Entertainment For Lively Minds
Radio 5
Posted by Johan on 4 January 2008 - 9:13pm.
I enjoy Radio 5. Intelligent presenters and generally high quality programmes. However, one thing which drives me mad is the obsession with reading out texts and emails from listeners. Let's say I've just heard Peter Allen interviewing someone who is an expert in his field. That's all I need. I do not want to know what various idiot listeners think about what has just been said.
I suppose it's all part of trying to involve your audience, but I'm sure it must annoy a lot of people (or maybe it's just me getting old and grumpy).
- More from Johan.
- Login or register to post comments
-
Mitchell and Webb...
...have commented on the same phenomenon - "You may have no knowledge, insight or real contribution to make, but I bet you reckon something, don't you...?"
I agree
And the way they solicit them is shameless.
Given the limitations of a text all most people can do is tap out a prejudice.
It drives me mad too...
I can forsee a time when the BBC News consists almost exclusively of newsreaders going through viewers' e-mails and texts, accompanied by footage shot by them on mobiles and camcorders. Well, the BBC is having to make cutbacks... what better way to save money than to pretend everyone's a journalist or a cameraman and let them get on with it...
Agreed
And why do we have to have 606, 3 times a week? I can only listen for about 3 minutes and then have to turn of. Is it not possible to have literate football journalists review the days games? Why does it hav to be Spooney taking calls from Stew in Coggershal saying that Alex Ferguson has 'lost it.'
And yes BBC London News everyday says 'What do you think', 'What's your opinion?' I don't want to Here Moira in Claphams view of the Northern Rock crises. Just tell me the news.
If he were younger...
the incomparable Hugh McIlvanney should have been given the chance to air a football show... he truly is the Shakespeare of football writing. Proof that a great writer is a great writer, no matter what the subject. But he probably didn't have enough 'bling' (eurgh!) appeal for da yoof.
Hugh McIlvaney = Sir Alex
I enjoy reading him but I am often under the impression that he is Sir Alex's spokesman/attack dog/message pigeon. You find an anti-Man U article by HM. Despite this, by reading HM's words AS THOUGH FROM Sir Alex you learn a lot about his views on England, the FA, Arsenal, Chelsea etc
If you haven't done so already...
you should try to find a copy of 'McIlvanney on Football'. It's superb... incredibly well written, informed, entertaining and eminently readable.
Baker and Kelly
Whatever you may think about Danny Baker and his compadré Danny Kelly, his 'phone-ins have only ever been the ones worth listening to in their entirety.
Sadly he fell out with Wippit last month, so once again they're consigned to the annals of wonderful radio until someone else decides to wheel him out for a month or so.
It's a travesty (or maybe just a shame) that the BBC and him can't get along.
Even more worser...
...on thursday morning 5Live breakfast news were asking people to send in photographs of the snow. Photographs of snow on a radio program?
AND - as for 'What do you think?'
I think it's fecking radio you cretins.
Interactive?
Just do the job your supposed to do, it's what you're paid for.
Thanks for letting me get that off my chest.
I'd comment, but...
...then I'd be falling into the trap of doing exactly what you're describing, wouldn't I? That's what I reckon, anyway.
The difference is ...
that I can just buy the printed version of a newspaper or magazine and ignore the comments on their web sites.
And I can pick and choose which blogs/forums to read. I read and contribute to The Word blog because I find it informative and entertaining. There are plenty of other sites I wouldn't go near.
On radio, these text messages from listeners are unavoidable, unless you keep turning the volume down every two minutes, which is obviously impractical.
Spoofs
A friend of mine regularly sends in spoof "outraged" texts to a an early evening TV news programme.
It's all a big swindle really...
...reading out the day's news only takes about five minutes an hour. How on earth are they supposed to fill the other twenty odd hours?
It's the "funnies" that make me squirm
Sid Vicious was wrong about most things but the man on the street, on 5Live yes he is a c***.
The best one I ever heard
was last year they read out a text which read "I hate Radio 5. Using people's endless texts and emails to fill out studio time is incredibly lazy and arrogant programming."
Without so much as a pause, the presenter said
" What do you think about using people's text messages to start a debate ? Do you think it is lazy programming - or do you enjoy leading the progrmme ? Text us now on "
I almost crashed the car.
You couldn't make it up...
oh, hold on a minute... this is the BBC... maybe you could! This democratisation of the news is such a drag... I want to hear informed opinion, not Sandra from Leighton Buzzard.
Sandra from Leighton Buzzard
may actually have as informed an opinion as any of the 'professional' presenters.As far as I can see it is only their presentational skills that are worthy of the 'professional'tag in a lot of instances.I think all of the comments about this are a bit precious - why shouldnt the person on the street be given the opportunity to express their views about a programme/subject matter they are listening to?I dont see it being significantly different to this website - a lot of participants to this website have provided highly amusing articles and comments.David H and the other word staff dont have the monopoly on being entertaining and the mere fact they have set up this site is surely a recognition of this fact.
Sandra
may have something interesting to say. Only trouble is you probably have to hear from half a dozen other ignorant plonkers or more before you get to her.
I'd say The Word site has many posts from people who really know their stuff (often better than I do I admit)and can articulate that well in the main - also rock music is a subject ripe for humour if you can see it's absurdity (not hard). A classy, thinking persons quality mag attracts a fair few bright people maybe? Sounds snobbish perhaps but true I think.
Generally though if you want to know something on a complex subject you want an expert who's put the time in to find out about it, though the odd one will be lacking.
The video diary thing on TV came about back in the eighties - from that time public interaction and involvement has grown and grown in media, and it's overrated and overused in my view, but of course it's cheap. Hence why more and more of us turn to DVDs rather than TV perhaps. I confess I watch the odd bit of reality TV though and enjoy it.
What you're saying is true...
but the reason I spend a lot of time on this website is precisely because the vast majority of contributions I read are from very interesting, opinionated, intelligent people. This is not the case in many other areas of the media that solicit opinion from the public.
To defend Radio 5...
... they do have Simon Mayo, and his film reviews with Mark Kermode are always enjoyable. Even members of Fairport Convention listen in.
Mayo with that?
Simon Mayo's afternoon show is of consistently high quality. He is a witty, entertaining, intelligent presenter who is able to steer a steady course through all manner of items. His show undoubtedly reaches a peak as the weekend approaches, with the (excellent) book review slot on Thursday and Kermode's film reviews on Friday. (Coincidently, both are available as stand-alone podcasts - as is a daily highlights show - via iTunes or the BBC website.)
In my view quite a lot of Radio 5's ouput is excellent, but I agree that the phone-ins (phones-in?) are awful. I can't help thinking that they'd be better off only being on air from (say) 5am to midnight and using the reduced hours to drop all the "interactive" shows. I could also do quite happily without the dreadful Fighting Talk, though I understand that it's a (mystifyingly) popular show...
(Too much bracketage in that post - sorry!)
Five live
Trouble is most alternative 'talk' radio is 100 x worse. Alan Partrige I presume is meant to be ironic but most local radio can only aspire to his level!
I remember one feature on Peter Allen's show where they brought on a church organist to play some famous pop songs. None was recognisable and then he tried Love will tear us apart - unmistakeable.
I read the commens herein because I value the opinions and humour of the contributors but spare me the thoughs of the great unwashed on very topic under the sun!
Anyway, how'd we get from music to talk radio? Mind you, photos of snow on the radio appeals...
More Mayo please
I agree that Simon Mayos show is consistently excellent and he gets great guests. Earlier this week he broadcast from New Hampshire as he covered the USA election campaign in depth. He solicited the opinions of many ordinary Americans and their views were as interesting to me as any of the official pundits and politicians and this is the point I was trying to make.