For other types of media
:sunglasses: 100 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
 
By Boiler
Posts
#550333
BBC Radio 4's Today programme and 5 Live Breakfast lost listeners this spring, industry figures show.

Today's audience dropped by 839,000 year-on-year, while 5 Live Breakfast was down 337,000, according to Rajar, which monitors UK radio listening.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-45029567

And a selection of BTL comments:
7. Posted by whyohwhyowhy on
12 minutes ago
The reason, my BEEB overlords, why I no longer listen to the Today programme on R4, is simple. You have insisted on inserting trivial popular "culture" slots into what was a serious news programme. That's fine on R5 or R2 but please leave the last bastion of serious current affairs on the radio alone! I never listen to R2 because there is always the chance of accidentally hearing Chris Evans.
6. Posted by fireyMoosse on
12 minutes ago
Not surprising the BBC are completely out of touch with British people, they concentrate on minorities, migrants and diversity, and their vicious anti Brexit propoganda day in day out is sooo over the top. More and more and more peopl are tuning off BBC News, both on TV and radio, as it is so out of touch and biased against the UK. It used to be trusted but now is a mess, it needs sorting and fast
14. Posted by fireyMoosse on
7 minutes ago
The BBC have become a minority, LGBT, diverse anti Brexit leftie propoganda machine, and are anti Btitish, Thta is why people are turning off in their droves, no real news anymore, just the BBC propoganda. The BBC think it is above the law as well, aka Cliff Richard. You have lost the major populous BBC by concentrating on PC, LGBT and diverse issues, Ban the licence fee you are no longer worthy.
 
By Daley Mayle
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#550346
The Today programme is now padded out in a similar way to the BBC News channel by using pre-recorded 'magazine' pieces that include lengthy book reviews or random stuff. With BBC News there are often breaks in it's supposed 24 hour rolling news coverage with 20/30 minute slots given over to The Travel Show (does what it says on the tin but hosted by people whose CV must have included Blue Peter and CBBC) and Click (a reasonably interesting technological show that unfortunately includes some 20-something presenters who get all excited by the latest must-have app or smartphone, get a feckin' life).
 
By Daley Mayle
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#550359
Earlier in the programme there was an objective, critical look at Robinson and the way contempt of court works. When this piece finished they said there would be a counter argument later from Raheem so in a way it was a balance but there is a presumption that everyone is going to be listening to a three hour radio programme.
 
By Kreuzberger
Membership Days Posts
#550363
The Red Arrow wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 10:30 am
A relevant thread...
Exactly, and they couldn't be more clumsy in having Raheem Kassam on "for balance" if they tried.

This is where, for me and conceivably many other, the programme really hits the buffers; not everyone wants to spend their waking minutes being absolutely outraged by both the minute-by-minute, evolving content and the broader editorial policy.

I am beginning to really hate BBC News. It wasn't always that way.
Boiler liked this
 
By cycloon
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#550364
The Red Arrow wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 10:30 am
A relevant thread...

Fuck me the comments that account gets on anything Robinson-related.

The worst are the conspiracy ones, yet again betratying an utterly incoherent worldview by seeing dark shadows everywhere, shadows that mysteriously fit themselves to suit any turn of events.

E.g. SB posts that the appeal's success suggests there isn't a conspiracy. Some prize tool then says 'conspiracies are harder to hide the more high profile they get'. They can never lose, because it's all fucking imaginary.
spoonman liked this
 
By Safe_Timber_Man
Membership Days Posts
#550366
You can't 'balance' facts, though. Sure, I get that having two people with opposing opinions and/or political views can provide balance, but having someone giving cold hard facts about legal matters on and then following that up with someone who just says stuff that is factually incorrect is not 'balance'.
 
By Malcolm Armsteen
Membership Days Posts
#550386
Safe_Timber_Man wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 11:01 am
You can't 'balance' facts, though. Sure, I get that having two people with opposing opinions and/or political views can provide balance, but having someone giving cold hard facts about legal matters on and then following that up with someone who just says stuff that is factually incorrect is not 'balance'.
Sadly, for Sarah Sands, that's precisely what it is. She was no more discerning when she edited the Evening Standard, and was Boris' cheerleader.
The Guardian wrote:During her time as Evening Standard editor, the free paper backed the Conservatives at the 2015 election and supported Zac Goldsmith as the Tory candidate for mayor. Sands was briefly editor of the Sunday Telegraph a decade ago.

Rod Liddle, who edited Today between 1998 and 2002, and is a columnist for the Sun and the Sunday Times, and an associate editor of the Spectator, said she was a “terrific choice” for the Today role, especially after the vote to leave the EU.

“The outside viewpoint is crucial, especially at a time when politics has moved in a direction that the BBC has neither anticipated nor welcomed,” he said.

“Sarah’s right-ish and comes with a strong journalistic background in print, which is where the best journalism is.”

He said he expected Sands to “freshen up” the Today lineup.
 
By cycloon
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#550396
I kinda hope that, if we're all going down the drain to live in the fuckwitted, intellectually bankrupt, moral cesspit that is Breitbartopia, Liddle is discarded by our new lords and masters for being not quite odious enough, or odious in quite the correct way.
Last edited by cycloon on Thu Aug 02, 2018 3:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Posts
#550486
George Peretz has a good Twitter thread on Today. He asked what sort of criteria should decide who gets a platform, and came up with

1) Have power over something in the news
2) Have a mandate from voters, members of an organization etc
3) Have expertise.

I think that's a good starting point.
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Posts
#550487
Malcolm Armsteen wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 1:09 pm
Safe_Timber_Man wrote:
Thu Aug 02, 2018 11:01 am
You can't 'balance' facts, though. Sure, I get that having two people with opposing opinions and/or political views can provide balance, but having someone giving cold hard facts about legal matters on and then following that up with someone who just says stuff that is factually incorrect is not 'balance'.
Sadly, for Sarah Sands, that's precisely what it is. She was no more discerning when she edited the Evening Standard, and was Boris' cheerleader.
The Guardian wrote:During her time as Evening Standard editor, the free paper backed the Conservatives at the 2015 election and supported Zac Goldsmith as the Tory candidate for mayor. Sands was briefly editor of the Sunday Telegraph a decade ago.

Rod Liddle, who edited Today between 1998 and 2002, and is a columnist for the Sun and the Sunday Times, and an associate editor of the Spectator, said she was a “terrific choice” for the Today role, especially after the vote to leave the EU.

“The outside viewpoint is crucial, especially at a time when politics has moved in a direction that the BBC has neither anticipated nor welcomed,” he said.

“Sarah’s right-ish and comes with a strong journalistic background in print, which is where the best journalism is.”

He said he expected Sands to “freshen up” the Today lineup.
Nothing says "outsider" like editor of the Sunday Telegraph and Evening Standard.

Aside from the arguments that Peretz makes, I expect that there was a Remain majority among Radio 4 listeners. Does it make any sense to ram Brexiter bollocks down their throats?
Brexit Fuckwit Thread

Oh and why the fuck has no journalist covered this[…]

Fawning over the royal family

We know William and Harry are now despised but Phi[…]

Paul Thomas Redux

Could be worserer. According to Mac he had to prov[…]

Richard Littlejohn

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk[…]