Any more names?

[french frank]

A letter is being sent to Tony Hall, on behalf of FoR3 supporters, protesting:

a) that Radio 3 is making damaging cuts to its specialist classical output, reducing or sidelining much of the non classical output and targeting much of the general classical schedule on 'potential' new listeners who would be intimidated by anything 'daunting'

b) since it is claimed that the cuts are the result of budget constraints, the unequal reduction to Radio 3's budget is cited (Radio 3 8.6% increase since 2006/07, Radio 1 35% increase)

c) we point out that when he was at ROH, the 'accessibility' policy consisted of taking the Real Thing (in opera terms) to multiplexes and public spaces, not simplifying it by showing 'highlights from the shows' in art house cinemas. The BBC should broadcast the arts - and classical music regularly on mainstream television, not simply rely on classical TV reality shows, or the occasional big BBC project.

FoR3 supporters have added their names (just over 700 so far). If you want to support us by adding your [real] name, PM or email me. The letter will be posted this week.

[french frank]

Bump.

If you want to join our reasoned representation to the Director-General, indicating that Radio 3, classical music (and jazz and world!) and serious specialist arts/speech programmes are being undervalued by the BBC, underfunded by the BBC and frequently under challenging on Radio 3, this is a final chance to add your name to the letter - I'd like it to be posted no later than tomorrow. The signatories are 'Radio 3 listeners'.

FoR3 supporters should all have received an email already and been asked to 'opt out' (one person did ); 'Music and Arts' supporters were invited to 'opt in' - a number have.

PM or email me - many thanks to those who have.

[Zucchini]

1) A letter is being sent to Tony Hall, on behalf of FoR3 supporters...

2) FoR3 supporters have added their names (just over 700 so far)...

3) The letter will be posted this week...

4) FoR3 supporters should all have received an email already and been asked to 'opt out' (one person did )...

I don't follow this:

Just over 700 FoR3 supporters have added their names to your petition/letter but you haven't said that it has been shown to them or even been finalised.

The way you describe it, it looks as though you have accumulated your names through the more or less outlawed practice of interia selling - you are "In" if you don't reply to the email and have to take the trouble to reply to opt "Out" . What about people who skim emails and only open what's interesting, or no longer read FoR3 email, or have marked you as junk or spam? I think in fairness you should explain what you've done in your letter to Tony Hall.

b) since it is claimed that the cuts are the result of budget constraints, the unequal reduction to Radio 3's budget is cited (Radio 3 8.6% increase since 2006/07, Radio 1 35% increase).

The rate of change of budgets for other BBC services is irrelevant. You cannot credibly argue that you deserve more money because some other services got more money faster. Maybe R3 has been profligate with its money and needs to tighten its belt. The only question is whether the budget granted is sufficient to implement the approved business plan.

Classic FM's annual accounts record operating costs of not much mre than £15 million pa for the last two years and generated profits of over £4 million from that. OK R3 has Proms, daily live concerts etc to finance but perhaps you should ask Tony Hall why R3 gets £40 million to play with yet still moans about being short of money?

[french frank]

Does that mean to say you won't be signing?

When/If I have time I will email answers to your comments. For crying out loud - do a bit more research. Maybe your experience of your (estimable) local music festival gives you a good insight into the BBC finances?

All supporters have at some point contacted me personally. That is a requirement of being a supporter. I have all their emails and letters and I know why they contacted us. If I've forgotten what an indvidual said, I can look up the correspondence. The email reminded them that the last attempt - sent straight to Capita as a 'complaint' - asked him to investigate the editorial strategy adopted by Radio 3, and how successful it had been. The same thing is being said in this one.

The rate of change of budgets for other BBC services is irrelevant. You cannot credibly argue that you deserve more money because some other services got more money faster. Maybe R3 has been profligate with its money and needs to tighten its belt. The only question is whether the budget granted is sufficient to implement the approved business plan.

Business plan? I suggest you go back and write another comment on our Facebook page. Point out that all the cuts which have been put down to financial constraints are just Radio 3 being profligate with their budget. And stop sneering.

[Letter sent 19 Dec]