« Previous | Main | Next »

Fancy a chat?

Post categories:

Ellie Reuter | 13:58 UK time, Wednesday, 16 June 2010

tea-for-web.jpg


This is my first week with 5 live's interactive team, and so far, I haven't broken anything.

I've worked on 5 live for six years: firstly with Nicky and Shelagh on Breakfast, and most recently on Victoria Derbyshire's programme.

I'm moving desks for three months to work on 5 live Connect and the 5 live blog, and to develop ways to interact better with the 5live audience (that's you).

5 live's programmes get huge numbers of texts, emails, Tweets and Facebook messages every day, but I want to know if we can improve our conversation with you. I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts.

Update

Thanks for all your thoughts: I've been reading all your messages as they come in, and if it's taken me a little time to respond, that's because I don't yet have the access rights to respond directly to your comments on this page (I'm working on getting that changed, though...)

It's good to hear what you want from the 5 live blog: accessibility, and a chance to talk about the network in more depth. I'll try to bear that in mind in the weeks ahead, as I ask our editors and producers to write about the projects they're working on.

Ellie Reuter is a senior producer at 5 live

Comments

  • Comment number 1.

    Welcome Ellie!

    Nice to see you're embracing the blogs. From the tone of your introduction it seems you're keen to learn and listen and see what the audience and participants here think.

    Can I suggest some background reading -- you'll see that Mr Bowbrick has asked us for our contributions on numerous occasions -- and I am sure you will find the threads I've show below enlighting and interesting. They should go a long way to explaining the strengths and weakness of the your blog and the 5Live contributions.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/5live/2009/11/an-open-post-what-do-you-want.shtml

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/5live/2009/11/answering-your-questions-about.shtml

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/5live/2010/02/victoria-derbyshire-on-faceboo.shtml

    I hope you will find 10 minutes in your day read all the comments therein, which I am sure will give a great introduction.

    Again, welcome.

  • Comment number 2.

    Hi Ellie,

    I hope that the blog succeeds. I think interaction is what is needed some of the time (see Ryan's comments and examples above).

    Twitter et al is ok if you just want to make a short comment or observation and don't expect or want a response.

    This (quite hard to find) blog section of 5 Live - I stumbled across it a few months back quite accidentally and then bookmarked it - is ideal. It has been incredibly frustrating (since the message boards closed down) when a lot of listeners/users of the website just felt their opinions and thoughts were simply an irrelevance and a nuisance and were told to 'embrace' twitter and facebook'.

    I've been a signed up member of the 5 Live website for 9 years now; and find I am contributing less and less (not because I wish to but because the facilities have become less 'user-friendly'.

    Anyway - hello - and good luck!


  • Comment number 3.

    Hello Ellie.

    The only way to improve your conversation with us who contribute on the blogs, is to actually react to the comments made. Annoyance creeps in when there is no response. Having been away for the first week of the World Cup and therefore following it on other broadcasters than the BBC, I have come back to listening to puerile stuff as predicted from Vassos and Nicky and re-churning of "news" which amounts to desperate fillers for your broadcasting, for much of the time.

    There were some good ideas put forward a few weeks ago to make the Five Live Blog more accessible and noticeable on the station's home page, and it would be great to see those ideas receive a response. Sarnia is right, and to achieve wider usage and feedback from your listeners you need to up the visibility and also encourage proper reactions rather than quippy Facebook/twitter sentences that mean nothing once the minute has gone. To build up a picture of how your listeners feel about the station's output you need a conversation, not a tweet.

  • Comment number 4.

    I agree with most of what Sarnia has posted. It is very difficult to find things on the blog. I find most of the things here purely by chance.

  • Comment number 5.

    "Fancy a chat?"

    A chat with each other? Or a chat with you Ellie? If it is with you then a chat requires a response.

  • Comment number 6.

    I was just thinking the same thing Carrie. This bodes badly for Ellie's time in the hot seat.

    Ellie, (if you actually read this), you have inadvertantly illustrated the problem here with your disapparance. Time and time again questions are asked, engagement is sought, and then the author of the post disappears.

    It would have taken you 2 minutes to have read and acknowledge the posts this week.

    You say you're working with 5Live Interactive for now. Could you answer these questions -- I am sure they will help us all --

    1. What is 5Live Interactive responsible for?
    2. How many people have responsibility for the blog output?
    3. Do 5Live interactive people work for other BBC outlets, eg. Radio4 also?
    4. How many people work in 5Live interactive.

    It's deeply disappointing that you've disappeared and entirely consistent with the token effort it seems the Interactive team makes to culitivate and promote the blogs.

    I hope you will "Have a Chat" next week. The longer you leave it, after your enthuastic introduction, the less credibile your claims to wish to engage are.

  • Comment number 7.

    As mentioned, not much good saying "Fancy a chat?" before logging-off for two weeks to go to your second home. It's understand you don't want to appear here, that it's an unwanted rotation (Curr, that management ay!) but, asking a question of the few remaining who care and then disappearing, it's just rude. Or rather, what's expected of the arrogant, unaccountable BBC.

  • Comment number 8.

    Remember this is a BBC Radio station! This blog is just a back up to what's heard on air.

    Again why were the Message Boards abandoned where listeners could start a blog on any issue that was covered?

    There also needs to be more random phone-in's on all your programmes apart from the actual phone-in. Ideally this should involve two callers with totally opposite views on a particular subject and if it get's heated all well and good because that is democracy!
    Far more beneficial than careerist politicians and journalists on one-to-one interviews where everything is a stage-managed act that ensures nothing too untoward is said!

  • Comment number 9.

    I can't supply a link but I did read a right rabid piece on a blog by some BBC person as to why the Radio message board, with criticisms of 5Live, was closed down.It apparently was something to do with the listeners/contributors being ' hostile ' to some presenters and the somewhat sensitive presenters obviously taking umbridge about their good names and reputations being besmirched and tarnished in such an ungainly fashion.

    Could Ellie or anyone please comment ?

  • Comment number 10.

    From what I remember of the Radio POV board there were some quite vitriolic and downright nasty comments/threads directed at a Radio 2 presenter - Sarah Kennedy I think?

    I've never listened to her but from what I could make out these comments (and it had been going on for a long time) were hardly what could be labelled as constructive criticism.



  • Comment number 11.

    One week on.. no reply... looks like Ellie is taking us for granted too. At least 5Livers are consistent. It's not hard to see why goodwill gives way to cynicism is it!

    Wouldn't you think Ellie would have at least read the reply to her post, especially as alledgedly she wants to "have a chat".

    Oh the irony.

  • Comment number 12.

    Hello, ryanw (and everyone else):

    I have been reading your replies, but as you'll see from the update I wrote on my original post, I haven't (until now) had access to write comments here. I'm sorry if that's been frustrating.

    Nick Vinehill, Leonard-Zelig and Sarnia: this blog replaces the old 5 live messageboard as a place where listeners can offer feedback about the network. The old messageboard was closed because with only 50 unique posters a week, the level of moderation required just wasn't sustainable. Your input is hugely valuable, and everything you post here does get read.

    Discussions about news and sport stories take place via text message, email, Twitter and Facebook, directly into 5 live programmes. We've started using 5 live Connect during the Breakfast programme and Victoria Derbyshire's show to pull all these together.

    Do keep your thoughts coming: it's useful to know what you think when I'm asking our editors and managers to write pieces for the blog.

  • Comment number 13.

    So what is wrong with posting as you eventually did, in message number 12?

    On the Five Live home page at the moment a questionnaire pops up asking such questions as whether you want a messageboard for the station. Mmmmmm, yes, I think so. So what there were only 50 unique posters on the old board? Maybe by re-launching you will get more posters, or at least do you not think a genuine opinion from a listener who love(s)(d) the station valid?

    As for this blog allowing listener to offer feedback about the network, surely you can see Ellie, that it only allows comment on what you choose to invite comment about, otherwise, as Steve did pretty consistently, it is closed down for being off topic. This was because the blog was so neglected by Steve there was nowhere else to write what we all wanted to write. There still isn't, because 5 Live Connect and all the other ways to contact the station, are reactive to what is being explicitly broadcast, rather than inviting comment generally.

    It is very frustrating.

  • Comment number 14.

    Deja vu.

    Ellie, could you answer my questions in post #6 please.

    It will provide useful context and an insight into your proirities.

    Oh, and you could have chosen to write a reply as a normal user, it's pretty telling it took almost a week to get access to blog as a BBC person.

    Finally, can I ask please if you have taken time to read the threads and comments I recommended in post #1 and Sarnia also commended to you?

    Thanks.

  • Comment number 15.

    Looks like another star recruit to 5Live Interactive. Ellie has gone missing already.

    Must have been receiving coached from "our" blogs editor, Mr Bowbrick.

  • Comment number 16.

    That is so typical of the BBC. Ellie was appointed to work on "5 live Connect and the 5 live blog, and to develop ways to interact better with the 5live audience" and yet she wasn't given access rights to reply to us! I have to agree with all that has been said above. It took me some while to find it, but nothing seems to be changing.

  • Comment number 17.

    Wouldn't a tribute to Allan Robb be appropriate use of space on the Five Live blog, Ellie?

    I would like to say that as an old school Five Live presenter, and a proper journalist, I had recently been thinking of him, as I looked over the past years and how the station has deteriorated since the days he and others sorely missed were the mainstays of the station.

  • Comment number 18.

    Couldn't agree more, Carrie. Sad news indeed.

  • Comment number 19.

    Well said Carrie. I looked for a post, only to find another contribution for Helen.

    Allan was a fine broadcaster and a loyal servant to 5Live.

    May he rest in peace.

  • Comment number 20.

    I was looking for a tribute to Allan Robb, too. I worked with him from 1997-2000, and have fond memories of a proper journalist, an outstanding broadcaster and a thoroughly decent person.

    I've followed the 5Live website in its iterations over the years, having launched the original one back in 1997. I've kept my thoughts on the changes to myself but I have to chip in now and say I am disappointed not to see some recognition give to Allan's loyal and outstanding service.

    Anyway, Allan was one of three key people at the BBC who guided me enormously in expanding my horizons from print and internet media to true multimedia. His advice has stood me in good stead to this day.

    Thanks Allan, rest in peace.

  • Comment number 21.

    Hello all,
    Thank you for your kind words about Allan.
    His close friend and colleague Nicky Campbell is putting together some words, which I hope to put on the blog shortly.

  • Comment number 22.

    You ask "Fancy a chat?" Well yes. How many BBC staff were given Wimbledon tickets? VD was to the finals, many others seen and said they've been. Are they more important than the fans that camped for days? Why is Logan paid a seven figure sum by the BBC, when - as ITV found out - she can't present or interview or turn-up?
    Why doesn't Klav listen to anybody but Jonathan Wall? With no-one at Lite Towers with any experience it might be a good idea.

  • Comment number 23.

    I suspect that the 5live staff who didn't go to South Africa (not many) have all been offered sweeteners in the form of freebie tickets to the event of their choice to keep them happy.

  • Comment number 24.

    The lack of a messageboard means there is nowhere to ask questions about the station.

    I would like to know why the lunchtime slot is called the Gabby Logan show. I like Gabby when she is presenting, but it has been very much a team effort with Colin Murray and John Inverdale often standing in. Maybe just rename it the Lunchtime Show and have a rota of presenters?

  • Comment number 25.

    Preferably with only John Inverdale on the rota.

  • Comment number 26.

    There IS nowhere to comment on the way the teenage mentality has taken over the daytime schedule. John Inverdale was like a breath of fresh air compared to some of the schoolboy/girl broadcasting which has now become the norm.
    Can no-one get us our station back...please?!

  • Comment number 27.

    Hi Prosperosgirl,

    I put your thoughts to Gabby's editor, Louisa Compton, and she says:

    "Glad you like Gabby's show. Like many presenters on 5 live, Gabby sometimes has other commitments -- like covering the World Cup -- and on those occasions, we'll ask other presenters to stand in for her. But the show doesn't fundamentally change on those days, so it's still the Gabby Logan Programme...just with a guest presenter to (very capably) hold the fort. Gabby will be back on the 19th of July".

    Not sure I can help out with the Radio John Inverdale suggestions, lunchtime_legend and Arthur...but he'll be very flattered.

  • Comment number 28.

    Thanks Ellie - I appreciate the response from you and Louisa.

  • Comment number 29.

    "Gabby will be back on the 19th of July".
    Can you make that 19th July 2015, please.

  • Comment number 30.

    Ellie,
    The show does fundamentally change....Gabby giggles and flirts....John Inverdale does neither!

  • Comment number 31.

    Hi Everybody
    First post on the Radio 5 blog - firstly can I just ask why is this so hard to find? Stumbled across it at work months ago then when I came to look for it at home a couple of weeks later - took me ages, even though I thought I knew what I was searching for.
    Used to be (upto the end of last year) really happy with R5 - I work part of my working week in a warehouse & used to have the radio on most of the time - now I try & work it so I'm doing my office work in the afternoons ie missing the Bacon bit & if possible (unless Phil Williams/John Inverdale or Rachel Burden are on) the Logan bit too. I don't mind admitting I cried when Simon Mayo left for R2, personally I think he's irreplaceable - but they could have tried!
    Ellie - nearly 3 weeks on & you haven't yet answered any of the questions posed by the earlier posters - you've only got just over 2 months left here - any chance of some replies. I've been reading these blogs over the last few months with increasing annoyance - they either run out of steam as questions are repeatedly ignored or are shut because they are deemed 'off topic'. Ellie you've chosen to reply to a couple of positive posts above but not to answer the questions - why?

  • Comment number 32.

    Kermodian makes so much sense so:
    Ellie: Why is Richard Bacon allowed on the airways?
    When is Simon Mayo coming back?

    Thank you.

  • Comment number 33.

    arthur, Simon will be back on Friday. I'm sorry you're not so keen on Richard Bacon: he did have 1.24 million listeners at the last count, though, so that's one of the reasons he's on air. And I've asked John Inverdale to up the flirt quotient.

    KermodianRant, I've tried to reply to the questions I'm able to answer. Some are beyond my remit, in which case I've asked senior colleagues for their thoughts. I don't yet have all their answers, but questions aren't being ignored.

  • Comment number 34.

    Ellie: Why is Richard Bacon allowed on the airways?

    The answer "he did have 1.24 million listeners at the last count" well that is reason enough for keeping him on, as well as giving him extra shows.

  • Comment number 35.

    We're getting somewhere now. If you know Bacon has 1.24 listeners then would you mind telling us what numbers everyone else has, because it can either prove or disprove what people think about some of the presenters on your station.

  • Comment number 36.

    Ellie

    I liked the way you said Richard Bacon DID have 1.24 listeners at the last count.

    As Carrie says how does that compare with the other presenters shows ?

    Can we keep the need for more flirting on 5live to out of office hours ?

  • Comment number 37.

    Ellie,
    Thank you for your reply.
    Can you now please give us Simon Mayo's figures for a comparable period last year, and please, Simon's figures on a Friday.
    It really does not enhance the debate by being flippant about flirting ( and, by default, giggling).
    This surely reinforces my point about teenage mentality taking over what was once a fine station

  • Comment number 38.

    I'd like all those stats.

    Not that we will be given them, of course.

    Dare you, Ellie. Go and ask AV-K permission to tell us the listener numbers of of all our "favourite" programmes.

  • Comment number 39.

    Hi all,

    I'm going to refer you to what Adrian van Klaveren wrote in May about 5 live's Rajar figures, in particular his comments at post 7.

    The latest set of Rajars will be out next month, and I'll ask Adrian to blog about them then, in as much detail as he feels is appropriate.

  • Comment number 40.

    With respect, the Rajar figures are not what I am interested in. Anyone can read the charts and see those figures. What I am interested in is the listener figures for individual programmes, and if you know Bacon has 1.24 million listeners at the last count, which sounds pretty exact as a figure, rather than say, "over a million" or "nearly 1.5 million", then you must surely have the numbers for all the other programmes.

    ".......in as much detail as he feels appropriate" already makes cynical old me think he is never going to give away real numbers because he knows they won't stack up. At least he will have the excuse of the World Cup for part of the period, and therefore the other excuse of having to reschedule so much because of the absence of certain people. Yes, I can almost tell what he will write.

    Please give us the real stats.

  • Comment number 41.

    Ellie,
    In view of your comments above, I reluctantly surrender for the time being unless of course you stop stalling and actually answer the question.
    These boards are exactly the same as the others on the BBC when trying to prise answers about Radio 5 i.e. if not told comment is off topic it is simply ignored.
    What is it that you are frightened of?

  • Comment number 42.

    It's clear from Ellie's woeful non "answer" that Richard Bacon has lost 5Live listeners after replacing Simon.

    The great irony of course is the people that pay for the talent aren't allowed to know how their performing, even with the most basic comparative analysis by daypart so as not to betray the commercial agreement with the research company.

    Openess and transparency aren't in the BBC lexicon.

    Reluctance to reveal trends, or even basic percentage changes, against some key demographics are instructive.

    Ellie, plucking unsourced "facts" from the air, without context or comparison aren't helpful.

    As others have said, if Richard Bacon has 1.24million listeners based on All People 10+ for his daypart what numbers was Simon Mayo posting, and even more importantly, in the 25-49 demographic.

  • Comment number 43.

    Arrogance and unaccountabilty is the BBC. They're paid by us, notionally accountable to us. But don't want to share their dirty secrets. They will never admit they are wrong and will continue to run rings around their critics. They are "The most powerful lobby I've ever encountered" David Davies MP. They are a second-rate commissioning house that redistibutes licence money to their mates. They are not prepared to change - and produce what can't be heard or seen elsewhere. They are - ladies and gentlemen - the BBC. A brand up there with BP, BA and any bank.

  • Comment number 44.

    I'm glad Ellie has bought up ratings again. Nice of her to give us a crumb.

    Convienently, Mr Bowbrick (remember him?) gave us the RAJAR publications guidelines (see http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/5live/2010/05/rajars-show-more-people-listen.shtml ).

    Below I have copied verbatim the NOT FOR PUBLICATION and GENERAL MISUSE & MISREPRESENTIONS sections.

    I have finally taken the time too look at them and they way I would interpret the guidelines is that the BBC is entitled to release the information we asked for, so it seems to me they intentionally withholding this information. But why? There was nothing I read in the guidelines that seem to forbid the most modest release of its own top-line figures to the people who pay for the BBC and the Corporation's participation in it.

    The smoking gun would seem to me to be "Stations are free to publish their own platform figures. However they may NOT publish platform-based data for any competitor services."

    Here are the extracts I thought most relevant (or use the link above to read in full)

    Not for publication
    a) Out of area data
    The RAJAR survey is not designed to be a definitive measurement of out-of-area performance. For this reason, out-of-area information is intended for internal purposes only and cannot be traded upon.
    b) Competitive platform-based data
    Stations are free to publish their own platform figures. However they may NOT publish platform-based data for any competitor services.
    c) Sub-area analyses
    Samples are only meant to be representative at TSA level. Any analysis based on an area smaller than a published TSA is therefore for internal purposes only and strictly not for publication.

    #############

    General misuse and misrepresentation RAJAR is most concerned that there should be no misuse or misrepresentation of information and, if necessary, may restrict publication rights. Misuse includes: • the publication or other dissemination of results prior to the embargo date and time specified for the 'Quarterly Summary of Radio Listening'. • the publication of data provided for internal use only - for example, monthly results, data for 'opt out' services or sub-area analyses. Misrepresentation of the data may be seen to have occurred where:
    - the universe, area or time period to which figures relate is not clear
    - the results are published based on inadequate sample sizes (as defined by RAJAR in the event of dispute)
    5
    - direct or implicit comparisons are drawn between basically dissimilar sets of data
    - a difference between two periods is interpreted as a real change in listening behaviour without checking for statistical significance.
    - RAJAR results are shown in conjunction with a station map that does not clearly show the TSA boundaries.
    In the case of doubt about the validity of an analysis or claim, consultation with RAJAR is strongly advised. The RAJAR Board has indicated that it will take a strong view of the abuse of the publication rules, and any organisation misusing or misrepresenting the data can expect action to be taken against it.

    ##########

    What do you think?

  • Comment number 45.

    I've been thinking. A little more context is perhaps worthwhile on this RAJAR debate.

    1. I intepret the publishing guidelines as restricting publication before the embargo has lifted, some restrictions around publishing data of your competitors, restrictions around some geographic (out of area) filters but a green light to publish your own details.

    2. The BBC's competitors will also have this information if they paid for the survey, as will media agencies who buy media on commercial stations. This discounts the "its commercial sensitive data" argument. So, looks like only we, the paymasters, are in the dark.

    3. The BBC presumably is a major contributor (read: licensee fee payers, you and me) of the fees payable to RAJAR ratings, so you would think, even if they were not permitted to publish any data (which I believe they are entitled to do) they would have sway to insist that some information can be released.

    4. Inevitably, the "ratings are only part of the consideration about the strength of our programming lineup" defence will be used to deflect and obfusicate so information will not be released (wouldn't want to upset our precious talent). This may be true. But there are qualitative and quantative measures, and I suggest quantative measures (what type of survey numbers they post) has a part to play in the level of their remuneration, for the same reason.

    5. There is a strong moral argument that basic, useful, audience numbers should be posted by the BBC. This is done with other public service broadcasters overseas.

  • Comment number 46.

    ryanw, your heap of hard work has uncovered the proof of what you and many others suspected for a long time, that is, that the BBC intentionally have tried to befuddle listeners asking questions about quality and listenership in to thinking that we are not entitled to listener stats etc. I suggest you send your whole file of information to the new Minister and tell him how the "powers that be" at the BBC have tried to avoid fulfilling a request that we have every right to ask to be answered.

    The only reason we don't get the answers is because we have been right all along and the figures are down, or massaged, or so bad that they can't admit they have made a mistake.

    It is very poor, but so very expected, that "our BBC" (their words) behaves that way.

  • Comment number 47.

    Carrie, I have corresponded with Jeremy Hunt before and after the election. My primary interest is more transparency and accountability, beginning with the relaxing of the Freedom of Information legislation which lets the BBC exempt itself from just about all public scrutiny. I'm hopeful the new government will act.

    Oh, and it wasn't really my hard week. You must thank "our blogs editor" who kindly provided us the link to the official RAJAR publication guidelines.

  • Comment number 48.

    Well done anyway ryanw.

    As there is nowhere else to post an opinion on output and quality, can I just say in the strongest possible way that I thought the coverage of the final hours of Raoul Moat was the most intrusive and ill-judged piece of live broadcasting for a very long time. I could go on.

  • Comment number 49.

    I was listening to, and enjoying, 5live sport when they decided to cut to Rothbury. My heart sank because I knew what to expect. Hours of speculation, of the same "experts" pontificating, of Nolan trying to make high drama out of every slow drip feed of news. 5live takes the "live" part of its name too rigidly at times - just because it's live doesn't necessarily mean it's news. Why not wait until something actually happens?

  • Comment number 50.

    Msgs 48 & 49 - spot on!

  • Comment number 51.

    As Carrie says, whoever decided to cover the events of Friday night 'live' should take a long, hard look at their position. It was prurient and tabloid radio of the worst possible kind, and Nolan (need we be surprised) was the worst of all possible presenters. Irresponsible and reprehensible broadcasting. Radio 5 should be ashamed.

  • Comment number 52.

    Live coverage of the Raoul Moat story has just been voyeurism at its worst

  • Comment number 53.

    It's been great hearing the likes of Ian Payne and John Inverdale on 5live,just like the good old days when 5live was a top station.

    All we need now is competent broadcaster from 10am-12noon and that she really help matters along.Extraordinary piece of radio this morning by Ms Derbyshire who was asking headteachers how much they earn ? Seems abit of a cheek beings the BBC won't release any figures of her, I suspect ,more than large enough salary !!

    Btw on the Raoul Moat case.Some of the most shameful and disgraceful broadcasting by all tv and radio in a long while but would we have expected any different ?

  • Comment number 54.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 55.

    For fu*ks sake, there's a "profanity filter" on here

  • Comment number 56.

    On virtually every blog, the conversation soon turns away from the content of the blog and into a discussion about the direction of the station. This surely shows that the blogs are not catering for what the listeners really want to discuss. Is it not time that 5live admitted there should be a place to debate the station and its shows and just let us get on with it?

  • Comment number 57.

    Prosperosgirl, surely you're not suggesting using common sense and providing an outlet to listeners who want to discuss their station are you? It'll never fly.

  • Comment number 58.

    Ellie has disappeared.

    I have made a complaint about a Labour party hustings being held on Victoria Derbyshire's programme, and at the same time being over advertised. Did the BBC do this for any other party? Considering the membership is only just over 60,000 we must therefore assume the powers that be at Five Live have decided to help Labour win the next election by exposing their candidates to national radio (that vast listenership) as a way to help us all get to know them.

    I do not think this is appropriate at all. Fair enough a portrait of the winner when it is over, so we know what we are getting, but this programme actually is serving as a membership boosting rally and therefore I think all parties should have an equal amount of airtime to do the same.

  • Comment number 59.

    Totally agree Carrie.

    Email ric dot bailey at bbc.co.uk -- he is the main man.

    It has been wall to wall Labour on the BBC. I haven't heard or seen anywhere near the same coverage or love-in on ITV, Channel 4 or SKY.

    Wonder why?

  • Comment number 60.

    I will, thanks ryanw.

  • Comment number 61.

    Ric was on holiday. His stand in sent it on to the producer of VD's programme. What a result. A total party political broadcast, very inappropriate and now it is over I feel the BBC will never do the same for the other major parties. So much for being politically unbiassed, with Pienaar and Derbyshire in charge. You are correct ryanw, the other major broadcasters would never get in to blatantly politicking for one party.

  • Comment number 62.

    hello all,

    I had to write somthing, i've been listener of five live for about six years now and when i first started to listen there were alot of interesting things broadcast, topics that i personally knew little about but found interesting and informative or two people would be debating an issue these people would be professional's who worked or had alot of experiance with the issue. The brain would be engaged.

    Today it's all phone in, text in, what do you think? tell us your views, what do you feel. I don't care what nigel from cardiff or joan from manchester thinks about the war in Afghanistan or the oil leak in America. Get people on the radio who have invested interests in the topic and question them about whats going on.

    Am sorry but am off, hopefully in time the decision to plan programs from the pages of the daily mail and hello magazine will be reversed and some interesting shows will once again be aired.

    i will listen as always friday 2 - 4

    thanks

  • Comment number 63.

    Wise words andashark.

    Most of the contributors on here have been making a concerted effort for far too long to try and change 5live back to the top station it once was but with very little affect.Nobody seems to have any idea what or who the current 5live is aimed at or what low intellect the BBC thinks its listeners has.

    I've almost given up but the only reason I do tune in is when the current crop of tedious presenters are off on holiday.It really says something about 5live when the ' stand-ins ' broadcast a far better programmes than the regulars.Francis Finn has been exceptionally good compared to Mr.Nolan as an example.

  • Comment number 64.

    Ellie, you need to take it easy. 5 Posts in two months. Blimey, get an assistant or two.

    We've seen in recent days - the BBC management's integrity (Salford - I'm not going), seen the big cheese's lack of strategy (Radio 6 - will be closed) and we know the days, weeks, months when no-one posts from the BBC and have to accept, now, there will never be any more quality, here at 5-Dive.

  • Comment number 65.

    Further to the last post, the Daily Mail and Guardian both reported yesterday, that the controller of 5Live, Mr Van Klaveren will not relocate his family to the new Salford base, and instead commute (presumably staying some/all of the week in the north). Frankly, this is none of our business in my opinion, although hardly a ringing endorsement for the 'move'.

    See: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1298540/BBC-boss-wont-London-Salford.html

    Of much more concern is the money we're paying out -- up to £1900 per month on accomodation benefits. If, as reported, the average price for a house in Salford is £138,000, this represents a whopping 16.5% yield pa. It is also safe to assume that a house has 3 bedrooms. Or put another way, at least two more then is required.

    We're shelling out up to £22,800 each year for each person to rent property in Salford.

    This accomodation benefit seems far too high.

    Speaking about Mr Salmon, BBC 1 controller, who receives the same accomodation benefits as the 5Live controller, a Salford resident is quoted in the Mail article as saying, "'Plus he's going to be getting £1,900 a month of our money towards his rent. How the other half live. He's going to be in a penthouse apartment or a massive house for three days a week. It's outrageous.'"

    Couldn't put it better myself.

  • Comment number 66.

    We all knew this would happen, ryanw. Maybe we naively thought AVK would set an example, particularly as he had been so positive about his staff moving up. Frankly the BBC board should stop those vast allowances and be bold about saying the staff should either move up there or re-apply for other vacancies in the BBC area they want to live in.

    It is pretty insulting to think you couldn't live maybe twenty miles from Salford and commute, and that your kids couldn't deal with a move, when thousands do this all the time. For once the National Curriculum can show that your children don't miss out on changing schools, they have to make new friends, so what? Do you know, if the BBC said to AVK we want you to run BBC World Service but you have to go to Washington DC or Sydney, he and his kids would be off like a shot. He is simply a snob!

  • Comment number 67.

    Morning Ellie.

    Fancy a chat?

  • Comment number 68.

    Obviously not.

  • Comment number 69.

    Oh dear, silly texting disease has spread to Logan's show - "what's the first thing you do when you get home?"
    You'd have thought someone would have got the message by now that most listeners are heartily sick of this tripe.

  • Comment number 70.

    Well Ellie has done a runner. Even accounting for a long period of leave she is awol.

    I am heartily sick of being patronised by AVK, his colleagues Steve Bowbrick and Ellie Reuter and his:

    "About this blog
    Behind the scenes at BBC Radio 5 live. A blog where Controller Adrian Van Klaveren, senior managers and editors talk about what's important at 5 live and 5 live sports extra. Big stories, changes and updates plus snapshots from the BBC's move to Salford".........


    Clearly NOTHING is important at Five Live, there are no big stories and the updates concerning the Salford move is akin to "don't mention the war" in the sense that if you read about it all you read is the lengthening list of those, including AVK, who are NOT going.

    All rubbish and I would like some action please - NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • Comment number 71.

    They could have told us they've hired a new producer, ex LBC, for breakfast.

    They could have updated us on the Salford progress, although it's probably embarassing given the we are paying up to £22,000 for people to rent property there, while others, like the Controller, aren't moving up there lock stock and barrell.

    They could have told us more about Colin Murray's new Sunday Roast programme (hmm, on second thoughts maybe not), they're trying to hawk tickets after all.

    They could have told us about the behind-the-scenes planning related to the Labour leaders debate (what it was like to deal with the different candidates).

    They could have told us about their cricket coverage if they'd bothered to read the blog and answered a question from a listener as they alledge the do.

    I suspect we WILL get a post tomorrow when the Q2 Rajars are released to tell us how 5Live is the best station on the planet and 1,000,000 times better then it was 18 months ago.

    You know the drill.

  • Comment number 72.


    "Radio listening breaks record for second quarter
    to reach all time high of 46.8 million listeners..."

    Strangely, the stats for Radio Five Live,including the World Cup and other high points, does not seem to be reflected. Spinning is going on as I write, although they have had a while to work out what to say - that is probably where everyone is, at their laptops, trying out excuses on each other before breaking cover today.

  • Comment number 73.

    Aaaah, the General Election. The World Cup.

  • Comment number 74.


    As it's Rajars day, and surely the spin is immenient, it is worthwhile returning to a popular theme.

    For some time 5Live, and other BBC radio outlets, have chosen to use the most basic audience figures to demonstrate the virtues of their programming decisions to us.

    Of course, this basic information is largely useless as it is often not comparative (QoQ or YoY), never split out by daypart (so we can see the relative strengths of hosts) or equally instructively and importantly daypart analysis.

    Giving us the 12a-12a Monday-Sunday AP15+ numbers don't tell us much.

    Despite repeated interest and enquiries our requests for more information on comparative daypart and demographic information - so for example we can see how successful Colin Murray is, whether Bacon has hemorrhaged a huge number of 35-54yr listeners, whether listening among texting teens has soared and 35+ AB listeners has plummeted etc.

    Our requests have fallen on deaf ears.

    So, I asked Rajar today and it turns out that it is entirely the BBC's decision not to be accountable to the listenership. It is fine to publish the most elementary and positive top line statistics, but they obfusicate and withhold information hiding behind Rajar.

    Here's an unambigious email I received from Rajar today --

    "The BBC own the RAJAR data it is their copyright and as such they can publish what they like.

    We conduct the survey on behalf of both the BBC and commercial radio and as such we cannot publish anything without permission."

    Regards

    Carole Caves
    Office Manager
    RAJAR Ltd


    As a point of further clarification I subsequently confirmed that commercial "rivals" can also view BBC Rajar data. Yes, they can.

    Carole confirmed, "Commercial stations do have access to BBC data as the BBC has access to commercial data."

    So, that just leaves the us, license fee payers in the dark.
    The paymasters aren't allowed to know how successful the shows are.

    BBC accountability at its best.

    We all value quality programming and accept that audience interest is not the sole benchmark for the BBC, but if the dumbing down and clear reduction in broadcast quality on 5Live for example is going hand in hand with a loss of listenership in key demographics then this is not good.

    Let's hope we get a spreadsheet of data published. [Personal details removed by Moderator]

  • Comment number 75.

    Sorry for my absence: you're right, I took some annual leave, and have also been covering other people's leave on Victoria's show.

    5 live's commissioning editor Jonathan Wall has just blogged about the latest Rajar figures.

  • Comment number 76.

    Apart from the Rajars Ellie, what's "important at 5 live and 5 live sports extra. Big stories, changes and updates plus snapshots from the BBC's move to Salford?"

    For example, there are lots of questions and comments on here since you last posted nearly a month ago. Care to have a go?

  • Comment number 77.

    Welcome back Ellie. Hope you had a nice and relaxing break.

    Ellie, if you read all the blog posts as you say you do I can only assume you ignore the questions we pose? Although maybe you have been too busy.

    Could you answer for example, my perfectly reasonable questions posed here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/5live/2010/06/fancy-a-chat.shtml

    It would be nice to get a reply to give us more context on what this '5 Live Interactive' thing is, where people like our blogs editor Mr Bowbrick disappear too for months and how the spend their time, so we can understand what the priorities are for the station in the Interactive realm, as obviously it isn't the blog.

    Maybe you could stir Brett Spencer into blogging an explanation.

    Thanks.

  • Comment number 78.

    I read many newspapers online and get a feel for the spectrum of opinion from doing so. Today I was highly amused by a piece in the Daily Mail which is headed "How your millions are being squandered............" which is factual in the sense it is a churn of stuff us Salford-detractors already know has been accepted by the BBC without denial. Have a look at it.

  • Comment number 79.

  • Comment number 80.

    We know the BBC is institutionally arrogant. It would be nice to think that Jeremy Hunt will stand his ground on the licence fee. However, no doubt after lots of schmoozing and softening up he'll cave in like all his predecessors.

  • Comment number 81.

    Where is the breakfast phone in blog we were promised? Why are you killing 5 live? It is quite obvious that hardly anyone is interested in the subjects you put up for discussion. Most blogs have no comment whatsoever. What is wrong with you?

  • Comment number 82.

    "the comments on 5 live blog posts now close automatically after 10 days" Nigel Smith

    Obviously not this one, what about some real station news we can discuss or do we have to watch the slow drawn out death of this blog?

    Who is going to be the new co-host for Breakfast? Rachel Burden has been so so this week.

    Nigel like your predecessors you promised so much but failed to deliver

  • Comment number 83.

    I am sick of Salford already. Sad for the rest of the country, but no-one has an opinion quite like a Salford person. (See "Giving it some death")

  • Comment number 84.

    This comment will seem unfortunately insulting to some individual posters, but these posts as a whole make a bad impression.
    One miserable person at a party can be dealt with. Maybe they will cheer up. Two people maybe, but a whole group of miseries, wet-blankets, kill-joys who always see the worst of things will spoil the party for others.
    It would be better if these people stayed away from the party. It is not for them. They put other people off. They like to grumble in the company of similar like-minded people.
    If you do not like a programme or a station you can deal with it. You can turn it off. You listen to something else, or do something completely different. If you do like a programme or a station as a whole, you can praise it, on this blog or write directly to the station. This may ensure that what you like stays on air. It may make the station give you more of what you like.
    Personally, I don't like sport, and I don't listen to it, but there are a lot of other good things on 5 live that I like.
    I often listen to Victoria Derbyshire, Gabby Logan if it is n't sport, The Drive programme, Weekend Breakfast except the sport, Kate Silverton etc. I listen to a lot of French radio, such as now, while typing.
    Just take a look at this blog - the comments, the posters, is it depressing, is it worth reading, would you rather do anything else? Just look, be fair to these posters who have a miserable tale to tell. Can you comfort these people, do they want to be comforted, do they prefer to stay with other miserable people? There are people like that.
    Just be fair to them. You have some patience, but you can't help people who want to be miserable , who enjoy it.
    Just be very fair and reasonable to them, and look carefully, and see if you can find one word of praise for the station. You'll have a hard job.
    Let us just tip toe away and leave them to it.

  • Comment number 85.

    Yes people on here are miserable coreze. Yes it would be easy to listen elsewhere or switch off - many listeners do when certain people are broadcasting, but there is one major point you have completely missed. The people who complain, me amongst them, are people who have listened to this station for many years, perhaps like me, for its entire 11 years, they are people who love current affairs, foreign and home news and politics, and who found a home on that station for their passions. The station has mutated in to on air Heat, it is low brow, trivial, smug and self satisfied. What is wrong with pointing out to the BBC that the station is largely rubbish. On another thread you can see that one of the programmes is using ringers to supply callers. That is a good example of how very poor it has all become; if the programme was any good there would be plenty of people calling in and no reason to ask friends to be callers before the programme has even begun.

    I don't find your post insulting but it does miss the point, and that is that of course if you like the station you should say so, but equally if you don't like certain things you should be allowed to say so too. The Rajars show there is little or no growth of listeners, and in fact there will no doubt be a negative return this quarter which will be explained away by, oh, maybe the wrong type of snow or leaves on the line, AVK will find something. The sad fact is there is no other station that provides listeners with the things this station used to broadcast every day. Up all Night is just about the only programme which continues with a broad subject base.

    My meandering post leads me to say that finally whatever your point of view coreze, there is no reason to be quite so patronising when you write it.

  • Comment number 86.

    Thank you for your reply, carrie, in your post no.85.
    Of course, I can make generalised statements about discontented posters who just complain all the time about the station. However you are an individual, and I can try to show you that things are not quite so bad. Person to person. you are entitled to your opinions,but are you seeing things in a bad light? I don't like sport, and so that is 50 per cent of the station that is of no interest whatsoever. Can I persuade you that there is something good in the other 50 per cent?
    Like you I listened to the station from when it started. You say that it has deteriorated. Can I suggest one thing, the original presenters for the most part have moved on and have been replaced by new younger presenters. Personally I thought that the original presenters were fine No change needed. However I suppose they want to develop their careers, and you must give new people a chance. However, I am not comfortable with the idea that the presenters must be a specific age, whilst the listeners get older as normal. Maybe that is what you feel. I'd like to see the old presenters come back for a flying visit. Let us just have a party and compare notes. I see that it going to be sixteen years in March since the start of 5 live. I think there should be celebrations. There have n't been any before, have there? We could have Diana Madill, Sybil Ruscoe and John Inverdale for example at the celebrations. These people were the original core presenters. Ground-breaking is the word. Here is a suggestion for the Controller, let us celebrate the past successes of 5 live and the future successes, with an anniversary celebration.
    However this may not be enough for people who just want to be unhappy. Take ryanw for example, who wants detailed raja figures. How will this make him happy? The raja figures say what listeners are tuned in to. Individual people such as ryanw, you, me may have completely different tastes. I mean a lot of people like sport on the radio. I don't, and so I don't listen. If a programme is doing badly, then there are people such as the Controller who will do something about it. That's what his job is. I cannot see why ryanw or any listener worries about raja figures. What matters are the programmes that you personally like.
    Of course it may be that there are people who don't like any of the programmes. In which case they should turn off 5 live. There are many other stations. Like supermarkets or shops, if they have n't got what you want, go elsewhere. I don't get everything from the same shop, and of course i listen to other radio stations as well as 5 live.
    very best wishes to you for some good radio listening

  • Comment number 87.

    Well said coreze, if more of the silent majority posted,instead of the usual cynical postings by the regulars, then maybe this blog would have a more accurate,balanced feel to it, instead of it being currently skewed in favour of the cynics.

  • Comment number 88.

    I think the whole point of silent majorities is that you don't know what they think, so your point works both ways Fedster. Hence the importance of Rajar figures to show whether people are switching off or not, and the importance of losing contracts to broadcast to other organisations such as Talksport.

  • Comment number 89.

    I entirely agree with carrie. I keep complaining because the station has deteriorated so much since its inception and there are very few programmes I can bear to listen to now. I don't like sport either, apart from tennis, so I have never listened to it. That's fine as I realise a lot of people do like it. My problem is with the current affairs content. There is no other 24 hour current affairs programme as an alternative and I feel the loss of the journalistic standards very keenly. I don't accept that because there are new younger presenters it should be dumbed down.

  • Comment number 90.

    The noise from the management is deafening.

 

More from this blog...

Categories

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.