iPlayer Radio What's New?

Ambridge ups and downs - 18 February 2013

Monday 18 February 2013, 08:27

Keri Davies Keri Davies Web Producer, The Archers

Tagged with:



Snow's gone


Rhys Williams

Fallon said yes!


Paul Morgan

Has he the key to Lilian's heart?


Emma Grundy

Shut up, Ed. Helen's a friend



Garden's a mess 

Lynda Snell
What a llama drama

Shula Hebden Lloyd
Poor Reg...

Elizabeth Pargetter
Can't even sell the family silver

You can receive this light-hearted round-up in The Archers weekly email newsletter, along with other Archers-related news and features.

Keri Davies is an Archers (and Ambridge Extra) scriptwriter and web producer.


Tagged with:


Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 1.

    I am really sorry but this is far more filling space than light hearted. Why bother with this stuff? It's as entertaining as reading a shopping list.

  • rate this

    Comment number 2.

    The blog doesn't seem to say anything that's new as far as I can see - it's just a rehersal of who's who so I'm not sure what purpose it serves. I'd suggest, as resources are tight, that the Beeb dispense with the blog and the Archers website too, for that matter. If you have things to say you could tweet them.

  • rate this

    Comment number 3.

    Can't agree with you Squire. I've seen shopping lists which are much better reads.

  • rate this

    Comment number 4.

    Messages 1 and 3: What, in heaven's name, is the point of sneering at a harmless summary of recent story-lines written by Keri Davies on the blog section of this website? He didn't axe the messageboard!

  • rate this

    Comment number 5.

    Erm, Mr K, quite a significant 'down' this week omitted, wouldn't you say?
    Just asking.

  • rate this

    Comment number 6.

    The blogs are a total waste of time. Keri's time would be better spent elsewhere eg sorting out the archive for starters.

  • rate this

    Comment number 7.

    "Snow's gone"

    Did they have any in Ambridge?

  • rate this

    Comment number 8.

    Message 6: Do you mean you'd like more archive material on this web-site, anna? For example, the kind of synopses of previous episodes like on the Lowfield site? (Don't know if that's still available.) Or are you talking about the 'Who's Who' section on here?

  • rate this

    Comment number 9.

    whos who - it used to be accurate.

  • rate this

    Comment number 10.

    Well, if there are mistakes on there, (and I know how detailed the knowledge of some long term listeners is!) has anyone alerted Kerr Davies to them? He's the web producer, after all, and is very approachable. You can contact him on these blogs, or on Twitter, and I think he'd be only too pleased to put things right. Why not post a list of the errors here?

  • rate this

    Comment number 11.

    People, have told Keri/Tayler countless times about the errors and the response is always that Keri knows but is too busy to deal with them. If he didn't have to do pointless blogs like this one perhaps he would have more time to correct the archive.

  • rate this

    Comment number 12.

    Nemo - there have been numerous requests regarding the website as a whole. Who's Who is the tip of the iceberg. I'm not going to go in to the whole "Pictures are obligatory" kafuffle, which occurred when the "new" website was launched, but errors included an entry for Clive Horrobin that claimed the character was played by an actor called (wait for it) Clive Horrobin. Whoops! And then there are the actors who are represented by landscapes, including Christine - one of the few originals left, and surely one who should be prominent. Months ago we were told that a new photo would be taken when the actress was next in the studio. Well, that time has been and gone and there is still no photo. Another huge gripe is the missing characters, although Bethany merited an entry within just days of being born, supposedly because she was in a current storyline, although that logic fall flat when Henry and Keira are also being featured and have no entries, along with George.
    And then there are the "missing" items, which just disappeared into the ether when the "new" website went live - and have never been re-instated. I'm thinking of the family tree, the interactive map, the time-line. In other words - items that gave me a reason for coming to this site, unlike the puff-pieces such as "ups and downs", which have absolutely no value at all.
    All of these have been mentioned many, many times- and to absolutely no avail. Nothing is done. The message is clear - there is no impetus to design this website around what the listeners actually want. Which makes me wonder what the purpose of the site actually is? Is it just a PR tool?

  • rate this

    Comment number 13.

    In reply to Nemo. I think my criticism is entirely valid. The blog is no more than an advertisement. There is little or nothing that is considered about it and this 'Fill space' example served up by Keri Davies, who clearly was struggling to come up with anything, is pitiful. Imagine if that was a feature in a newspaper. So, as has been asked by others above, why bother to keep it? Just chop it completely.

  • rate this

    Comment number 14.

    These blogs are a strange way for the BBC to use their allegedly limited funds and resources. The only times this blog gets more than a comment or two is when they are full of complaints. It's a wonder the powers-that-be don't try and shovel them away in some "under used" refuge like a message board, for instance.
    Oh, wait a minute...


This entry is now closed for comments

Share this page

More Posts

A response to queries over the closure of The Archers messageboard

Wednesday 13 February 2013, 18:29

‘Yay, Clarrie's back!!!’ – listener discussions to 13 February 2013

Tuesday 19 February 2013, 21:05

About this Blog

Backstage news and insight into The Archers. Curated by Keri Davies.

Blog Updates

Stay updated with the latest posts from the blog.

Subscribe using:

What are feeds?

The Archers tweets