« Previous | Main | Next »

Latest audience figures

radio.jpg

A few weeks ago when England played poorly against Algeria, we received 3,000 phone-calls from listeners trying to get themselves on 606 or the Stephen Nolan show.
Not long before that, all our news programme teams were reporting a bigger-than-usual response to our General Election coverage.
So It wasn't a huge surprise earlier today when the audience figures for April, May and June arrived:
5 live has set a new high of 6.76 million listeners each week. That's up nearly 350,000 from last year.

I'm really pleased for our production teams that all the hard work they put into both the election campaign and the World Cup in particular seems to have been rewarded with a big audience response.
With Radio 4 also reaching a new high, it's also a big success for speech radio despite the competition on other platforms.

Here are some other interesting stats: the average 5 live listener is tuned in for 7 hours 23 minutes each week; Danny Baker and Colin Murray have put on the highest figures for several years in their respective slots; and Breakfast and Drive audiences are very near to their highest ever.
So, despite predictions to the contrary several years ago about speech radio's uncertain future, people across the UK are still choosing radio as one of the main ways to keep in touch with what's going on in the world.

We're now looking ahead to the next three months -- starting of course with the new Football League season this weekend. We also have a major set of outside broadcasts in the northeast of England for 5 live's Septemberfest, and our news teams are already planning their coverage of the party conference season.

We also have that new Sunday evening schedule from September 5th: Alan Green moves to Sunday 606, followed at 7pm by Pienaar's Politics and then at 8pm we will have our new business programme "On the Money" hosted by Declan Curry. Our news investigation show moves to 9pm and will be called "5 live investigates". I hope to bring you news of the new presenter of that show early next week.

I know not all of you will like everything we do, and you are not shy in telling us what you think doesn't work, but thank you for being part of our record audience numbers.

Jonathan Wall is 5 live's commissioning editor

Comments

Page 1 of 2

  • Comment number 1.

    It would be interesting to know how many listeners have switched off in the afternoons fed up of the poorly prepared lightweight Richard Bacon. "Text in about when you saw a celebrity on a train" and features such as ‘help’ and ‘what’s annoying you this week’ have no place on a national BBC news and sport radio station.

  • Comment number 2.


    The World Cup and the Election. What are you going to do now one is over for four years, the other for five?

    Colin Murray's slots? Have you added the listenership all up together? I want to see these magic secret figures for all the slots please, then I can understand, compare, and, if necessary, say sorry for not believing the incredible hype you put out. Or wait for more of your excuses if ryanw and I are proved right.

    As a licence payer I pay for these rajar collations and I am pretty well sure you therefore should not be keeping them secret.

  • Comment number 3.

    Rajar permit the BBC to publish any or all of their audience data.

    Read this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/5live/2010/06/fancy-a-chat.shtml#P99123859

    Rajar told me 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."

    The BBC just chooses to withhold this information from license fee payers. It's not even that this information has commercial value as it was also confirmed to me that the commercial stations can access the BBC audience figures.

    The only people in the dark are us. The people that pay for the talent and the station.

  • Comment number 4.

    It would be intresting to know why the BBC dont publish the audience data, especially if as ryanw claims "The BBC own the RAJAR data it is their copyright and as such they can publish what they like.

    Maybe Ellie you can enlighten us?

    Or AVK if you are reading this, could you shed some light on this issue?

  • Comment number 5.

    Fedster, just a point of clarification, I wasn't claiming it, it was confirmed as _fact_ this morning by Carole Caves at Rajar in an email to me.

    Rajar told me, and I quote verbatim, ""The BBC own the RAJAR data it is their copyright and as such they can publish what they like."

    Sadly, I am sure even if we did an Freedom of Information request on this, the ridiculously wide derrogation the BBC has, would probably allow it not to release it to us -- even though commercial competition have it -- on the grounds that is was held for journalism, art of literature reasons.

  • Comment number 6.

    Indeed so Ryan, so seeing as this blog is all about accountability, i really think Ellie or AVK should give us a reply ASAP, not leave the question hanging in the air, for days weeks, months on end.

  • Comment number 7.

    I am not sure why the ratings have gone up - I can only believe that it had to do with the World Cup. Over the past 12 months I think there has been a steady decline at 5live. Neither of the new day time presenters - Gabby Logan and Richard Bacon - can inetrview anyone to save their lives and are poor replacements for Simon Mayo (who also seems to have caught the diseases with his overlong film fest with Mark Kermode). It comes to something when you think that Nicky Campbell is not too bad. As for the other newbies such as Declan Curry, Colin Murray and Stephen Nolan (nothing against Northern Ireland), they are all too sensationalist (Nolan/Curry) or smug (Murray). At least Ian Payne has returned - I hope he is made chief sports man along with Mark Pougatch.

  • Comment number 8.

    What is it with 5live and Northern Irishmen, fat or otherwise? (yes, we are allowed to say that now)
    I'm looking forward to Murray's Sunday Roast - will the first guests be Rio Ferdinand and Frank Lampard with a video camera?

  • Comment number 9.

    It would be very interesting to see the breakdown of figures. This morning I thought I must be on another planet when I heard the increased listening figures for 5Live. I couldn't believe so many people liked the new, dumbed down 5Live. I certainly listen far less than I used to and not at all in the afternoons. I used to always listen to the 10 p.m to 1 a.m. slot but now I just find out what the discussion is going to be and go off elsewhere usually.

  • Comment number 10.

    You're not the only one. The whole day time schedule, 6am to 7pm, has been uniformly dumbed down. Even the MPs' panel has to have a comedian on it to ensure that the discussion doesn't get too serious.
    It looks as if the sport is also being affected. Whereas once Jonathan Pearce and Henry Winter were on 606 now there's Chapman and Savage. The intelligent discussions with quality journalists at midday on Saturday and Sunday will be a thing of the past.

  • Comment number 11.

    Livesey is doing better and better, although some of his jokey bits are daft, and he does manage serious and balanced, which is more than you can say for some people. If you heard last night for example, he led a reasonably balanced piece on Council housing plans and managed to represent the other side of all the points when necessary.

  • Comment number 12.

    If it wasn't for Rachel Hodges and the Facebook nonsense it could be half decent. However, in a slot once occuped by Nick Robinson there's now someone who used to edit a pornographic publication.

  • Comment number 13.

    I agtree with most of the comments made,the text 'this and that' gets on my nerves.The 10pm slot was best when hosted by Fi Glover,and if only Simon Mayo was to return to the afternoon slot.I think Richard Bacon has his place but think it might be more suited to a saturday/sunday morning show.I am fully aware things have to move with the times but it is time to bring back a better standard of debate.

  • Comment number 14.

    Given that Danny Baker has posted one of the highest listener increases, when are we going to hear him back on five live ? Does anyone know ?

  • Comment number 15.

    I would tend to agree with Carrie. Livesey has ability. Regretably someone, presumably Jonanthan Wall thinks silly in jokes, pointless txt-ins, trival nonsense and constant Facebook mentions make good radio.

    I think Livesey is being led astray by poor producers.

    I've made the point before but it's worth mentioning again -- his Facebook 'audience' is likely to constitute 1% or less of his total lisetnership, so why does it get such a disproportionate mention on air.

    It is as if the hosts have been told that inane text ins and a healthy Facebook friends list is the mark of a good radio host. It isn't. Not even close.

    I guess this is the "accessible" radio that Mr Controller talks about.

    Meanwhile, silence on the disclosure of the ratings numbers. Are we surprised?

  • Comment number 16.

    I did actually listen to quite a lot of the debate on Livesey last night and I realise that given the chance, he could be a serious broadcaster. He did well with some of the election coverage too. I agree that slot was at its best with Fi Glover and Nick Robinson.

  • Comment number 17.

    It's only when someone as good as Phil Williams is on this in the 2-4pm timeslot that you realise the mess that Richard Bacon has made of it after taking over from Simon Mayo what with the juvenile 'texters', the media-celebrity driven trivia obsessions, the inability to shut up long enough to let the guests answer the questions put to them and the reliance on texted questions from the listeners rather than researching the topic for his own questions.
    Phil seems to get the best from his guests and makes his interviews intelligent, informative and entertaining. He lets the guests answer the questions and he sounds as if he has done his research on his guests so that his questions are relevant to the interviewee and the reason why they are on.
    Practically as good as Simon was.
    Please get rid of Richard and give Phil this slot full time and watch the ratings go back up.

  • Comment number 18.

    Ian Payne will sit in for Livesey for the hols. Ian is fun but can get over-excited, but I am glad he is back on the station as he was wasted on Sky. He will calm down anyway.

    Livesey mentioned 20 times at least last night that they had received fantastic listening figures. He did not say what they were and sometimes it sounded as if he was talking of his programme, others the station as a whole. I think it was most likely he was excited over his own growing listenership, which will underscore for all Bacon detractors that the slot is now in better hands.

    Sadly, AVK and his minions will always find a good excuse for any change they have made, and I suspect everyone will have to deal with Bacon for ages to come. Even though he made me laugh in the old slot, I am afraid his afternoon slot has lost me completely. The insulting irony of "what has annoyed you this week" and then not reading out the many one word answers "YOU!!" and the dire Help piece do not work at all. It is just too trivial and yes,he is too excited about his own fortune to be able to realise he dominates by talking over everyone. I am sure he won't be off to Salford - his London social life is too good by his own account. I rarely if ever listen now after 12 and before 4. Logan is just plain awful and full of herself. I never listen to Nolan. The weekend is a listening desert now.

    I agree about Phil, have always been a fan of his, he is old school competent in the station style.

    Why can't we be told about the listener scores from the rajars, AVK? Put the controversy to bed and let us be proved wrong, if you dare.

  • Comment number 19.

    I heard the rating spin about last night on Livesey. Unfortuantely there is 0 transparency, so we don't know if his listenship rose or fell, or more importantly the trends in each daypart against key demographics.

    Of course, the "didn't we do well" narrative becomes accepted in absence of any actual facts for each programme.

    It's important that we see demographic breakouts, because I would sure ratings have soared in the i-can-only-think-140-characters-at-a-time-Heat-reading-under-25-year-old group. But what about others?

    I would say Phil Williams is solid. A steady performer. A safe pair of hands, but currently I don't think he has the X factor.

    Richard Bacon on some levels is better actually, well suited to a lightweight weekend or evening programme, but not worthy of commanding a weekday afternoon slot, establish when preceded by Victoria and Gabby. Three lightweights in a row with little gravitas is a travesty. There needs to be a serious broadcaster in the weekday daytime lineup somewhere.

    Mark Pougatch is well rounded and a quality broadcaster who could actually do more including non non-sports progammes. After losing over a third of their football and with the rise of Colin Murray, they'd do well to make sure Pougatch is looked after before they lose him to Talksport.

    Now, back to the ratings... why can't we see the breakdown as according to Rajar "The BBC own the RAJAR data it is their copyright and as such they can publish what they like."

    Ellie, can you chase this up for us please?

  • Comment number 20.

    I know you're keen for a more detailed breakdown of the figures. It's a subject which has come up in the past, and it's worth referring to Adrian's comments from May.
    I've asked on your behalf if that policy has changed at all.

  • Comment number 21.

    Bacon seems to be more focused on other projects, his new TV show ‘Beer & Pizza’ etc. This may explain his lack of preparation and research about his guests, this often seems to be little more than looking at Wikipedia and asking his Twitter followers for questions, also complaining he is tired. He only has two hours a day to fill (Mayo 3 hours) but ends up filling with lazy radio such as text ins, ‘help’ and ‘what’s annoying you?’ If we want text in trivia we can tune into local radio. He needs to give the guests chance to speak; we want to listen to what the guests have to say not just Bacon’s opinion.

    His inability to cope with sport was demonstrated at Wimbledon and the Open golf. John Inverdale is far superior.

  • Comment number 22.

    Hi Ellie. Thanks for trying.

    Maybe if trends are the important way to look at Rajars, AVK could be persuaded to give us Rajar fee-payers the trends for each time slot.

    Quite frankly the more AVK denies those of us interested in stats, the more sure we are he is hiding what he would see as bad news, and we would see as a vindication of ours.

  • Comment number 23.

    Gabby Logan has been better while George (sports news reader) has been off, less cringe worthy ‘banter’ and ‘flirting’.

  • Comment number 24.

    Ellie, thank you for your efforts. I hope common sense will prevail.

    Just to be clear, is the current position that the BBC refuses to release this information?

    Information which is available to its competitors, and also which Rajar advises the Corporation is free to publish?

  • Comment number 25.

    I now switch on Radio 5Live for the first time at 4 p.m. (apart from listening to Breakfast where N. Campbell is pretty annoying), but I am getting fed up of Aasmah Mir giggling and being silly with Peter. He is a serious broadcaster and I don't know how he puts up with it. There is no comparison with Jane Garvey. Anita Arnand was bad enough, although I enjoyed her 10 p.m. programme. I heard her say when she came back for one morning, that she was making one final appearance with Peter in August, but not returning.

  • Comment number 26.

    Whatever happened to Peter Allen? He could have gone to Radio 4, he could have been the next John Humphrys. Once upon a time he struck fear into any ingenue presenter paired with him. He fiercely maintained standards.
    Now he is the caricature of a hen-pecked husband, the butt of grumpy old man and dinosaur jokes. He contributes to the dumbing down by endlessly reading out listener's drivel. A sad end to spend your last few working years before collecting your albeit gold plated BBC pension.

  • Comment number 27.

    I am not at all interested in some trumped up record audience figures which the BBC suits obsess about, what I want from 5live is quality and intelligent radio which we used to have before some bright spark had the idea of dumbing this radio station down to the depths it has now plummeted.
    Here is a good example of the dire state of 5live and the reason most of us switch off.I refer of course to today and Victoria Derbyshire interviewing some footballer ( Marlon King ) and his poor wife, after he had just been released from a prison sentence.Who the hell is interested in this garbage and why do you think intelligent people would be ?
    There was a time when 5live was on most of the time in our house but now the news headlines are about as far as I get !!
    Get some new articulate presenters or just close the whole operation ( inc. its overpaid management and broadcasters ) down and save the BBC and us licence payers a wad of money.

  • Comment number 28.

    Derbyshire's got paid twice for presenting exactly the same programme because Marlon King's agent was on quite recently with the same phone-in/text-in.

  • Comment number 29.

    Thank goodness I have TMS to listen to. On principle I wouldn't listen to Marlon King and switched off the other day when his odious agent was hawking him for a job, and of course, himself at the same time. ("Gissa cut mate, it's his right to work.") Why on earth do the powers that be at Five Live book these vile people because I am pretty certain I would not be alone in this view.

    I am also certain Peter Allen is just seeing out his time until he retires as he must be the oldest stalwart still at the station from its origin. He couldn't care less what he has to do or read out and is a shadow of his former incisive self, apart from when he was chronically losing it during the General Election, and embarrassing himself in the process. He almost showed he cared.

    Frankly the station was ruined by Bob Shennan and Moz Dee, who managed in their tenure to lose the way of the station and its presenters, lose the core of its older listeners and also insult the intelligence of everyone by dumbing it down to its lowest level possible.

  • Comment number 30.

    ' Marlon King's agent was on recently......'

    Goodness me, this station is in a worse state than I first thought.Still I suppose Derbyshire will cling to and exploit any manner of sports story, she and her woeful production team can get their hands on.

  • Comment number 31.

    Managed to get through the news headlines this morning only to hear some bloke say ' Contact the show if you have been dumped by text ........' Switched off again.
    It has become quite clear that the vast amount of money 5live management and presenters are paid is not in fact earned in any way shape or form.I wouldn't pay you in peanuts for the garbage that is now broadcast.

  • Comment number 32.

    I didn't listen to the King interview but was any comment made on his conversion to Islam (after being busted for cocaine possession) and his choice of Islamic name. Abu Hamza would you believe.....

  • Comment number 33.

    Trifecta, I thought you were joking.. http://www.football.co.uk/wigan_athletic/marlon_king-_shamed_former_wigan_star_converts_to_islam_and_names_himself_after_hero_abu_hamza_rss696605.shtml

    "Marlon King is reported to have converted to Islam and has told inmates hate preacher Abu Hamza is his 'hero'."

    Even less reason to give this man any airtime.

  • Comment number 34.

    On the contrary, it explains exactly why the BBC would favour someone like this appearing.

  • Comment number 35.

    “Text in the name of a hero you have changed your name to”

  • Comment number 36.

    Agree with most coments (17 & 18 in particular). Was excited when heard on Thurs last that Phil Williams was standing in for Bacon so made a point of tuning in. His first guest was an actress from Mistresses and I was SO disappointed when after a matter of minutes we were invited/begged by him to 'text in and tell us what YOU realised was ...blah blah...as a new mother ..blah blah' (obviously on instruction from the producer). Could tell that Williams was 'obeying orders'. It cane across as alien and infantile and I bet he hated having to dumb down. Leave that puerile show filler nonsense to Bacon. People such as Mayo and Williams are intelligent enough to cope with a show without having to resort to banalaties.

  • Comment number 37.

    Are the BBC basing Richard Bacon's ' across the board ' audience figures on how many hours he can cram into a week ?
    Not only do listeners have to put up with his drivel on 5live on 4 weekdays, he is now on Sunday and last Saturday he was hosting a 6Music show.Go and find some broadcasters with some talent and do your job properly.5live is worse now than local radio.Correction, there are better presenters on local radio !

  • Comment number 38.

    Yes Leonard-Zelig, there are some half decent local radio presenters,I'm glad you made that qualification.

    I think Frances Finn coped well filling in shouty Nolan last week.

    We could have her back again. She was a welcome change.

  • Comment number 39.

    Ryan, Frances Finn was a very welcome change at the weekends.I am sure that she said she would be on again this weekend but they got some poor lad doing the Nolan slot who sounded like he had just finished secondary school.

  • Comment number 40.

    Yes, who WAS that guy? He was AWFUL! Frances or Phil Williams would have been a nice better substitute.

  • Comment number 41.

    Made the mistake of turning on my radio this morning and tuning into Bacon's chart the week. Mr Bacon was actively encourging a 19yr old to go out and sleep with some girls and make a name for himself. Is this the standards the elusive AVK wants for 5 live!

  • Comment number 42.

    It was Nihal from Radio 1. He is an Asian DJ and I don't think sounded very comfortable with the format - I am safely listening knowing Shouty is on hols.

    You lot, at least the BBC didn't ask Bacon to help out! Kate Silverton did her programme this morning then read the 10.30pm BBC1 news at 10.30pm, so he could manage it I'm sure if you ask nicely.

  • Comment number 43.

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

  • Comment number 44.

    Oh no George Riley is back, I’ll give Logan a miss due to the ‘comedy banter’

  • Comment number 45.

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

  • Comment number 46.

    I can just imagine Riley spending the whole two hours in the studio looking longingly and admiringly at Gabby.

  • Comment number 47.

    In response to message #46: I think most blokes would spend "the whole two hours in the studio looking longingly and admiringly at Gabby"!

  • Comment number 48.

    You forgot to add the "phnoar, phnoar".

  • Comment number 49.

    Riley and Logan would be ideal for a BBC costume drama like Pride and Prejudice.Riley could play the part of some caddish gent with a lustful eye for Gabby,as she flirtatiously giggles at his advances behind a suitably positioned fan in front of her overdone lip gloss.

  • Comment number 50.

    Plenty of giggling certainly, but I don't remember Jane Austen using "you know".

  • Comment number 51.

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

  • Comment number 52.

    As promised -- here's Jonathan's response to your request for a more detailed breakdown:
    "There's been lots of interest on the audience figures and some comments and questions which I thank you for.
    We don’t release specific programme figures. In fact we don't even distribute them widely to staff on 5 live because we don’t analyse individual numbers. There are so many factors to take into account - these include which quarter of the year it is, whether there has been a big sporting event that may have increased certain numbers more than others, whether there is a new presenter or new programme that needs to bed down in a schedule, whether there have been big news stories or events and even factors such as whether there has been extreme weather such as Januuary and February earlier this year.
    It takes at least three or four weeks for our audience researcher to plough through the data and help us look at trends, which could include how well we do in certain parts of the country and how well we do for each age group.
    The reality is that all of our main programmes, yes including all the daytime programmes, have a significantly higher audience figure than last year. But I'm not going to come out and tell you it's all down to schedule and presenter changes some of you might not think have improved the station. Some of it will be down to World Cup matches taking place in the daytime and some of it I suspect will be down to an increased interest in news and politics in and around the election. Also, it is likely some of the programmes won't have such a high figure in the next quarter - it doesn't neccesarily mean they are not as strong.
    There was also some debate about the Marlon King interview. I completely accept people's right to have a view on whether 5 live should be covering the Marlon King interview. I'm sure you would expect me to say this but I absolutely think we should be providing big interviews such as that on issues we were getting a big audience response to. The interview was subsequently on the BBC news website where it was one of the most popular stories.
    There are are also a lot of abusive comments about presenters that will always be ignored and sadly if they continue will only lead to a debate about whether the blog serves any constructive purpose.
    I know some of you feel we are not on here enough and don’t always get round to answering every point made, but we have made big strides to be as open and honest as we can be. When we won the Station of the Year award for example, you wanted to know what was in our entry, and within a few days, our audio entry was up on the blog.
    There will always be subjective debate around presenters and indeed about the direction you think the station is going on and we welcome good constructive comments. Also though, you cannot assume that 3 or 4 comments on a blog neccesarily represents a true cross section of our audience - we do after all carry out specific audience research, speak to our audience in large numbers at outside broadcasts at Hull and Liverpool for example, we analyse text and email response, and of course we have the official Rajar audience figures.
    I look forward and thank you for the non abusive and constructive debate that will now emerge!"
    Jonathan Wall is 5 live's commissioning editor

  • Comment number 53.

    “There are are also a lot of abusive comments about presenters that will always be ignored and sadly if they continue will only lead to a debate about whether the blog serves any constructive purpose.”

    Looking back through the comments on here they don’t appear abusive, yes certain presenters attract more criticism. Surely we should be able to discuss shows that we feel are weak and presenters that in our opinion are wrong in a particular time slot. Your comment seems to suggest that if we continue to criticise the scheduling decisions the blog will go the same way as the message board, how is that connecting with your audience?

  • Comment number 54.

    Wall uses the familiar BBC management technique of ignoring all criticism whilst talking to the poll-taxed public as children

  • Comment number 55.

    "There's been lots of interest on the audience figures and some comments and questions which I thank you for.
    We don’t release specific programme figures. In fact we don't even distribute them widely to staff on 5 live because we don’t analyse individual numbers.”

    So why did Victoria Derbyshire announce on the show that she had gained300,000 new listeners?

  • Comment number 56.

    "Our news investigation show moves to 9pm and will be called "5 live investigates". I hope to bring you news of the new presenter of that show early next week."
    I think I know who the new presenter is!
    Jonathan, am I right in thinking you are bringing in Adrian Goldberg to front 5 live investigates?
    Adrian presented his final show on talkSPORT last week and one of his colleagues from there Tweeted that he was leaving to join 5 Live.
    Given the timing of his move in relation to what you've written above, you can see why I've come to this conclusion. As Adrian is a consumer affairs journalist by trade this programme would seem to suit him.
    If this is the case, then congratulations are in order as you've bagged yourself one of the finest speech radio broadcasters around.
    Adrian was excellent on talkSPORT and BBC WM so he should be a real asset to 5 Live, although long-term I hope you give him more hours of airtime than just the one!

  • Comment number 57.

    Abusive? Of course, this is the oh so sensitive 5live who were posed such problems when the film "Inglourious Basterds" came out. What do think the public is more offended by? Someone saying "Basterds" or the obscene salaries and expenses of BBC staff?

  • Comment number 58.

    And half an hour later...

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/aug/10/adrian-goldberg-bbc-radio-5-live

    Hi John. I'm sure you posting that so soon after I made comment #56 was just a massive coincidence. :-)

  • Comment number 59.

    Jonathon, you say you do specific audience research when you have done an outside broadcast. So the choice of viewpoints comes down to where you are doing a show. As you pretty well entirely neglect Wales, South West, Midlands, East Anglia - I could go on - and rarely if ever have a live broadcast in London, do you think audiences in Hull, Liverpool and some places like Stevenage actually will represent your total audience view? I certainly don't accept that some Scouser is going to put forward my Brummie view. As for the Rajar figures, don't make me laugh. OK it takes a while to plough through them, although it didn't take Vicky long to pronounce on hers, or Livesey for that matter, but once you have looked at specifics, for the sake of public accountability as we pay for the darn things, I think you should be open and honest about them.

    You were wrong about Marlon King, sorry, Abu Hamza. To give that man two bites of the cherry using his agent too, was offensive to any decent person.

    Abusive is a strong word. Probably best Jonathon, if you think that the opinions of your listeners are important to you, and leave it there. To threaten the Blog being taken away is treating consumers of the BBC like kids.



  • Comment number 60.

    Simply incredible that Jonathan Wall describes Derbyshire and
    Marlon King as a ' Big Interview ' ?
    Haven't seen any contributions on here that could be termed abusive.An extremely strange and over the top use of wording.
    As someone has remarked Derbyshire was very quick to tell us all that her audience figures had increased which I find even stranger if no specific audience figures ( analysed or otherwise ) are applied to individual programmes.

  • Comment number 61.

    That was a very instructive post from Jonathan. It makes a few things clear.

    1. There was no denial that the BBC has the rights and is free to release this information.

    2. The excuse for not giving us access to the numbers to scruntise them appears to be that the BBC 5Livers haven't scruntised them. That is hardly a valid excuse.

    3. 5Live seems to me to holds itself up as a digital pioneers ... release the numbers and crowdsource the analysis. I am sure we'll happily plough through the numbers and provide analysis for you.

    4. The elephant in the room is why won't you release the numbers? What are you hiding?

    It seems that the BBC is going in completely the out of step with the public on this. The government is pushing for more openess, more transparency and more accountability among the public service. Meanwhile the BBC continue to obfusicate and hide information that the public have a legtimate interest in, and has been proven not to be commercial sensitive (insofar as competitors already have this information).

    Let's make no mistake. The BBC do not want us to know how their talent is performing, or provide any meaningful analysis, but are very happy to use the same numbers for their own puffery and propaganda.

    It would have been a major step in the right direction for you to release the numbers.

  • Comment number 62.

    "We have made big strides to be as open and honest as we can be" ... why can't you be open and honest and provide your ratings data? We don't real reason yet.

    Just be clear, I won't mind if you don't provide analysis with the data, and I am sure many wouldn't mind. Don't feel under any pressure to pour over the numbers.

    I quick CSV export and posting of a few key demographics for each daypart will do nicely thank you. Oh, and a survey pre the dumming down too please.

    Thanks.

  • Comment number 63.

    The station acts as a commercial one (personalities/"talent", surveys, phone-ins that re-inforce prejudice, the daily reading aloud of the Daily Mail etc. - yet doesn't & need not generate any revenue.

    We are made to pay for this, on threat of imprionment, yet are not allowed any input.

    Your threat to remove the blog is right, there is no point, like you and your arrogant & unaccountable working lives.

  • Comment number 64.

    I think it was JW's quite arrogant statement 'you cannot assume that 3 or 4 comments on a blog neccessarily represents a true cross of our audience ' that really hit home.

    JW there were very more complaints about the direction of 5live on the now defunct Radio Message which you should obviously know about but was closed down due to adverse criticism of 5live.So it is not in fact 3 or 4 contributors.I am sure more would complain on here if they could find there these ' out of harms way ' blogs.Can't say I see too many praising 5lives output so that should tell you quite alot.

  • Comment number 65.

    I also noted that comment. None of these blogs have engendered a critical mass of support for 5live. On most of this type of forum you will see plenty of pro and anti posters on whatever subject; statistically one might expect at least 50% support but I don't see anything like that on here.

  • Comment number 66.

    Try searching on the Digital Spy radio forum, there are a lot more than 3 or 4 contributors and the majority are critical of the direction of 5 Live and certain presenters in particular.

  • Comment number 67.

    How arrogant. ..."you cannot assume that 3 or 4 comments on a blog neccesarily represents a true cross section of our audience" ... no-one was suggesting it was. But the subtext is clear: we ignore you. Well certainly on the evidence of the lack of posts, the invisible blogs editor and the few answers we receive to our legitimate questions.

    "There are also a lot of abusive comments about presenters that will always be ignored and sadly if they continue will only lead to a debate about whether the blog serves any constructive purpose." -- oh my!

    There are very few abusive posts, if any. There are a good number of critical posts. It seems the BBC cannot accept critisism.

    And if this continues "will only lead to a debate about whether the blog serves any constructive purpose." ... what is the 5Live's definition of constructive?

    Does it mean that we can't be critical of the constant facebook mentions, the trival text-ins, tiresome twitterings, hosts who are clearly out of their depth or show no signs of doing any research or being informed?

    Just like the 5Live ratings it seems only praise and good news is welcome.

    You say "we have made big strides to be as open and honest as we can be" but it seems we aren't allowed to be. And with the ratings you refuse to be.

    Poor effort.

  • Comment number 68.

    How interesting... just visited Digital Spy at Dom's suggestion... the top 5Live post is "Richard Bacon how the hell does he get this job" ... 251 posts... http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=1274091

    Interesting reading. Perhaps you should read them Jonathan.

  • Comment number 69.

    I am insulted by the comment that we are "abusing" presenters. We are expressing an opinion and one which is shared by many, here and other places. Any truly abusive posts would be removed and I don't see many of those. 3 or 4 comments? Another insulting statement. There are far more than that.

    Adrian Goldberg is back on TalkSPORT tonight for his final few nights. He would have been an excellent replacement for Richard Bacon and hopefully will increase his hours on 5Live.

  • Comment number 70.

    I think that we are all rather insulted.If one of the BBC's staff see's genuine criticism, from licence payers, as somekind of abuse then it reflects very badly on the whole attitude of the BBC.I will certainly be making a complaint to the BBC Trust.

  • Comment number 71.

    Why do both Victoria Derbyshire and Stephen Nolan insist on referring to the PM as Cameron (and not David Cameron OR the Prime Minister?). Is this BBC policy or evidence of 'insitutionalised anti-Tory-ism' at the BBC? Gordon Brown was never referred to as 'Brown'. Personally, I find this attitude/disrespect insulting.

  • Comment number 72.

    No surprise there, the BBC were part of the New Labour project. Witness the recent 5live Labour leader candidates programme (which has been commented on in these blogs) plus their constant wheeling out of Labour ex-ministers for their views on Government policy.

  • Comment number 73.

    I made a strong complaint to the correct person about the Hustings for Labour leader programme.

    Answer - he was on holiday.
    Forwarded it to his cover, who forwarded it to Louisa Compton, Vicky's producer.
    No reply for nearly a fortnight but she dismissed it when I eventually heard from her.
    Replied to her for an expansion of her view but she is on holiday.

    I also take offence at Cameron, Clegg and so on. Nolan is blatantly anti-Tory and speaks with disdain. "God forbid I'm spinnin' for the Tories" were his words today. Plus complaining the government couldn't put anyone up to further what the PM said about tourism.

    For a station that chooses to put Beckham as first on the news bulletin over the breast cancer figures shows they have their priorities too. Anyway, as I said on another thread, who is paying for the wee man to stay over here when he could perfectly well have done this programme from Belfast. It is a ludicrous waste of licence fee money and I expect he claims full subsistence allowance too despite having to eat wherever he lives.

  • Comment number 74.

    I'll always remember where I was when I heard the news about Beckham.

  • Comment number 75.

    LOL @ comment no. 74 ! Well done 'Richard in Norwich' whose short msg just read out by 'PH' vocalised what a lot of us think and have pointed out on here - namely Nolan's inherent anti-tory bias and his inability or disinclination to at least try to present himself in an impartial manner.

  • Comment number 76.

    Stephen Nolan persists in calling our government "the Tories" which says everything.

    He is so politically biassed. He cannot keep off the subject of his wretched weight, I expect he wishes he could have done the phone in today. He hasn't changed since I stopped listening to his evening programme years ago, except there are no sayx interviews fortunately, as it is day time.

  • Comment number 77.

    Agree, Carrie. Although his salivating is audible as he tries to extract ever more salicious 'details' from this woman Diane in the current non-stroy/intervirw he is 'conducting right nigh.

  • Comment number 78.

    Apologies for typos - but my left hand isn't working - and am having to type (and everything else) with just my right hand.

  • Comment number 79.

    Thank God no Logan and Riley today. We can look forward to a sports panel not being interrupted and dominated by some jumped-up bit-part player.

  • Comment number 80.

    Yes - the dulcet and intelligent tones of John Inverdale - what a treat!

  • Comment number 81.

    I agree Inverdale is a true professional, let’s hope Bacon gets some sort of TV job then we could have Inverdale as an afternoon replacement.

  • Comment number 82.

    You're probably not as old as some of us who remember John Inverdale doing Nationwide on 5live in the afternoon in the late 90s. He's an old hand at this which is why he sounds so accomplished. Sadly it would probably be seen as a retrograde step to come back full time.
    I too would like Bacon, Logan and Murray to move exclusively to TV where I could easily avoid them. The relocation to Salford might see the disappearance of all the regular day time presenters, which I would be quite happy about.
    Speaking of BBC bias no surprise that Bob Ainsworth has just been brought on to criticise the Government.

  • Comment number 83.

    It was wonderful to hear John Inverdale on the radio this afternoon. I wouldn't normally have switched on at that time these days, but it was on my car radio. Although many of us would like him to be on every day, I should think he has too many other commitments to do a full time daily programme, even if he was asked.

  • Comment number 84.

    Bob Ainsworth - what a joke! Nth choice for Defence Mnister in last Govt and trundled out to slag off Fox and this Govt. I really wished that he'd been challenged more strongly by Inverdale (although he did try - a bit)

  • Comment number 85.

    Again you have to be of a certain age but Ainsworth reminds me of Blakey from On The Buses.

  • Comment number 86.

    He does!

  • Comment number 87.

    Having Bob Ainsworth on doesn’t make the BBC biased as some of you have claimed, of course they need a member of the opposition to discuss the coalition cuts. Regarding the tourism debate, a member of the coalition was invited to come on but declined so Nolan was right to point this out. If he hadn’t you’d be screaming why no coalition spokesman and claiming bias. For balance they need a member of Labour and the coalition to debate, seem like some of you don’t want to hear anybody on air criticising the government.

    Let’s not forget the issue at hand, lightweight underprepared presenters, Five Live dumbing down with juvenile texts etc, and a refusal by Five Live management to provide the audience figures.

  • Comment number 88.

    Actually Dom, I felt Ainsworth was his usual weak self. A poor choice as a Minister, not really on top of his brief and certainly not in tune with popular Services opinions. As a spokesman for the Opposition, he couldn't really give a fair comment because it is so close to when he said one thing and did another. In the tourism part of this debate, it is certainly true that no other government spokesman came forward. However if anyone took the time to read the whole thing, plus the floow up comments, you can see it is a broad and fair attempt to encourage us all to be ready to capitalise on the lead up to the Olympics and what that means to all our livelihoods.

    I have been a reader of the Number 10 website throughout its existence and whether Labour or Coalition in power, you get a better feel for what the government is saying than the little picks that BBC editors think will do for us to create an opinion.

    Whilst Nolan continues to speak in such a derogatory tone about HM Government, I cannot take his neutrality at all seriously. In fact it is non existent. Please someone tell him that MR Cameron is the PRIME MINISTER and not some yob from the shipyards, and accord him and other ministers of state with a bit more respect.

    I do heartily agree with your final paragraph Dom.

  • Comment number 89.

    by 'floow', I meant to write follow.

  • Comment number 90.

    Quick, someone make sure John Inverdale doesn't get away.
    What a refreshing change.

  • Comment number 91.

    Have any of you had chance to plough through all the BBC Freedom of Information requests to see if anybody has been successful in getting radio listening figures?

    All FOI requests are in the Guardian:

    http://gu.com/p/2jx6a

  • Comment number 92.

    Dom, fascinating stuff. I am going to have a look and see what is there.

    How did I miss it when it was in the paper?

  • Comment number 93.

    Kate Silverton has just said "Our Rajar figures are way up, thanks for listening..." Seems everyone knows the figures but those that pay for them.

  • Comment number 94.

    I'm afraid Welcome2theMachine these claims of rating soaring hold no weight.

    We haven't seen the numbers. It's like a football coach saying we're having a brilliant season, we're the league's top scorers. Meanwhile, the team is leaking goals at the other end of the pitch. Unless we know the detail we don't know if the station is losing listeners in one demographic an piling on the under 20's for example, or breakfast listenership has soaring and Bacon is tanking.

    Nice that everyone is reflecting in the 'glory' of this so-called increase, was Kate referring to her own programme or the station.

    Good way to silence the detractors to keep talking up an "increase" without any detail.

  • Comment number 95.

    I think Kate Silverton must have read the audience figure as a misprint.

    Not way up.....more like way out !

  • Comment number 96.

    That is the problem every presenter can make claims that they have the best ever listening figures without any scrutiny of the accuracy.

  • Comment number 97.

    Again Silverton’s claim it cast further doubt on Wall’s statement:

    "In fact we don't even distribute them widely to staff on 5 Live because we don’t analyse individual numbers.”

  • Comment number 98.

    You're right Dom.Can't make out anything anyones says at the BBC right now.

  • Comment number 99.

    Nolan is up to the old tricks. I heard two bits: raped and murdered girl and the story of her attacker, plus sex trips for disabled people. He just can't help it. It is the way he presents these pieces. The disabled story has already been done on Five Live phone in (Ian Payne I think it was) and the other story was proved to be incorrect about the sex offenders register requirements for this murderer if he ever gets out anyway.

  • Comment number 100.

    Why does Nolan insist on saying "that's what you want to talk about today". This is the non choice he is giving listeners, not a free phone in choice of subjects. Otherwise I would be calling up............

    By the way, today it is the same mawkish stuff he has been presenting everyday. I never thought I would say it, but when is Vicky back?

 

Page 1 of 2

More from this blog...

Categories

These are some of the popular topics this blog covers.

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

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.