R4 Presenters

[Billy OShaughnessy]

re: Sunday Evenings on R4 annamc mc - HOST - 3318th post - 12 Jul 2005 11:58
Hi Stewart, sorry to take so long to get back to you. I asked the editor in charge of the factual programmes about this and she says they pick presenters who have a connection with Radio 4. (kinda makes sense if you think about it).
We have had newsreaders in the past - in fact Peter Donaldson was one when I worked on Pick of the Week on one of those fabulous secondment schemes we have here. John Humphrys, Eddie Mair and Liz Barclay as I seem to recall, and Martin Jarvis as well - how lucky can you get?
A


I don’t know if anyone has seen the posting above on the CIY board, but I think it’s a disgrace that R4 is allowed to do this. The programme requests choices from all networks, yet it’s then fielding R4 presenters who, in the main, possess a far from catholic taste in radio. In fact a significant proportion of them are exceptionally boring and dull.

Mark Radcliffe has been nominated loads of times, but no response from R4. Poor old Susan Rae doesn’t even get a look in and she works her socks off for the station. I’ve noticed that they don’t bother mentioning the message board at the end of the programme now, so it looks as though POTW is in deep trouble.

Should POTW be scrapped or moved to R2?

[Crusoe]

Interesting questions, Billy.

I think that, since the majority of selections on “Pick of the Week” are speech-based, Radio 4 is its natural home and as a Radio 4 programme, it would be understandable if there was some bias towards Radio 4 presenters, although there is no reason for the near exclusive use of Radio 4 presenters that currently prevails. Mark Radcliffe would, as you say, make an excellent presenter.

I’m not sure if the choice of programmes featured can be blamed, particularly, on the presenters, however: I doubt they have much input into the selection of items at all and fear that even with the most interesting presenter, the same items would be chosen by the production team. It would be very interesting to hear a more diverse selection of “picks” and, whilst the other national networks are often ignored in favour of Radio 4, BBC local radio stations are almost completely missing from the selections. Whilst much of what is broadcast on these stations is likely to be only of local interest, there are some very good producers ,broadcasters and journalists working for these stations, whose work may well, on occasions, be of interest to a national audience.

Another thing I dislike about the choice of presenters for “Pick of the Week” is that the programme often becomes a covert trailer as we are told at the end of the programme: “and Phil Airtime is back on Wednesday, with a new series of ‘Me and My Spoon’.” As a result, the presenter ends up being chosen according to the needs of the marketing department, rather than their suitability for the job.

[Benbow]

webb said:

Phil Airtime is back on Wednesday, with a new series of ‘Me and My Spoon’.”

Aha... You've been craftily reading ' Private Eye', Crusoe. Somebody send it in a bottle, did they?

[Billy O Shaughnessy]

webb said:

Interesting questions, Billy.

No major disagreements with the contents of your first paragraph Monsieur Crusoe, although I would argue that the balance between music and speech isn’t as skewed as you suggest. Just count the number of selections from R2 and R3 programmes that one hears each week. There was an interesting letter in the RT recently, complaining about Mark Radcliffe’s No: 27 rating in their presenters’ poll. I haven’t a clue who compiled the chart, but it certainly had a strong bias in the direction of R4. Inspection of previous editions of the RT make it clear that a definite cycle exists when it comes to presenters hosting the programme. From memory it’s about a 13 week cycle, but there have been some exceptions lately: Sheila McClennon, Simon Fanshaw (thought he was awful), Steve Punt (didn’t convey any love of listening to the radio) and Elizabeth Barclay are names that spring to mind. I’ve never been a fan of Sheila Dillon, but her references to Dylan Winter’s trek across the mid-West of the US in her POTW surprised me and that’s one of the major reasons that I listen to POTW. It’s useful if one can re-evaluate one’s opinion of a radio presenter.

I accept that one must maintain a degree of balance in respect of producer/presenter/listener selection. However if you showed me two lists of choices, one of which was Laurie Taylor and the other Sheena Macdonald, then I could differentiate between the two immediately. The same would apply to Edward Stourton, Simon Hoggart and Libby Purves. Elizabeth Barclay surprised me when she chose an extract from The Rory Gallagher story, so I checked the rather quiescent BBC POTW board and noted that a contributor (think his name was Lawrence Jones) had nominated it. I find it hard to imagine that any R4 presenter would own any Rory Gallagher records.

One can always identify the fingerprints of an R4 producer and I do recall a period when the programme did include extracts from local stations which I also find interesting. You refer to R4 catering for a national audience, but in reality most of the audience is located in the south of England and R4 is very sensitive about upsetting grumpy old posh southerners. This, I suspect, is the reason why one doesn’t hear fascinating extracts from Radio Merseyside or Kettering Radio.

They don’t always trail the next appearance of the presenter, but I can appreciate why it annoys you. I’ve always suspected that trailer making at the BBC is one of those professions that one has to keep secret from neighbours and friends. ‘where different works’ drove me insane.

[dulcinea]

i always thought presenters are merely the chosen mouthpieces of producers...

but then i know nothing..

[Billy OShaughnessy]

dulcinea said:

i always thought presenters are merely the chosen mouthpieces of producers...

I often think this Dulcinea, but some R4 presenters really are full of themselves and don’t give the impression that they regard themselves as accountable to anyone. Jonathan Dimbleby emphasises week after week that he’s only ‘the hired hand’ on AQ, yet there have been numerous occasions when the producer should have prevented him from taking over the programme. The listener is left with the impression that she’s frightened of him.

The Woman’s Hour presenters are another example. I read an interview in the Independent with a WH producer quite recently and you could tell that the producers regarded JM as the big cheese. Similarly, it was clear that Martha Kearney had scripted the interview with Michael Howard, because she asked him: ‘Do you cook supper?’ A producer should have pulled her up on that one.

but then i know nothing..

You write fascinating and extremely thought provoking postings Dulcinea and I’ll always be grateful to you for that.

P.S. ….and you’re quite modest in respect of never boasting about being a bit of a brain box!


































but then i know nothing..[/quote]

[Lux]

Another thing I dislike about the choice of presenters for “Pick of the Week” is that the programme often becomes a covert trailer as we are told at the end of the programme: “and Phil Airtime is back on Wednesday, with a new series of ‘Me and My Spoon’.” As a result, the presenter ends up being chosen according to the needs of the marketing department, rather than their suitability for the job.

Probably true, Crusoe. Don't we all like marketers to offer us "solutions" so we don't have to look for them ourselves? Not that I know how it works, never having had proactively to ring up agents or promotional departments to ask them whether their artists were available to promote their new product <cough>, but "Loose Ends" seems to be a classic example.

People promoting current product come free.

Non-topical inserts have to be paid for.

As for Jonathan Dimbleby - isn't that a case of horses for courses - or, as Crusoe puts it, "suitability for the job"?

Though on the whole, I'd agree with Dulcinea: presenters are mouthpieces, and the person who tells them what they are required to say is the producer. I'd like to think that "Pick of the Week" is an exception, and that maybe the presenter has some input. In fact I'd like to know what the procedure actually is.

How much radio can one person listen to in a week? I don't imagine that a POTW presenter gets paid enough that they can spend their whole week listening to radio, and to tapes of the programmes which were on Station X while they were listening to Station Y.

The fact that Dr Jones' suggestion got broadcast is quite encouraging to me. So what if it's doing the producer's job for them?

[dulcinea]

lux, regarding loose ends, i would have thought they have so many offers that they have a job sifting out what offers they will accept... when you think about it there are very few platforms where you can sell your product on a national forum. i have no qualms about such a programme, because i rather like to find out what's out there, loose ends is an easy format...

regarding your idea that you like to think that POTW presenters are actively involved i would like to point out that it is produced by an 'independent' production company - one if i recall correctly produces many programmes for the bbc.

it is of course possible, that these production companies - who are in business on many different levels -are in search of new talent and offer presenters the chance to do some journalistic/media type work of a more creative kind than they are usually required to perform.

not belonging to the tribe of antisceptics, i would think it is not unnatural for people to gravitate towards their own and promote or what they know or like or gain by... i don't mean to malign anyone but i accept that people generally do what comes naturally... (i mean, i find apparently old posts of mine rehashed in places... ... these things happen)

i love dreamers but perfect decisions happened a long time ago - methinks solomon is dead quite a while.

[Billy OShaughnessy]

No disrespect meant to lux by jumping in here, but I get limited chances to reply.

i would like to point out that it is produced by an 'independent' production company

I think ‘independent’ has a broader definition when discussing issues relating to the BBC and radio programmes. Feedback is produced by an independent company, yet Roger Bolton presents programmes on R4 and I’ve also heard one of the producers, Kathleen Griffin, presenting features (e.g. the one about Sister Jeannine Deckers on Woman’s Hour) on R4. Viv Black also has R4 connections.

I’m not suggesting any kind of impropriety, but if a programme is truly independent, then it should be free to obtain answers to listeners’ queries. This certainly isn’t the case with R4. The former controller hadn’t appeared on the programme for over two years and this clearly wasn’t for the want of requests from Feedback. It was also abundantly clear that Mark Damazer had decided in advance what questions he was and was not prepared to answer when interviewed. Feedback had to broadcast two public appeals for Kevin Marsh to appear on the programme. So much for accountability within R4! Can you imagine the outburst at a shareholders’ meeting if the CEO decided that he wasn’t prepared to attend?

[Crusoe]

Billy said:

Just count the number of selections from R2 and R3 programmes that one hears each week. There was an interesting letter in the RT recently, complaining about Mark Radcliffe’s No: 27 rating in their presenters’ poll. I haven’t a clue who compiled the chart, but it certainly had a strong bias in the direction of R4.

I take your point about the speech/ music divide, Billy, although many of the items chiosen from R2 and R3 do seem to be extracts of spoken sections of programmes, which makes me feel that the programme seems (to me) more at home on R4. As for the listeners’ poll, I couldn’t agree more that Mark Radcliffe deserves to be much higher but my guess would be that those people who buy “The Radio Times” for its radio coverage are, more often than not, R4 listeners, which is bound to skew the results.

Billy said:

I accept that one must maintain a degree of balance in respect of producer/presenter/listener selection. However if you showed me two lists of choices, one of which was Laurie Taylor and the other Sheena Macdonald, then I could differentiate between the two immediately. The same would apply to Edward Stourton, Simon Hoggart and Libby Purves.

That’s interesting, Billy, I shall pay closer attention, in future. I would guess that some presenters would tend to have more input than others: I could certainly imagine Laurie Taylor taking an active interest in the choices and I do get the feeling that he genuinely does like the things that are chosen (but perhaps this just means he is a better actor than some).

Billy said:

Elizabeth Barclay surprised me when she chose an extract from The Rory Gallagher story, so I checked the rather quiescent BBC POTW board and noted that a contributor (think his name was Lawrence Jones) had nominated it. I find it hard to imagine that any R4 presenter would own any Rory Gallagher records.

This Lawrence Jones must have been very persistent: I’ve heard that Radio 4 hardly ever seem to pay attention to their messageboards.

Billy said:

I do recall a period when the programme did include extracts from local stations which I also find interesting. You refer to R4 catering for a national audience, but in reality most of the audience is located in the south of England and R4 is very sensitive about upsetting grumpy old posh southerners. This, I suspect, is the reason why one doesn’t hear fascinating extracts from Radio Merseyside or Kettering Radio.

I do recall very occasional excerpts from local radio on POTW but they have been exceptionally rare. I’m not sure about the issue of whether or not Radio 4 does adequately cater for a national audience since I am a Southerner.

Billy said:

They don’t always trail the next appearance of the presenter, but I can appreciate why it annoys you.

You’re right that the presenter’s next appearance isn’t always trailed, although it does happen fairly often. The announcement itself does not bother me too much (it is, after all, much shorter and repeated less often than those annoying, specially made trailers), it’s the fact that the trailing potential seems to lead to the choice of presenter. The latest edition of POTW was presented by Steve Punt and today there begins a new series of “The Now Show” starring, surprise surprise, Steve Punt.

Billy said:

I’ve always suspected that trailer making at the BBC is one of those professions that one has to keep secret from neighbours and friends. ‘where different works’ drove me insane.

Hee hee, I think you’re right on both counts, Billy.

Billy said:

Jonathan Dimbleby emphasises week after week that he’s only ‘the hired hand’ on AQ, yet there have been numerous occasions when the producer should have prevented him from taking over the programme. The listener is left with the impression that she’s frightened of him.

Well, JD may only be “the hired hand” but I’d guess that he’s hired to chair the debate form start to finish and that the producer doesn’t interfere in trying to run things. The fact that he continues to be hired to do this job suggests that the producer actually likes his way of doing things, which may be more of a concern.

Lux said:

Not that I know how it works, never having had proactively to ring up agents or promotional departments to ask them whether their artists were available to promote their new product “cough”, but “Loose Ends” seems to be a classic example.

It’s a shame that no-one on the island has ever worked for a broadcaster: it would be useful to have some inside information I can see that ”Loose Ends” could, indeed be a classic example. I have a sort of love/ hate relationship with “Loose Ends”: on the one hand, I find Ned Sherrin’s luvvieisms and the general cliqueiness distinctly annoying and many of the guests being very poor but, on the other, it does occasionally have excellent performances by people who are rarely heard elsewhere on national radio. Or

dulcinea said:

i rather like to find out what's out there, loose ends is an easy format.

is another way of putting it.

Lux said:

I'd like to think that “Pick of the Week” is an exception, and that maybe the presenter has some input. In fact I'd like to know what the procedure actually is.

Me, too. Lux.

dulcinea said:

'independent' production company - one if i recall correctly produces many programmes for the bbc…. i would think it is not unnatural for people to gravitate towards their own and promote or what they know or like or gain by.

I’m not quite what the independent production company is signed-up to do, in terms of a specification for the programme. I’d have thought it was entirely possible that the BBC could specify who they want to present the programme, or even to provide their preferred presenter to the production company “free issue”.

dulcinea said:

i love dreamers but perfect decisions happened a long time ago - methinks solomon is dead quite a while.

I don’t think perfect decisions ever happened, Dulcie, but I do think that when bad decisions are made, it should be recognised and some effort made to improve.

Billy said:

I think ‘independent’ has a broader definition when discussing issues relating to the BBC and radio programmes. Feedback is produced by an independent company, yet Roger Bolton presents programmes on R4 and I’ve also heard one of the producers, Kathleen Griffin, presenting features (e.g. the one about Sister Jeannine Deckers on Woman’s Hour) on R4. Viv Black also has R4 connections.

Absolutely, Billy. And, of course, the production company may be a separate entity but it is still under contract to its client, the BBC, and so the BBC still pulls the strings. Added to this, there is the fact that they are dependent upon the BBC to make producers, controllers, answers and the like available to the programme: it has no means to force the BBC to do this and so is a bit of a “toothless tiger”.