Sheila Dillon's Comments

[Lawrence Jones]

Did anyone hear Ms. Sheila Dillon’s comments on tonight’s POTW apropos the programme ‘Gibberish’? I couldn’t believe my ears when she expressed satisfaction at not giving in to her ‘baser instincts’ by refusing to listen because of the saturation trailing for this programme.

Almost every messageboard associated with broadcasting has comments expressing dismay at the return of saturation trailing on R4. Listeners have petitioned Feedback ad nauseam with pleas to desist and – the same as complaints about the R4 mesageboards – nothing happens.

The only course of action left to the powerless listener is to withdraw their ears and this is nothing to do with responding to ‘baser instincts’. It’s perfectly logical.

[Luxury Yacht]

Lawrence said:

Did anyone hear Ms. Sheila Dillon’s comments on tonight’s POTW apropos the programme ‘Gibberish’? I couldn’t believe my ears when she expressed satisfaction at not giving in to her ‘baser instincts’ by refusing to listen because of the saturation trailing for this programme.

I was rather surprised to hear Ms Dillon say that, Dr Jones. But did she not qualify this by saying that she'd listened only because she was having to pick the week?

I was driving while POTW was on, and had only just heard a repeat of a programme featuring one of her picks, which I'd already heard once ("The Science Blacklist"). This was a bit irritating, especially since she only repeated a snippet giving one participant's experience, and there was so much more to the programme than was represented by the excerpt she chose.

Almost every messageboard associated with broadcasting has comments expressing dismay at the return of saturation trailing on R4. Listeners have petitioned Feedback ad nauseam with pleas to desist and – the same as complaints about the R4 mesageboards – nothing happens.

The only course of action left to the powerless listener is to withdraw their ears and this is nothing to do with responding to ‘baser instincts’. It’s perfectly logical.

I agree with this standpoint, usually. However, there are programmes I would listen to despite excessive trailing - those which would make me feel I was cutting off my nose to spite my face (in those cases I have taken to switching off the trailer instead). This would have been one of them but I didn't have the opportunity to listen. Having now heard the excerpt on POTW I don't feel I missed much anyway.

[Lawrence Jones]

luxuryyacht said:

Lawrence said:

I was rather surprised to hear Ms Dillon say that, Dr Jones. But did she not qualify this by saying that she'd listened only because she was having to pick the week?

Well yes Ms. Yacht, she certainly implied that which is understandable. I still think Ms. Dillon gave the impression that listeners who object to endless trails are being unreasonable or irrational. I have a great deal of sympathy for the individuals who compose trails (and I’d include ‘jingles’ here as well) because some of them really are a work of art. However, it’s the ruling classes within R4 who choose to abuse them that causes objection: listen….. or else is the message I receive after I’ve heard them for the 50th time. The majority of R4 listeners are pretty clued up people and so do not need someone within R4 to dictate their listening habits.

A classic example of an abused trail occurred with the supposed ‘new’ programme Profile on Saturday. We heard the two women - one southern accent, one US - explaining the background to the programme. The listener would have assumed that these two women were going to present it and be an integral part of the programme. It was no such thing! In fact one couldn’t even construe it as a new programme, since one hears this style of character profiling on R4 quite regularly. What happened to the two women on the trail? For some reason, I hadn’t checked the RT and thought it was going to be 30 mins long. I hadn’t realised they’d binned the 1945 hours discourse which was one of the most interesting parts of Saturday night R4.

I was driving while POTW was on, and had only just heard a repeat of a programme featuring one of her picks, which I'd already heard once ("The Science Blacklist"). This was a bit irritating, especially since she only repeated a snippet giving one participant's experience, and there was so much more to the programme than was represented by the excerpt she chose.

I was astonished at this! I listened to both the initial and secondary transmission, so to then broadcast another excerpt within an hour or so seemed like very poor planning and, as you say, didn’t really convey the flavour of the programme very accurately. I must say I found this programme rather disappointing.

However, there are programmes I would listen to despite excessive trailing - those which would make me feel I was cutting off my nose to spite my face (in those cases I have taken to switching off the trailer instead). This would have been one of them but I didn't have the opportunity to listen

Agree with this and certainly didn’t allow the trails for ‘Ian Dury At The BBC’ to dismiss listening to this programme. I have to say that I don’t like it when one 'celebrity' receives an infinite amount of publicity on R4 which is why I demurred in respect of Gibberish (agree with your comment that the excerpt didn’t suggest that it was particularly interesting). I adopted the same approach when R4 went Jamie Oliver carzy. Both The Food Programme and Woman’s Hour ignored all the articles in The Guardian, Independent and Telegraph concerning the £6 - £18bn worth of food that's wasted every year.

[Lawrence Jones]

P.S. Did you hear Prof. Dawkins having a complete freaky in the Saturday Review extract? Hee-hee-hee-hee-hee, it made my Saturday!!!! I’ll definitely watch that tonight. Comments on Saturday Review were well argued and most appropriate.