« Previous | Main | Next »

5 live Controller on Radio 4's Feedback

Steve Bowbrick Steve Bowbrick | 17:07 UK time, Friday, 26 February 2010

In order to see this content you need to have both Javascript enabled and Flash installed. Visit BBC Webwise for full instructions

5 live Controller Adrian Van Klaveren appeared on Radio 4's Feedback programme this afternoon - click play to listen to the interview. He answered Roger Bolton's questions about the cost of the new daytime schedule ("...I can assure you that those costs have not increased."), the Salford move ("We now have a whole weekday line-up where those presenters will be part of what we do from Salford...") and Richard Bacon ("Richard is a big personality broadcaster. There's a sense of identity about his programmes which very much comes from his own life...").

Steve Bowbrick is editor of the 5 live blog

  • Feedback is on BBC Radio 4 at 1330 on Friday and repeated at 2000 on Sunday.


Page 1 of 2

  • Comment number 1.

    Why wasn't this on 5Live?
    Why wasn't this announced to 5Live listeners who might actually have an interest in 5Live?
    Why is Mr Van Klaveren prepared to front up on Radio 4 but has denied 5Live listeners the same privilage?
    Why did this happen before the Q&A session Mr Van Klaveren promised "early in the new year" on this blog?
    And where are the answers to the questions we have heard absolutely nothing about since submitting them 3 weeks ago?

  • Comment number 2.

    I found it a fascinating listen. I am not sure all the points were defended well.

    Also I wonder why we have selected quotes from the broadcast in the blog? Without the context of the question it is not necessarily easy to recognise the correct tone of the interview from the snippets quoted above.

  • Comment number 3.

    I agree with ryanw. It would have been nice to have some sort of trail on R5. They're always trailing other stations, so why not this one which was extremely pertinent to R5 listeners?

  • Comment number 4.

    I imagine they didn't tell the Radio 5 listeners about Feedback because they didn't want them to hear Adrian's defense of Richard Bacon, which was hilarious !

  • Comment number 5.

    What an absolute load of tosh. He didn't even have the courage to appear on a 5Live programme. It is an insult to the intelligence of his listeners that he should think he wouldn't be criticised for this piece of nonsense.

    Don't hold your breath for any answers, ryanw, he has spent weeks working out how to appear in that interview.

    Have a good weekend folks! I am attending so much top live sport I could do some commentaries for you all myself............

  • Comment number 6.

    Thanks for your reactions to Adrian's Feedback appearance, ryanw, prosperosgirl, GillB, Curmy and carrie. Couple of points: Feedback is a Radio 4 programme that has a history of reaching out to the other networks occasionally when the story is interesting. Editors and Controllers from all the networks have appeared on the programme over the years and 5 live listeners routinely write to the programme with their own issues.

    When I spoke to Adrian this afternoon he was very keen to publish his interview here on the blog so that you and other listeners would hear it. This is one of the good things about the network blogs: we can do things - like repeating content from other networks - that aren't normally done on-air. This is what the 5 live blog is for.

    I've publicised Adrian's Feedback interview on the 5 live Twitter account, it will be promoted on the 5 live home page and I'll seek some on-air promotion for it too. I want 5 live listeners to hear it.

    And, prosperosgirl, I selected some quotes from the item to encourage people to listen to the whole thing. I'm happy to acknowledge that I may have picked the wrong ones!

    We're quite capable of running our own Q&As about 5 live output here on the blog - see social media week earlier this month - and we will run more. I appreciate your enthusiasm and appeal for a little patience. Watch this space.

    Steve Bowbrick, editor, 5 live blog

  • Comment number 7.

    Steve, all I would say about the choice of Feedback is that perennially the workings of the BBC are discussed on Five Live, notably I think on Victoria's programme, and so I would say that it was have been an equally good place to have such a discussion. We are the listeners after all, and also there is apparently nothing to be afraid of from those listeners if you are correct.

  • Comment number 8.

    Oh dear Mr Bowbrick, where to start with your latest intervention....

    It would have been nice _before_ the Feedback programme to know Mr Van Klaveren was appearing. Fortunately, several of the concerns of contributors here were put to the Controller. Nevertheless, it might have been nice to know ahead of time so we could should a question.

    Are you telling us we know need to listen to Radio 4 for answers about 5Live?

    You see to have completely forgotten that Mr Van Klaveren himself wrote "I'm planning to do a question-and-answer session on this blog early in the New Year, which should be another chance to put points to me directly." in reply to Q10 here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/5live/2009/11/answering-your-questions-about.shtml - it's March next week. Is that "very early in the New Year"?

    What happened to that?

    How much patience do we need to have? Questions asked since 20 November unanswered? Q&A "very early in the New Year" not materialising...

    I presume since this thread is another discussion about 5Live we can discuss the station here, or will your cut short any robust discussion again as you did in the Answers (oh the irony) thread?

  • Comment number 9.

    its strange...r5 discussed on r4 without any notice to r5 listeners and yet r5 listeners get an hours discussion of r6..

    wonder if r6 advertised this to their listeners....

    why cant we have an hours discussion of r5 on the 9 am phone in one morning...with the bosses there to hear, amongst other things, what we really think of recent additions to the daytime line up

  • Comment number 10.

    Nothing new in this Feedback broadcast.I'm sure I heard a previous controller ( Bob Shennan ),when interviewed on Feedback, come out with almost same line in defending his decision making

    The usual blurb by a BBC controller.Unwilling to criticise the appointments and style of 5live presenters and unwilling to accept responsibility that might make out that he got somethings wrong.

    Why couldn't Victoria Derbyshire have interviewed AVK on her show ?On second thoughts she gave Sir Michael Lyons (BBC Trust )such an easy ride when she interviewed him last year that no questions were really answered.Derbyshires interview with Lyons seems to revolve around him speaking over her and then him gloating about his freebie tickets that he got for Strictly Come Dancing and his ( look, I'm entitled to it ) hospitality expenses.Another fine mess.

  • Comment number 11.

    Again, I have only found out about any of this by chance whilst trawling through the endless blog sections. This is utterly ridiculous. Get your act together BBC.

  • Comment number 12.

    :::::::looks around::::::: nope, clearly Mr AV-K inhabits a different planet to the one I do. I found this interview and the answers given by AV-K so dispiriting that I feel like giving up. It's OK Steve, don't worry, I'm not about to throw in the towel just yet :-)

    I am one of those people who apparently are not educated or with it enough to 'get' Richard Bacon. He IS totally self obsessed and operates as one who believes his own self publicity. So his programme reflects his own life experiences; what a selfish, moneyed, single, naval gazing, and ignorant ("I don't read books" Bacon) experience that has been. As listeners we DON'T CARE what he thinks, what his experiences have been, what he likes doing, what his obsessions are, all we do care about is the person he is interviewing or the story he is covering.....you know how it is, just like Mayo handled the programme.

    The two hour lunch offering is not a reflection of what has happened that day and what will/might happen but merely a 2 hour fest of football talk, giggling and on line flirting between Gabby and George, which personally I find vomit inducing and entertainment focussed news. Lordy be, there was a lot more news covered in the old Mid-day programme that ran for half the time than there is in this new programme.

    The expenses comments failed to address the costs that will be involved in paying subsistence for those who do not move to Salford, including AV-K and it was a pity that AV-K's reasons for not making the move himself were not explored by the interview. Why on earth did Five Live appoint a new head honcho that wasn't prepared to make the long planned move? Smacks of no real commitment to the long term interests of the station and of a real commitment to self interest in a career plan. No wonder AV-K 'gets' Bacon! Birds of a feather!

    Steve, this journey we're on, this need to wait and be patient for answers to questions....is this in any way connected to the proposed cuts to the BBC web site? Is it that if you can fend us off for long enough, you will not have to answer any questions because the journey will have reached its destination of cached pages only?

    Can we have a message board please?

  • Comment number 13.

    5 live is rapidly becoming a bad joke.

    Admittedly there are still some areas of quality broadcasting-breakfast(even though I am not a fan of Nicky Campbell) and drive(much better without Anita) shine through the rest of the apology for joined-up speech radio that the rest of the weekday schedule represents.
    And why at the weekends do we have an intelligent 2 hour news programme shunted into the evening schedule when it would be far more useful to have it as a weekday show instead of the unlistenable to garbage offered by Gabby Logan and George Riley.
    Of course AVK is going to defend his decision making but really,anyone who thinks that Richard Bacon is the right replacement for Simon Mayo needs their head testing.

  • Comment number 14.

    Agree with above comments. There is a thread on R4 Message Board 'The Choice is Yours' about last Friday's Feedback Programme if anyone is interested.


  • Comment number 15.

    As a regular, long time listener to R5, admittedly mainly for the sport content I find the current howls of complaint interesting. I am no particular fan of Stephen Nolan, Gabby Logan or Richard Bacon, but if the likes of ryanw etc aren't happy, there is always the choice of either something else or the off button. I suspect falling listening figures would be a lot more persuasive to Mr V-K than the same few "moaning minnies" repeating the same mantra over and over.
    You have to admit that as this move 'Oop North' is going ahead, like it or not, there is little point in having presenters who don't want to leave London.......

  • Comment number 16.

    I have no doubt that the criticisms aired in feedback, whilst being publicly argued against will actually have some effect on how the new schedule changes.

    Although Ricard Bacon has stood in for Mayo before, it is a very different thing to make afternoons his own appropriate to the time of day. He had a very definite late night style and it would appear he has been encouraged to bring that to daytime, much more than he ever did as a stand in.

    I presume he and his producers reflect on feedback and I wouldn't be surprised if things adapt quite quickly and the parts that do not work (the awful help and constant self reference for instance) are soon left behind.

    As for the Salford issue, I do not really have an opinion on it - I cannot tell when listening to a programme where it was produced.

  • Comment number 17.

    I hate to tell you prosperogirl, but I've never known the controllers of Radio 5 take ANY notice of what is said on Feedback.

  • Comment number 18.

    Whilst I appreciate that radio 4 covers many areas and is a good station in many respects surely an interview with the controller of fivelive should also be aired on that station. The defence of this is weak at best.
    Also Richard Bacon is extremely self-obsessed and is a shocking replacement for the excellent Simon Mayo even though he only covers 8 of Simon's previous 15 hours. He may be a "big personality" but he is also a man with an enormous ego and his personality continually talks with itself.Also all the replacements must be more expensive than what they have replaced at a time of financial crisis. Rather than assertions about this it would be good to see a budget (without necessarily namimg names for discretion).
    I would like the controller to explain what Colin Murray's qualities are as I too feel he has ruined the Friday football preview programme with his inaneity and trash talk.
    Also I would like to add that I was listening to fivelive this morning before the 8:30 am news and there were two very poor efforts by the team.
    Firstly David Walliams came on to talk about his bike ride for sport relief. Except Nicky and Shelagh only talked about Shelaghs planned swim for charity which isnt for at least two weeks. Poor David got a bit annoyed with them and I don't blame him. These two are very self-obsessed.
    Then we had Andy Verity telling us how good HSBCs figures were only for an expert to come on and tell us that they were worse than last year!
    So a very poor ten minutes of radio and five live is deteriorating......

  • Comment number 19.

    As the person currently responsible for 5 Live's relentless slide into mediocrity I would expect Mr Van Klavaren to defend the changes.

    5 Live has departed from its remit of intelligent news and sport and now seems driven by lowest common denominator "celebrity"-driven tabloid values, certainly between 9 am and 4 pm. The current choice of presenters and the subjects covered reflect these on-going changes.

  • Comment number 20.

    I don't know if nyone has seen this. There is a discussion on BBC POV going on.


  • Comment number 21.

    boristhebold, there is nothing more annoying than being told to switch off if you don't like something. As a longtime listener and of course a licence payer I have every right to say what I think about the BBC and any of its output. I have every right to praise and criticise as I see fit. When you are looking at a system that just doesn't add up, there is not a reason on earth why I shouldn't say what I think about it. And having to shell out expenses to every Tom, Dick and Harry as they go up and down, or across and back, as the case may be, to Manchester, just to allow some cackhanded system to be put in place that stops the output being Londoncentric but apparently is OK to make it Manchestercentric, makes me sad for all the good stuff we are about to lose. Not to mention the good people that have managed to get away from the station as it is too embarrassing to work for the BBC's centre of Dumbdown.

  • Comment number 22.

    Well said Carrie. Boristhebold, we all have the right express our opinions. It is our license fee which fund the BBC. I have been quick to the praise the magnificent Rhod Sharp and the outstanding 5Live Sport team, especially Mark Poutgsch.

    However I have been very critical of the new lineup, what I perceive as the increasingly trivial banter becoming commonplace on 5Live, the lack of transparency and hyprocrisy on transport and accomodation especially Stephen Nolan flying to Manchester from Belfast every weekend, and the waste, and overuse of twitter, et. al. when the percentage of listeners using these mediums is less then 1% of the any shows listenership (before you say the blog isnt well patronised it's accessible to all, on mobile and online, whereas twitter and facebook requires signup and knowledge).

    We're all entitled to our view, and it's fantastic we can have a robust dialogue here. If we didnt care about the station we wouldn't be here.

  • Comment number 23.

    zeldalicious, thanks for the link to the BBC Internet blog. Very good debate over there. I'll be posting something there myself tomorrow - something about why we bother with these blogs. And ryanw, I like your point about requiring people to sign-up for non-BBC web sites. It's really important that we don't exclude people from talking about the BBC's output or telling us what they think of it by moving our interactions out to the social nets.

    In fact, I feel fairly comfortable saying that we shouldn't ever require people to create an account elsewhere in order to talk to us - there should always be an accessible way to talk to the BBC directly. But the inverse of this position is that we shouldn't stay off the social networks entirely because that risks excluding the growing number of licence fee-payers who spend most of their online time on Facebook and are unlikely to come over here to the blog any time soon.

    Steve Bowbrick, editor, 5 live blog

  • Comment number 24.

    //In fact, I feel fairly comfortable saying that we shouldn't ever require people to create an account elsewhere in order to talk to us//

    //But the inverse of this position is that we shouldn't stay off the social networks entirely because that risks excluding the growing number of licence fee-payers who spend most of their online time on Facebook and are unlikely to come over here to the blog any time soon.//

    Thanks for contributing, Steve. I have a facebook a/c which is a personal one and I actually dislike using it to interact with the programmes and "in order to talk to us" - so - I am considering exactly that - creating an account (under the name I use here) in order to 'talk to you' because I wish to retain some privacy.

    As to the second point that I have quoted - the point isn't that you "should stay off the social networks entirely" but that you shouldn't exclude Message Boards! And -- your comment that the 'license-fee payers who spend most of their time on facebook and therefore unlikely to come over here to the blog anytime soon' is disingenuous. Hardly anyone uses the blog because a) it's hardly user-friendly and b) it's damn difficult to find - most users just stumble across it.

  • Comment number 25.

    With the debate about closing down BBC expensive stations raging, it would be interesting to know, perhaps after the World Cup - see where I'm going?- how much per head of Rajar-counted listeners each station costs. With no doubt half of Radio 5 swinging off to South Africa shortly for a pointless beano, it would be a good way to work out where the cuts should be. Bye Radio 5................

  • Comment number 26.

    "But the inverse of this position is that we shouldn't stay off the social networks entirely because that risks excluding the growing number of licence fee-payers who spend most of their online time on Facebook and are unlikely to come over here to the blog any time soon."

    Steve, this raises some interesting issues:

    1.Finding the BBC blogs is almost impossible.

    2. Unfortunately you can't compare page views or unique visitors of the BBC site and the Facebook, unless you can do something with FBML on a fanpage (which would be interesting to explore), so there's no way to comparing the popularity.

    3. You say everyone is one facebook or twitter, which a percentage of the audience may be, but all of your hosts (with the expectation of Bacon) have a woeful number of followers or friends (less than 1-3% of their audience in most cases), so either people aren't interested with interacting with the BBC in this way or you're doing it wrong.

    4. Aggregation is the way to go which you are, Steve you might also be interested in a very progressive approach by AP, they see a siteless Web http://bit.ly/dys0zw.

    You really do need to get this message board situation fixed. It's appalling we don't have one now.

  • Comment number 27.

    Hmm, you do have to wonder about 5Live's standards... I wrote a pithy comment and submitted it via 5Live Now about the BBC largess and it wasn't one of the handpicked submissed warranted worthy of publication -- surprise surprise.

    BUT... this gem got through just before --

    The BBC should stop covering Gordon Brown and the other lot. Concentrate on the Lib Dems. - Vince (Westminster)

    Unbelievable! Do these people have any idea? Clearly not letting this slip by. Shows what a laughing stock that platform is really.

  • Comment number 28.

    Ryan that post couldn't possibly be from a certain Mr V. Cable of Westminster could it? ;)

  • Comment number 29.

    I was listening to Richard Bacon yesterday and chuckled when he said that Mondays at 3.30, were all about his obsessions. How on earth could AVK say the man is not self obsessed with that being broadcast every week?

    I wouldn't mind so much if RB demonstrated a good range of interests; sporting pursuits, travel, reading, hobbies etc, but his obsessions seem to be purely about a very limited range of technology. It is becoming a boring and repetitive slot.

    It is the same with his American section on a Wednesday - given the size and population of America, why do they always go for the most obvious and well covered stories? It would be really interesting to take different aspects of American life and examine these in depth. I think Richard could do really well to cover this sort of story as I still think there is more to him than we are currently getting and with a lot more homework and research he could go deeper than his producers are currently allowing.

    As for Help - I am really hoping that it has now disappeared - it doesn't work.

  • Comment number 30.

    I'd like to know why Trish Adudu is a regular guest on Tony Livesy, she shouts people down ,she's rude , she often doesn't grasp what people are talking about, and last night she called a guest barking mad because she didn't agree with her.

    She's very unprofessional.

    BTW I agree with all the comments about Richard Bacon.

  • Comment number 31.

    Ah, Curmy, shouting over speakers, especially when they have an interesting or different point of view from the presenter, has, I suspect, become a necessary qualification of Five Live presenters and their friends: Nolan, Bacon, Dotun, Campbell ... I rest my case. It's the equivalent of stuffing your fingers in your ears and singing la-la-la-la.

  • Comment number 32.

    So very different from Julian Worriker et al who could get the best out of people without being boorish.

  • Comment number 33.

    Steve, I am glad the link I gave was of interest but I found that link on another forum not the BBC. One of the huge problems I have with the blog system is that most of it remains invisible. I have said before that 9 times out of 10 I find blogs purely by chance.

  • Comment number 34.

    Given the new weekday line-up and editorial direction, how should those spending our money be accountable?

    The major critics on theses blogs are few in number. Tens of people cannot be statistically representative of millions of listeners. Management seems to use this as a reason to solely use its own judgment.

    The Controller needs to publicly commit to consider the detailed listening statistics at a reasonable time, say the third quarter of this year, publicise the comparable sector variations from 2009, his analysis of these statistics and then consult on his proposed actions to resolve any issues arising.

  • Comment number 35.

    Depends on what you mean as accountable. The Five Live blog is used merely to convey decisions already made. It is a one sided communication because no notice is taken of anything said by listeners; no answers are provided; there is no discussion or debate between those who blog and those who comment.

    This is lip service of the worse sort and has nothing to do with accountability. Those who blog do not feel the need to account for their actions or decisions or even to make a genuine attempt to engage in discussion and debate, just to report them. The blogs are entirely a defensive mechanism.

  • Comment number 36.

    I lieu of accountability certainly some transparency would help. The BBC do themselves no favours when they withhold information of no commercially sensitive value like the cost of transport and accommodation. When the Rajars are released for Q1 in May we'll see how the figures look. This however doesn't provide any insight into spending and value for money.

  • Comment number 37.

    Please can we have a blog where opinions about the schedule changes can be discussed?

  • Comment number 38.

    Excellent interview with Greg Dyke. Boy would things have been different if he had still been in post, I feel certain of that.

  • Comment number 39.

    Rather than trying to hide away on Radio 4 should this interview not been aired on fivelive? There is no reason why it could not have been broadcast on fivelive as well and makes me wonder if the Controller of fivelive is running scared.
    When I think of what he might be running scared of I would imagine it would be a criticism of decisions to promote Richard Bacon and Colin Murray. Also promotion of such an obsessive self-promoter as Richard "you can see me on 4 webcams" Bacon does not fit with the ethos of the BBC.

    I would like to echo Linda111
    "This is lip service of the worse sort and has nothing to do with accountability. Those who blog do not feel the need to account for their actions or decisions or even to make a genuine attempt to engage in discussion and debate, just to report them. The blogs are entirely a defensive mechanism."

  • Comment number 40.

    Shouty Nolan tells us via Twitter "I'm fronting five lives coverage of Gordon brown at chilcott. Friday from 10am - 3 . Then I'll rake your reaction that night at 10pm." http://twitter.com/StephenNolan/status/9933822444

    What's happened to Victoria? Is she ducking again? I'm not sure Nolan is going to be any better. I'm sure he'll give Brown and easy ride though.

  • Comment number 41.

    Why can't Peter Allen do it ? He's 10 times better.

  • Comment number 42.

    I don't know if this is the right place to comment on the current shows but it does feel very difficult to find anywhere better.
    I've just been listening to Phil Williams sitting in for Richard Bacon and the improvement was absolutely astonishing. Well researched questions for informative and interesting guests about interesting subjects and the guests were allowed to answer and give their opinions and insights (which is after all why they are there) without anyone constantly jumping in the way Richard does!
    This was the best show in the Monday to Thursday 2 till 4 slot since the last time Phil replaced Richard. Glad to see he's doing it again on Tuesday. Pity Richard can't be sent off to America (one of his obsessions after all) for longer.
    I'ts time you admitted the mistakes of Gabby and Richard for weekdays and replaced them with better broadcasters like Phil and perhaps Aasmah Mir

  • Comment number 43.

    I'm glad I've seen this, Snoopysmate and shall be listening on Tuesday at 2pm. I wish I'd known that Phil Williams was going to be on today but assumed it was Bacon so didn't tune in.

    When the changes to the schedule were announced 5-6 months ago; a lot of people (including myself) thought that Phil Williams would have been the ideal choice to replace Mayo. Concur with your comments about Aasmah Mir - shamefully under-used on 5 Live and her Midday News programme was a great loss.

  • Comment number 44.

    You're so right about the midday news, Sarnia. The loss of that marked the start of the rot. I agree, too, about Phil Williams, who is improving, now that he appears to be shedding his rather bloke-ish persona. As you say, at least he seems to listen to what's said to him.

  • Comment number 45.

    Will Richard Bacon be broadcasting from LA or is he on a private trip?

    Before there is a cry of 'off topic' I am wondering if he is indeed broadcasting from there at some point this is further evidence that Richard's show is to be a four day entertainment led programme? This then begs the question what will Colin Paterson's role be if more and more entertainment news is being covered by Bacon?

  • Comment number 46.

    I agree about Phil W. His appearance the other day gave us a chance to confirm that he really is preferable to Richard Bacon. Looking on the bright side, the midnight hour is now Bacon-free.

  • Comment number 47.

    Yes Phil Williams should definately have been given the 2-4pm shift.No doubt about it and I hope things will change quickly.

    Why on earth have the BBC got this fixation with the self obsessed Richard Bacon ?Are they afraid of upsetting him ?I expect him to one day ask a question for listeners to text in to where he should go next.' Go ' being the operative word.

    The number of jobs he has been moved around from.I remember when he was even on BBC Radio7.

  • Comment number 48.

    Did you hear 5Live's live Oscar night coverage? No I didn't think so. 90% of the population was asleep... So you missed the fact they had 9 people on air covering it. Yes, 9 plus the production team!

    What an extraordinary waste our of our money!

    Richard Bacon, Colin Patterson, Paul Adams (all in Los Angeles, all expenses paid) plus showbiz reporter Sandro (?) wherever he was. Then you had a panel of 4 people in a radio studio in Los Angeles plus Dotun in London.

    Why? Talk about trying to crack a walnut with a sledgehammer.

    Do 9 people provide exponentially better coverage then 2-3? I think not.

    A more responsible and frugal broadcaster would have had 1 person on the red carpet, then co-anchoring the programme, the UK host and topped up the coverage with Susanna Reid's (yes, another person from the BBC) television interviews also.

    I can't even see how apologists for the BBC - given the event was live on Television, and occurring overnight, can justify this waste of license-fee payers money.

    PS: It's now been a month, and how many of the questions Mr Bowbrick asked me to compile from the posts made on this blog have been answered here? None. Very very poor effort. However, quite unsurprising really.

  • Comment number 49.

    Bleurgh - had enough of this Oscar/Celeb saturation. I feel as if I'm listening to the radio equivalent of Heat magazine.

    The only good thing about this obsessive interest in all things puerile is that Phil Williams will be standing in for Bacon tomorrow (as he returns back from his freebie w/e in LA)

  • Comment number 50.

    I really don't understand why Richard Bacon was sent over there.

  • Comment number 51.

    As there is nowhere else to say this, I will post it here.

    I was listening to Stephen Nolan last night and seriously, you'd have to wonder about the intenstion of those in charge at 5live! Are they intent on annoying the listeners with this man? Last night Mr Nolan went into one almighty tizzy because he was annoyed at his hairdresser and taxi drivers who dare to start a conversation with him!!!! He insulted every single taxi driver and hairdresser in the land. What gives him the right to do that? I really don't get it!
    One listener suggested that he should take public transport if he doesn't like Taxi drivers, and Nolan's reponse was "I don't like public transport"!!!! Why, I ask? Is it because it's "full of smelly people" as you once said on BBC radio Ulster? And then you had the nerve to have a go at Sir Nicholas Winterton?!!!

    I mean come on the BBC. treat us with respect. We pay for the licence fee so why doyou let your presenters insult us like this. Nolan costs us so much in travel alone and he is nothing but a parasite. He doesn't offer any real intelligent conversation or point of view, just lots of drivel. I think we deserve better.

  • Comment number 52.

    Yes a waste of money because who cares about coverage of this trivia band jingoistic claptrap anyway? I'd rather hear about the Iraqi elections, the ethnic cleansing in Nigeria, the aftermath of the Chilean earthquake, anything but such a mindless subject.

    By the way, Phil was at the Oscars a few years ago when he was the entertainment correspondent............

  • Comment number 53.

    No mention of the murder of Christians by Muslims in Nigeria this weekend but enough time to waste reporting on the Oscars and the overpaid, over exposed, over feted and over pampered 'celebs' by fawning, sycophantic media reporters. Typical.

  • Comment number 54.

    Not quite 5Live but more evidence of BBC hypocrisy... "Not an MP but one must be near. Nick Robinson and crew on the Chippenham to London train. Spending my licence fee 1st class!" http://twitter.com/eyespymp/status/10171819320

  • Comment number 55.

    Surprise surprise... it's been all about Ashcroft for days on the BBC, the moment that Lord Paul finally gets some scrutiny and dodges an interview with Victoria today we get silence from the BBC. The 5Live website home page covers 3 items for breakfast including dog insurance. I think the Tory that Victoria had on today has it right when he said...

    "Imagine a Tory donor who'd bought a company, run its pension fund into the ground, bought the assets back for pennies in the pound, who became a privy counsellor even though he wasn't qualified while personally funding the leader's leadership bid - they would be a massive story and yet somehow the BBC runs day after day on Lord Ashcroft, who as far as I can see has done nothing wrong, and gives Labour an easy ride. It takes me back to the tales we had of the champagne bottles in 1997 and I'm afraid the BBC remains biased and fails to ask the proper questions of those who are currently in power."

    Whether you think this is a worthy story or not, it certainly deserves more balance then it's been getting on the BBC.

  • Comment number 56.

    Firstly even more people are advertising their personal twitter accounts on their programmes. I thought this was being discouraged?

    Secondly, instead of dog licences maybe it would have been a good idea to discuss abuse of Facebook in the light of the grooming, rape and murder of that child via Facebook. This does not sit easy with the Five lite approach I suspect, as they all are pushing Facebook at every opportunity. Fact is the child was groomed easily by someone posting with an assumed profile, and that is worth a discussion I would think.

  • Comment number 57.

    Just popping in to say that I have now severed all listening to 5 live,It's just too painful.
    Adrian Van Klavaren has ruined what once used to be an intelligent,must listen to station and turned it into the radio equivalent of Sky News-and that's being unkind to Sky.
    I've moved over to 6 music.It may not be everyone's cup of tea but at least the presenters are knowledgeable and can string a sentence together properly.
    Who is the terrible woman doing 'weekend breakfast' with Phil Williams ?
    How can someone who is so obviously inexperienced be allowed to present a prime time programme on national radio ? It's a disgrace.That was it for me.I prefer my speech joined up and you know what-6 music is fantastic.I feel I've been missing out on so much.
    Oh-just one thing-get Bacon off it.He really is a tiresome idiot !

  • Comment number 58.

    I have just remembered my thirdly.........

    Who is the Five Live parent of that child who does the dreadful Sports Relief warm up ad? Does h/she belong to Nicky, Vicky or whoever? I bet I'm right and the parent is on the payroll.

  • Comment number 59.

    With all this talk about Bacon et al...one that you have missed is Tony Livesey. he is painfull, any programme he is on he renders unlistenable. He is without doubt the worst broadcaster currently on 5Live (and yes there is some stiff competition for that mantle...Lord alone knows where they got him from. I have gone from regular night time listener (Bacon is no Mayo but the night time programme was ok) to never ever listening after 10.00pm until Rhod or Dotun. One other thing...I wonder if any of the people posting here were amongst the many who complained bitterly when Mayo first joined, I well remember the avelanche of criticism of his style, and look what he blosomed into...

  • Comment number 60.

    Totally agree with you Ryan (comment no. 55). I couldn't believe that Victoria Derbyshire just swatted aside the comments made by Graham Stuart and proceeded in her quest to bash Ashcroft (because that is what she is meant to do). Never mind impartiality and the instinct for a story - clearly not evident in this case.

    Concur with Carrie's comments re: Twitter and the promoting of presenters' personal a/cs on 5 Live. Keep the personal accounts to personal use. IF 5 Live feel the need to use it then please just have an account pertaining to the station and or programme.

    Also feel as frustrated as Robbo06 does with A V-K's destruction of the station and just wonder if there's anyone out there who actually thinks it's better?

    Kevin Hunter - I remember those comments about Mayo (back in 2001/2) and didn't agree with them. They were mostly nit-picking about his gulping ...

    I haven't read a single comment that has endorsed Bacon in Mayo's slot. He's simply too shouty and immature and self-obsessed.

  • Comment number 61.

    Are you people expecting answers from someone at 5Live or the BBC about the concerns you have raised here!!!!!?

    Just asking.

    Life is too short and those who run the BBC are too pompous to give a adamn.

  • Comment number 62.

    Carrie, #56, re: Twitter mentions, I've wrote to the Head of Editorial Policy at the BBC several weeks ago who's reply I expect any day. He's referred it to his policy team. You'll recall they recently revised the social media guidelines. Nicky Campbell is still relentlessly promoting his music exploits on twitter, we've had Richard Bacon promoting left-wing propaganda in last week Stephen Nolan endorsing Volkswagen on air and on twitter. I've raised each of these with AVK by email. As it's continued, I'm getting a policy perspective. Strikes me: BBC talent promotes on air and on its website a BBC talent's twitter account (and encourages feedback via this channel) then it should be under the BBC guidelines of impartiality and non-commercial, something the Head of BBC Online confirmed by email to me, but it seems these twitter accounts are in a "grey" area. Will let you know what happens. I don't care if people have private twitter accounts and personal views, but don't use BBC-promoted accounts for commercial ends.

    PA71, #61, re: answers. I think the BBC thinks if it obfuscates long enough it can get away without answering questions. Even when it invites them in some kind a role playing exercise it ignores then. Further, when you use FoI to get answers about travel and accommodation expenses they refuse to release them saying they are for "art or journalism" purposes. Ridiculous.

    re: Livesey, I'm not a fan, but credit where credit is due, I caught a few minutes of his programme over the last couple of nights, and didn't hear any frivolous facebook mentions I'm happy to report, and much to my surprise two intelligent debates. Maybe they are finally starting to listen? Hmm... well maybe not.

  • Comment number 63.

    And we're still waiting for the answers to Ryan's 50 questions. Why on earth this blog has the word 'accountability' at the top is beyond me. Accountable to whom? Certainly not the listeners and licence-payers. My main question now is, 'Who listens to Five Lite during the day?' Robbo06 is right: this once worthwhile and interesting station has been ruined in its rush to appeal to the lowest common denominator. It's now red-top radio at its worst.

  • Comment number 64.

    @ryanw. I cannot disagree with you more regarding Livesey. I used to think that Bacon was shallow and self obsessed but Livesey is just so frivolous and generally dull. I tuned in last night to hear him say something about him being the least famous person in the room (I hadn't heard of the others) and then some female starts talking over him. This seems to be a regular feature and for the life of me I cannot see how this programme fits any of the criteria of news, sport or entertainment.

  • Comment number 65.

    Carrie, as promised and predicted.. I've had a reply from Mr David Jordan, Head of Editorial Policy at the BBC. Here's his reply to my complaint re: the use of Twitter for on the BBC to promote/endorse commercial enterprise.

    Dear RyanW

    My apologies for not getting back to you earlier with the result of our enquiries.

    Nicky Campbell's Twitter account is not badged as a BBC account, unlike the BBC Five Live Twitter account, so it is clearly intended to be a personal account and its content is consistent with that aim. While the microblog mentions that Nicky Campbell works for the BBC among other things, the account deliberately links to a non BBC website.

    In this context, a personal account, there is no inherent problem with Nicky Campbell mentioning that his band is playing in a pub somewhere. There is no evidence in this case that BBC editorial decisions are being influenced by personal interests. As far as can be seen, this personal message was not even picked up and retweeted by the BBC Five Live official Twitter account.

    Under the Social Networking Guidance, presenters of live chat shows, music and entertainment shows should not generally be mentioning the specific urls of their personal accounts on air though they can do so in some instances. The circumstances in which they can be mentioned are described carefully:

    * where editorially justifiable
    * where the account is used as a personal tool by the presenter
    * it should not be used as a normal or official means of contacting the programme
    * but it can be used to gather instant feedback by the presenter.

    I have asked the Editorial Policy Adviser responsible to make sure that Nicky Campbell is aware of these parts of the Guidance , though I am not aware that he has failed to abide by them either in the instances you quote or at other times.

    The Guidance we issue is designed to allow those working for the BBC to participate in normal social networking activity, including Twitter, as far as is possible, without bringing the BBC in to disrepute. Personal social networking accounts are bound to touch upon many aspects of an individuals life, including, from time to time, other commercial activity undertaken by freelance presenters but, provided this does not bring the BBC in to disrepute, the BBC Guidance is not designed to prevent it.

    I appreciate this does not go as far as you would wish but I hope this is helpful.

    Yours sincerely,

    David Jordan

    So it seems it's ok that for example:

    1. Nicky Campbell's twitter account which is promoted on air, and often linked to from the official @bbc5live twitter account can be used to promote his commercial activities.

    2. Stephen Nolan can endorse Volkswagen on air and on his twitter account (which he mentions every 5 mins on his show, which is linked to from the @bbc5live twitter account, which specifically mentions his BBC involvement and which his uses as an official communications channel for his programme!

    This is totally out of order, as far as I am concerned this is an official BBC channel for the programme and should not be for comments like this "@Volkswagen yes! I present a rAdio show in uk. Will probably but another phaeton soon. I love them. Much better than merc or BMW" http://twitter.com/StephenNolan/status/9600779430

    Radio One's Greg James (who we're told to Follow on Twitter here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/gregjames/%29 went so far as to ask for a Volkswagen car he likes them so much. "Just seen that @Volkswagen is following me. Wanna give me a car" http://twitter.com/gregjames/status/9597280714

    Why is this acceptable? The new guidelines are pathetic!

  • Comment number 66.

    Personal twitter accounts and Facebook pages are the sign of the self obsessed as far as I can see, and you quote a couple of examples ryanw which are inexcusable.

    You ask why it is acceptable for Nolan, Campbell and James to do what they do on twitter. And I think it is not acceptable and neither should the Head of Editorial Policy. No doubt he has his own twitter account.

    Don't they know just how ridiculous it all is, and how amazingly desperate they all seem?

  • Comment number 67.

    I think the answer received to Ryan's Twitter questions proves the whole system is flawed. If you look at Nicky Campbell's twitter account, similarly Richard Bacon's they invite comment on the content of their BBC programmes on their personal twitter accounts. If that comment is then used in a show, it is to all intents and purposes a BBC account.

    If I send a reply to Nicky's twitter page assuming it to be a personal account, I would not expect it to be broadcast, but obviously given the grey areas mentioned it could be.

    Interestingly, someone who does work for the BBC and in my experience uses her twitter really well is Maggie Philbin.

    David Jordan needs to look at the social media blogs to fully understand the many concerns which have been expressed - I wonder if he knows of their existence.

    That reminds me, since Social Media Week we have had no feedback on the many points raised in the blogs.

  • Comment number 68.

    "//But the inverse of this position is that we shouldn't stay off the social networks entirely because that risks excluding the growing number of licence fee-payers who spend most of their online time on Facebook and are unlikely to come over here to the blog any time soon.//"

    Does this explain to some extent why the economy is in the can, what with more and more of the nations productive workers glued to Faceberk and Twitter (never a truer first syllable spoken in jest!) instead of working for a living whilst sat at their desks...?


  • Comment number 69.

    The fudging by the BBC on Twitter is terrible. It is very easily solved. @bbc[name] accounts for BBC talent. These are the only ones linked to from other BBC sites and mentioned on air. They are subject to the normal guidelines, free from bias, balanced and not used to endorse or promote any commercial activities.

    This doesn't preclude them from the normal banal chat about what they had for breakfast or how many times they went to the toilet. It also doesn't stop people communicating with them.

    The current updated policy is unworkable. Love to hear of any other examples of BBC talent misusing Twitter as I'm going to prepare a letter to Trust with the Bacon, Campell, James, Nolan abuses for starters. More examples welcome.

  • Comment number 70.

    "free from bias"

    Are you mad? This IS the BBC, remember!!!!


  • Comment number 71.

    I am listening to the radio right now and despairing at what Five Live has become. Richard Bacon and guest are discussing the affairs of Mark Owen and Bacon is telling us what a great guy Mark Owen is.

    Why on earth is this a suitable topic for a national news service? Even within the remit of entertainment it is stretching it for someone's personal problems to be discussed with Bacon pronouncing his judgement on the character of those involved.

    Who is producing this show?

  • Comment number 72.

    "I am listening to the radio right now and despairing at what Five Live has become. Richard Bacon and guest are discussing the affairs of Mark Owen and Bacon is telling us what a great guy Mark Owen is."

    Meanwhile, Steve Wright is playing some excellent music and hosting a jargon-busting feature aimed at helping the computer-unsavvy and the older generation understand the internet and how to use it - which sounds suspiciously like public service broadcasting to me.

  • Comment number 73.

    I could not agree more prosperosgirl.
    This has to be the most appalling yet and just a further instance of the dumbing down that has undoubtedly taken place since the start of the year. I had to switch off the radio as it was so bad, obviously something I've never had to do when listening to Simon Mayo in the past and not something I did lightly. I'm sure there were many other listeners who took the same action.
    Something really has to be done by someone at 5 Live before all the listeners built up over years are lost within a matter of months.
    At least that's Bacon off for over a week (Phil W on Monday and Cheltenham Festival the rest of next week). I don't even like horse racing!

  • Comment number 74.

    In the interests of fairness I listened to the opening five minutes of Livesey last night and he explained how he had kept a mint in his mouth for ninety minutes and how one of the backroom staff had eaten forty satsumas.

    Then I switched off.

  • Comment number 75.

    " I am listening to the radio right now and despairing at what Five Live has become. Richard Bacon and guest are discussing the affairs of Mark Owen and Bacon is telling us what a great guy Mark Owen is."

    Do you remember what it was like when Simon Mayo was on from 1pm-4pm ?

    Intelligent conversations, for which Simon had done his research . Now we have Gabby Logan and George Riley giggling about sport followed by Richard Bacon discussing celebrities !

    In the evening we have Tony Livesy asking "What's the most pointless world record you've broken ? "

    I thought Nu labour had spent 13 years trying to make this country more intelligent.

    I can only assume Radio 5's target audience is now brainless morons !

  • Comment number 76.

    What is the merit in the ""What's the most pointless world record you've broken?" conversation? Is is designed to be funny, incisive, entertaining? It just sounds banal and stupid to me. And why are they trailing this? Presumbly you promote the most compelling and interesting part of the programme. If this is the best they can do then there's absolutely no point listening. They may as well say "And on Livesey tonight more banal banter and pointless piffle dressed up as entertainment for your enjoyment".

  • Comment number 77.

    Well, well, well, since I've raised the clear and blatant commercial endorsement of Volkswagen on Twitter here and on air over the weekend, Mr Nolan has since added "These views are NOT the BBC's views." to his Twitter page.

    As if that makes a difference!

    He stills promotes this on air every 5 minutes; it's linked to from the @bbc5live Twitter account regularly and he uses it to solicite feedback for his show.

    That is all fine EXCEPT you can't do that AND use it for your personal propaganda for in his case to endorse a brand.

  • Comment number 78.

    I have tried to be fair and listen to the new schedule on 5 live. But today was just a complete joke. Richard Bacon show was a complete mess to actually ask people to text in if they haven't had an affair with Mark Owen what on earth was that about. Not only that Bacon interupted and interview to tell the viewers the really really important information that Davina Mccall was waving to him.... 5 live was supposed to be a news and sport information station. Now all we get are presenters talking about there twiiter accounts and what they got up to last night. I think the controller of the station has to come out and tell us his views on where the station is going and what the editorial content of the sation is. We know Mr Van Klaveren likes appearing on other statiopns apart from 5 live maybe just maybe he could appear on Simon Mayo's show no Radio 2 to tell us whats going on.

  • Comment number 79.

    "Do you remember what it was like when Simon Mayo was on from 1pm-4pm ?"

    Yes - it was absolutely fantastic (hint: migrate to R2 circa 2pm and stick with it. Come 5pm you'll be enamoured of Wrighty and ready for your all-too-short two hours of Mayo).

  • Comment number 80.

    One other thing I noticed about todays Richard Bacon newsreader Justine Greene seemed embaressed about the banal topic Bacon kept going back to.

  • Comment number 81.

    I was listening to 5Lancs last night and on Livesey (I know, I know, but it was only for 5 mins, he puts me to sleep) there was this extremely irritating women who shouted over the top of everyone.

    Was that this Trish women others have spoken about?

    I didn't bother to listen long enough to find out. Whoever she was she needed a muzzle.

    Oh, how interesting the Rajars will be when released in May, particularly the 25-44 demo, mid-upper socios. I doubt there will be any listeners left. I distinctly remember Mr Controller saying in November he wanted the station to be more ”accessible”, after 3 months I am more sure then ever that meant dumbing down and catering to the lowest common denominator. It's more tabloid and more trivial then ever. Just say so. He gets advanced notice of the survey results so I am sure the spin machine will be in evidence.

  • Comment number 82.

    You are right about tabloid - It's is certainly attempting to be appealling to younger people this morning with a report on self harming. More Radio One than 5 live. They don't want us older listeners.

  • Comment number 83.

    The thing is it isn't appealing to the younger listeners either (if the view points of my own three children are anything to go by).

    I feel very sad about all this; about the downward spiral into mindless dross that has replaced intelligent programming.

    Reading comments above I had to google Mark Owen as had no idea who he was; I now no longer listen to 5 Live during the day and consquently feel as if I've lost a friend.

    Where I live I cannot pick up FM (the signal is clear 10 yards down the road though) so unless I listen to radio via my television I am restricted to MW and LW. That wasn't a problem really because I pretty much had 5 Live on all day.

    The decision to replace Eleanor Oldroyd with the hyperactive Colin Murray is a great mistake. I cannot listen to 5 Live on a Friday night at 7 any more but do listen on Thursday nights when Eleanor is hosting.

    I cannot understand what thought process goes through A V-K's head to think that replacing Mayo with someone like Bacon; to replace Eleanor Oldroyd with Colin Murray etc is an improvement! The mind truly boggles.

  • Comment number 84.

    The Voice of The Underground was on Livesey last night. She is a weekly self promoting feature and makes alot of noise. I am giving up on nearly every Radio 5 programme. Thank goodness for World Service and Radio Four.

    He also mentioned his Facebook site was unofficial, ryanw.

  • Comment number 85.

    Tempus - I listened to a bit of Mayo on R2 (via my TV) last night but the format doesn't really appeal; inasmuch as I prefer speech radio to music.

    What a big mistake A V-K made by letting Mayo go.

  • Comment number 86.

    And now it's BROS! Fans ringing in "I can't believe it, Oh my God," "I saw you in November" .....

    Who Cares? It aint 'news, it 'aint sport and it AINT INTERESTING.

  • Comment number 87.

    Is 5Live now Radio One without the music?

  • Comment number 88.

    "Tempus - I listened to a bit of Mayo on R2 (via my TV) last night but the format doesn't really appeal; inasmuch as I prefer speech radio to music."

    Well, given that R2 is a music station he is obliged to play music! It's the hits we remember, though, and not all this pap-pop for yoof that R1 specialises in repetitively churning out. I feel that Mayo manages to bring the interest and "educated banter" to his music show as he did his current affairs and chat show - and there is always an afternoon of the two doctors on the Friday movie reviews to immerse oneself in.

  • Comment number 89.

    I am quite fascinated by the obsession with Facebook and Twitter. At the moment mark Thompson, the BBC's own Beeching is ripping the BBC apart. I presume (and I am no apologist for the man) AVK is doing what he has been told to do. Some of you are banging on about Radio 1....it has its own problems, and actually they are similar. Accepting that its not necessarily your station of choice aside, there have been a number of changes in the presenters and there are exactly the same problems, broadcasters learning the job as they broadcast, mind numbingly banal presenters taking it towards celebrity culture, the list could go on and in deference to this being a 5 live site I wont. then there are the well documented decisions over at 6 and the Asian network, this despite 6 acheiving more listeners than 1xtra and only 100,000 less than 7, while surely the Asian network fulfills the service remit. So I hope you'll forgive me for saying, there are more important things going on here than Twitter. Please, you're clearly a motivated group and the debate here is inteligent, but look at the big picture here, the BBC has faults, we all know that, but the one thing everybody wants to see/hear is quality and I think we all feel let down by the lack of it. Canvass everyone, canvass the board, get in touch with Beeching ... sorry Thommo and tell him he is wrong....and you know what Thommo....its our BBC, you're only meant to be looking after it, and in that respect you're falling down on the job

  • Comment number 90.

    We've love to canvas the boards LOL ,unfortunately there's no Radio board on POV any more and the Radio 5 station board was shut down 3 years ago !

  • Comment number 91.

    Kevin, I agree with your sentiments, however as Curmy says we're being thwarted. We've been invited to engage with BBC Management, we've probed, we've harranged and questioned, but at almost every turn we've been ignored or there's been obfuscation. I know personally I've written to the Head of Editorial Policy, the Head of BBC Audio, the Head of BBC Online, the controllers of Radio 4, 5Live and the BBC Chief Political Advisor, and lodged FoI requests. It's achieved little so far, but believe me, we're all scruntising the BBC and many of us here ae actively trying the engage them, for example --

    - since 20 November we've been asking questions in a thread here which have been almost totally ignored -- that was four months ago
    - on Feb 8 I was invited to consolidate the questions we all asked and the blogs editor said he would get them answered, 5 weeks later we have had absolutely no response
    - we've been asking for a very long time for a message board to focus debate about the station and standards
    - in January I had an FoI request about the cost of flying Stephen Nolan to Manchester each weekend for his show and putting him up in a hotel, on the grounds this information was exempt as it was for held for "art or jounalism" purposes - no I don't get that either. I've since spoken with the Information Commissioners office and due to a ridiculous court ruling last year the BBC can hide almost all expenses on these grounds.

    So, in short, many of us aren't settling for what we've been served up, are deeply disappointed about the dumbing down, and rather then letting the slide continue care enough to try and halt the rapid decline, or at least chart it.

  • Comment number 92.

    Oh, I can also add that Mr Controller dodged the 5Live audience and made an unannounced (to the 5Live audience) appeared on Radio 4 to discuss 5Live (as you would) and also hasn't kept this promise "I'm planning to do a question-and-answer session on this blog early in the New Year, which should be another chance to put points to me directly." -- it's the second week of March and he's been a no show.


  • Comment number 93.

    "surely the Asian network fulfills the service remit"

    I'll accept my money being spent on a station exclusively for Asian culture when I get one that deals exclusively with my white Anglo-Saxon heritage and the "indigenous" culture of this island, pre-"multiculturalism."

    And what about the Afro-Caribbean community? What do they get? Or the oriental community? What's so special about the Asian community that they get their own station and everyone else has to accept broad-spectrum "diverse" stations?

  • Comment number 94.

    Tempus, I'm surprised Harriet hasn't arranged an all women station yet things are that bad. All women Question Time is only the beginning of the master plan ;)

  • Comment number 95.

    Ryan w sorry.....classic case of a johnny come lately....of course you have been questioning the bbc and whilst I might not agree with all you regulars, I certainly agree with the. Main thrust of your argument.

    Tempus.....sorry what's your point.....should we just have stuff for white middle class blokes because they represent the majority? They may not represent those other minorities but that is no reason to stop representation of anyone else. Besides if you want hideously white middle class surely that's why radio 2 exists?

  • Comment number 96.

    "Tempus.....sorry what's your point.....should we just have stuff for white middle class blokes because they represent the majority? "

    Er, no - and I didn't say that. I also fail to see why one specific and particular section of our apparently highly successful, utopic socially-engineered happy-clappy harmonious multicultural society should, over and over again, be singled out for advantage and special treatment.

  • Comment number 97.

    And another thing; where exactly did I mention white middle-class?

  • Comment number 98.

    Yeah sorry tempus....I mis read your comment in amongst the the rest of the bile...or was I paraphrasing a former controller...hmmm

  • Comment number 99.

    And another thing: Strikes me thats exactly what your saying, no matter what passive racist language you want to cloak it in. You dont see why one specific group should get something when you dont. Surely the whole point of a public service remit is to represent as many 'happy clappy groups' as possible, if they fail some other groups then there should be encoragement or insistance that they cover these other groups not insistance that the bbc does nothing. And yeah...you do have a station that plays to your White Anglo Saxon heritage, or is one not enough??

    Your use of language really makes me sick to my stomach

  • Comment number 100.

    I smell another outraged LWN liberal who can't help but cry "Racism!" at any and every opportunity at the merest mention of an ethnic minority in anything other than a shining light, right up there on some pedestal or other.

    Haven't you got some yoghurt to knit or sandals to polish or something?


Page 1 of 2

More from this blog...


These are some of the popular topics this blog covers.

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.