Gold Radio UK

[Scott]

Gold is automated except for four hours in the morning (James Bassam
6-10 weekdays and Dave Andrews 8-12 weekends). I wondered whether
there is an Ofcom rule to provide four hours of live broadcasting or
just a commercial decision to boost audiences. I looked at the
public file and Ofcom website but cannot find anything.

Also, does anyone know if the output of the London station on 1548 kHz
is identical to the national DAB multiplex?

[Brian Gaff]

I don't think it always is as some commercials differ. I think it needs a
shake up in commercial radio in this country. It all started so well, but
then we got the big media players in buying up the stations for they
frequencies and not really following the spirit of local commercial radio,
just adapting things to employ fewer people with less choice and offering
the bare minimum of differences to get around the rules drafted many years
back.
Trouble is, nobody can make money unless they are big, since the money
grabbing administrators of the frequencies and transmitters have priced the
little operator out of the market.

Is Radio Jackie still independent, and how long for?
Brian
--
--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
***@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!

Post by Scott
Gold is automated except for four hours in the morning (James Bassam
6-10 weekdays and Dave Andrews 8-12 weekends). I wondered whether
there is an Ofcom rule to provide four hours of live broadcasting or
just a commercial decision to boost audiences. I looked at the
public file and Ofcom website but cannot find anything.
Also, does anyone know if the output of the London station on 1548 kHz
is identical to the national DAB multiplex?

[Scott]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 12:11:54 -0000, "Brian Gaff"

Post by Brian Gaff
I don't think it always is as some commercials differ. I think it needs a
shake up in commercial radio in this country. It all started so well, but
then we got the big media players in buying up the stations for they
frequencies and not really following the spirit of local commercial radio,
just adapting things to employ fewer people with less choice and offering
the bare minimum of differences to get around the rules drafted many years
back.
Trouble is, nobody can make money unless they are big, since the money
grabbing administrators of the frequencies and transmitters have priced the
little operator out of the market.
Is Radio Jackie still independent, and how long for?

Do you think there is an argument for redefining the likes of Smooth,
Heart etc as national stations. This would allow them to use a
specific part of the FM spectrum (like the BBC stations) and allow a
SFN for DAB (all on the same multiplex).

Would the loss of the the ability to slot in local advertising make
any real difference to Global and Bauer?

[MB]

Post by Scott
Do you think there is an argument for redefining the likes of Smooth,
Heart etc as national stations.

Never heard to them because of their lack of coverage partly and also
because I never listen to commercial radio anyway. :-)

[Scott]

Post by MB

Post by Scott
Do you think there is an argument for redefining the likes of Smooth,
Heart etc as national stations.

Never heard to them because of their lack of coverage partly and also
because I never listen to commercial radio anyway. :-)

This reminds me of the old joke about the judge who asked 'Who or what
are The Beatles anyway'.

Global is Europe's largest radio company. Here you go:
https://global.com/

You might learn something new.

[Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd]

Post by Scott
Global is Europe's largest radio company.

Really, in turns of turnover, number of staff or different automated stations?

I'd guess the BBC is larger in all but total stations, few if any of which are
automated.

Nothing against automation, my favourite background Global station has one
commercial break an hour, but no presenters or trailers.

Angus

[Scott]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:34 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),

Post by Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd

Post by Scott
Global is Europe's largest radio company.

Really, in turns of turnover, number of staff or different automated stations?

Based on what it says in their website. They mention reaching 51.7
million individuals across the UK every week, which suggests the claim
is based on audience figures.

Post by Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd
I'd guess the BBC is larger in all but total stations, few if any of which are
automated.
Nothing against automation, my favourite background Global station has one
commercial break an hour, but no presenters or trailers.

This is Gold? Occasional trailers for the breakfast shows and
Destination Midnight.

[MB]

Post by Scott
Based on what it says in their website. They mention reaching 51.7
million individuals across the UK every week, which suggests the claim
is based on audience figures.

I suspect there is a bit of creative accountancy going on.

[Scott]

Post by MB

Post by Scott
Based on what it says in their website. They mention reaching 51.7
million individuals across the UK every week, which suggests the claim
is based on audience figures.

I suspect there is a bit of creative accountancy going on.

No doubt there are many ways to calculate audience figures but Global
is a major player in the radio industry by any measure (even without
your custom).

[Mark Carver]

Post by Scott
Based on what it says in their website. They mention reaching 51.7
million individuals across the UK every week,

Classic FM's reach accounts for that figure alone, then add in Capital,
Smooth, Gold, and LBC, which are sub-set layers within that 'footprint'.

[Rink]

Post by Scott
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:34 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),

Post by Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd

Post by Scott
Global is Europe's largest radio company.

Really, in turns of turnover, number of staff or different
automated stations?

Based on what it says in their website.

I do not see at their website that they are "Europe's largest radio
company".

Post by Scott
They mention reaching 51.7 million individuals across the UK every
week, which suggests the claim is based on audience figures.

51,7 million individuals ?
Really?

How many people are living in the UK?
And almost everybody listens to Global every week?
I think they mean "potential" listeners (10 years and older).
And that "Reach" = "can receive us".

I'm pretty sure there are more people living in Russia (European part)
and they have less choice of radio stations nowadays.
Probably there is "Europe's largest radio company".

Rink

[John Williamson]

Post by Rink

Post by Scott
They mention reaching 51.7 million individuals across the UK every
week, which suggests the claim is based on audience figures.

And that "Reach" = "can receive us".

I suspect you are correct.

Assuming that 51.7 million is the population of the area covered by
their transmitters. About three quarters of the UK population, and
rather less than half the area of the country.

[Scott]

On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 14:09:10 +0000, John Williamson

Post by John Williamson

Post by Rink

Post by Scott
They mention reaching 51.7 million individuals across the UK every
week, which suggests the claim is based on audience figures.

And that "Reach" = "can receive us".

I suspect you are correct.
Assuming that 51.7 million is the population of the area covered by
their transmitters. About three quarters of the UK population, and
rather less than half the area of the country.

I suspect this is correct as they also refer to 'Entertaining 25.4
million people across the UK every week'. This suggests a potential
audience though I suppose it could mean that half the listeners are
not entertained :-)

[Mark Carver]

Post by John Williamson

Post by Rink

Post by Scott
They mention reaching 51.7 million individuals across the UK every
week, which suggests the claim is based on audience figures.

And that "Reach" = "can receive us".

I suspect you are correct.
Assuming that 51.7 million is the population of the area covered by
their transmitters. About three quarters of the UK population, and
rather less than half the area of the country.

I think so too. The 'reach' in terms of number of people who tune into a
specific station for a minute per week or more, is more or less about
50% for the BBC, and 50% for commercial radio. And the 50% of commercial
radio is roughly made up of 40% Global, 40% Bauer, and 20% 'others'.

And of course all groups overlap, there are some people (probably most
people) that listen to more than one group. For instance, BBC, Bauer,
and 'others'

50% reach in those terms is half the population, so about 35 million.

[Scott]

On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 15:02:12 +0100, Rink

Post by Rink

Post by Scott
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:34 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),

Post by Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd

Post by Scott
Global is Europe's largest radio company.

Really, in turns of turnover, number of staff or different
automated stations?

Based on what it says in their website.

I do not see at their website that they are "Europe's largest radio
company".

I suggest you look again, under the word 'radio' where it states:

'Europe’s largest radio company, Global is home to the UK’s best-loved
radio stations including Heart, Capital, LBC, Capital XTRA, Capital
Dance, Classic FM, Smooth, Radio X and Gold.'

[Rink]

Post by Scott
On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 15:02:12 +0100, Rink

Post by Rink

Post by Scott
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:34 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),

Post by Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd

Post by Scott
Global is Europe's largest radio company.

Really, in turns of turnover, number of staff or different
automated stations?

Based on what it says in their website.

I do not see at their website that they are "Europe's largest radio
company".

'Europe’s largest radio company, Global is home to the UK’s best-loved
radio stations including Heart, Capital, LBC, Capital XTRA, Capital
Dance, Classic FM, Smooth, Radio X and Gold.'

OK, I've read it on
https://global.com/radio/

And there they say they are :
"Entertaining 25.4 million people across the UK every week".
And:
"Our brands include Heart, Capital, LBC, Capital XTRA,
Classic FM, Smooth, Radio X and Gold."

25.4 million is half the number I read before.
And half the number they "reach".

And I see what they mean by "outdoor":
Advertising with Billboards,
which has nothing to do with radio broadcasting.

Still I do not understand where "Europe's largest radio company" is
based on.
It could also be RTL (Germany, France, Belgium, Spain, Luxemburg).
Or a Russian station. There are more then 140 million listeners in Russia.
for example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Rossii

Rink

[Scott]

On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 16:10:31 +0100, Rink

Post by Rink

Post by Scott
On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 15:02:12 +0100, Rink

Post by Rink

Post by Scott
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 19:34 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),

Post by Angus Robertson - Magenta Systems Ltd

Post by Scott
Global is Europe's largest radio company.

Really, in turns of turnover, number of staff or different
automated stations?

Based on what it says in their website.

I do not see at their website that they are "Europe's largest radio
company".

'Europe’s largest radio company, Global is home to the UK’s best-loved
radio stations including Heart, Capital, LBC, Capital XTRA, Capital
Dance, Classic FM, Smooth, Radio X and Gold.'

OK, I've read it on
https://global.com/radio/
"Entertaining 25.4 million people across the UK every week".
"Our brands include Heart, Capital, LBC, Capital XTRA,
Classic FM, Smooth, Radio X and Gold."
25.4 million is half the number I read before.
And half the number they "reach".
Advertising with Billboards,
which has nothing to do with radio broadcasting.
Still I do not understand where "Europe's largest radio company" is
based on.
It could also be RTL (Germany, France, Belgium, Spain, Luxemburg).
Or a Russian station. There are more then 140 million listeners in Russia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Rossii

I thought you were querying whether this claim appeared in the
website.

It's veracity is a different matter altogether.

[MB]

Post by Rink
51,7 million individuals ?
Really?

Just means that in a survey that number of people have said they have
heard the station at some point over the period. They do not need to
have actually listened to a programme.

[Scott]

Post by MB

Post by Rink
51,7 million individuals ?
Really?

Just means that in a survey that number of people have said they have
heard the station at some point over the period. They do not need to
have actually listened to a programme.

Well, does it? I thought we had concluded it was the number of people
capable of receiving the broadcasts [using the term 'broadcast' to
include online]. .

[Roderick Stewart]

On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 18:14:20 +0000, Scott

Post by Scott

Post by MB

Post by Rink
51,7 million individuals ?
Really?

Just means that in a survey that number of people have said they have
heard the station at some point over the period. They do not need to
have actually listened to a programme.

Well, does it? I thought we had concluded it was the number of people
capable of receiving the broadcasts [using the term 'broadcast' to
include online]. .

If you include online in the definition of 'broadcast' then you'd have
to add a caveat of some sort, as the number of people capable of
receiving it would be almost the entire world.

Rod.

[Scott]

On Thu, 02 Feb 2023 09:31:17 +0000, Roderick Stewart

Post by Roderick Stewart
On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 18:14:20 +0000, Scott

Post by Scott

Post by MB

Post by Rink
51,7 million individuals ?
Really?

Just means that in a survey that number of people have said they have
heard the station at some point over the period. They do not need to
have actually listened to a programme.

Well, does it? I thought we had concluded it was the number of people
capable of receiving the broadcasts [using the term 'broadcast' to
include online]. .

If you include online in the definition of 'broadcast' then you'd have
to add a caveat of some sort, as the number of people capable of
receiving it would be almost the entire world.

The website we are discussing specifically refers to the UK. Quote -
'On-air, on Global Player and outdoor – through these platforms
combined, we entertain and reach 51.7 million individuals across the
UK every week.'

The question we are discussing is how the figure of 51.7 million is
calculated.

The favourite answer so far is that it is the number of *potential*
listeners.

I was suggesting this probably includes online, smart speaker, phones
etc as obviously Global will be looking for the highest figure..

[Roderick Stewart]

On Thu, 02 Feb 2023 09:57:07 +0000, Scott

Post by Scott
On Thu, 02 Feb 2023 09:31:17 +0000, Roderick Stewart

Post by Roderick Stewart
On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 18:14:20 +0000, Scott

Post by Scott

Post by MB

Post by Rink
51,7 million individuals ?
Really?

Just means that in a survey that number of people have said they have
heard the station at some point over the period. They do not need to
have actually listened to a programme.

Well, does it? I thought we had concluded it was the number of people
capable of receiving the broadcasts [using the term 'broadcast' to
include online]. .

If you include online in the definition of 'broadcast' then you'd have
to add a caveat of some sort, as the number of people capable of
receiving it would be almost the entire world.

The website we are discussing specifically refers to the UK. Quote -
'On-air, on Global Player and outdoor – through these platforms
combined, we entertain and reach 51.7 million individuals across the
UK every week.'
The question we are discussing is how the figure of 51.7 million is
calculated.
The favourite answer so far is that it is the number of *potential*
listeners.
I was suggesting this probably includes online, smart speaker, phones
etc as obviously Global will be looking for the highest figure..

That's pretty much what I was getting at. If it's a website or online
streaming source, even if it's only intended for British listeners,
the number of *potential* listeners is the entire internet.

Even if you specify the number of potential British listeners, you'd
need some way of determining which ones they were if you wanted to
make an actual measurement.

Rod.

[John Williamson]

Post by Roderick Stewart
On Thu, 02 Feb 2023 09:57:07 +0000, Scott

Post by Scott
I was suggesting this probably includes online, smart speaker, phones
etc as obviously Global will be looking for the highest figure..

That's pretty much what I was getting at. If it's a website or online
streaming source, even if it's only intended for British listeners,
the number of *potential* listeners is the entire internet.

Not necessarily. Some streamers, such as the BBC, geofence their website
based on your IP address. You *can* get round this by using a VPN.

[Sn!pe]

Post by John Williamson

Post by Roderick Stewart
On Thu, 02 Feb 2023 09:57:07 +0000, Scott

Post by Scott
I was suggesting this probably includes online, smart speaker, phones
etc as obviously Global will be looking for the highest figure..

That's pretty much what I was getting at. If it's a website or online
streaming source, even if it's only intended for British listeners,
the number of *potential* listeners is the entire internet.

Not necessarily. Some streamers, such as the BBC, geofence their website
based on your IP address. You *can* get round this by using a VPN.

I generally use a UK node of my VPN provider, PIA. Using it, I can
access neither BBC iPlayer nor Amazon; I have to turn off the VPN
for at least the validation stage of the connection.

[Roderick Stewart]

Post by Sn!pe

Post by John Williamson

Post by Roderick Stewart
On Thu, 02 Feb 2023 09:57:07 +0000, Scott

Post by Scott
I was suggesting this probably includes online, smart speaker, phones
etc as obviously Global will be looking for the highest figure..

That's pretty much what I was getting at. If it's a website or online
streaming source, even if it's only intended for British listeners,
the number of *potential* listeners is the entire internet.

Not necessarily. Some streamers, such as the BBC, geofence their website
based on your IP address. You *can* get round this by using a VPN.

I generally use a UK node of my VPN provider, PIA. Using it, I can
access neither BBC iPlayer nor Amazon; I have to turn off the VPN
for at least the validation stage of the connection.

That's something they don't mention in the adverts. Every other
Youtube channel seems to be pushing the use of one VPN or another, a
common selling point being that you can access all your usual stuff
when you're on holiday. If the BBC and Amazon are using some kind of
blocking system, I wonder if it applies to all VPNs or just the one
that you're using?

Rod.

[Theo]

Post by Roderick Stewart
That's something they don't mention in the adverts. Every other
Youtube channel seems to be pushing the use of one VPN or another,

That's because it's insanely profitable - costs very little to deliver the
service and they get to relieve people of ballpark 10 pounds/month (after
all the introductory offers etc). That's why they're aggressively pushing
products most people don't need.

Post by Roderick Stewart
a common selling point being that you can access all your usual stuff when
you're on holiday. If the BBC and Amazon are using some kind of blocking
system, I wonder if it applies to all VPNs or just the one that you're
using?

The content providers likely subscribe to a service that identifies VPN
servers. eg:
https://www.netify.ai/resources/applications/nordvpn

It'll be a cat and mouse game of the VPN spinning up new servers and the
blocklists catching on.

If you run your own server you don't end up on the blocklist.

Theo

[Scott]

On Thu, 02 Feb 2023 11:26:39 +0000, Roderick Stewart

Post by Roderick Stewart
On Thu, 02 Feb 2023 09:57:07 +0000, Scott

Post by Scott
On Thu, 02 Feb 2023 09:31:17 +0000, Roderick Stewart

Post by Roderick Stewart
On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 18:14:20 +0000, Scott

Post by Scott

Post by MB

Post by Rink
51,7 million individuals ?
Really?

Just means that in a survey that number of people have said they have
heard the station at some point over the period. They do not need to
have actually listened to a programme.

Well, does it? I thought we had concluded it was the number of people
capable of receiving the broadcasts [using the term 'broadcast' to
include online]. .

If you include online in the definition of 'broadcast' then you'd have
to add a caveat of some sort, as the number of people capable of
receiving it would be almost the entire world.

The website we are discussing specifically refers to the UK. Quote -
'On-air, on Global Player and outdoor – through these platforms
combined, we entertain and reach 51.7 million individuals across the
UK every week.'
The question we are discussing is how the figure of 51.7 million is
calculated.
The favourite answer so far is that it is the number of *potential*
listeners.
I was suggesting this probably includes online, smart speaker, phones
etc as obviously Global will be looking for the highest figure..

That's pretty much what I was getting at. If it's a website or online
streaming source, even if it's only intended for British listeners,
the number of *potential* listeners is the entire internet.
Even if you specify the number of potential British listeners, you'd
need some way of determining which ones they were if you wanted to
make an actual measurement.

We agree then. They specifically state: 'through these platforms
combined, we entertain and reach 51.7 million individuals across the
UK every week.' If we accept that the website amounts to advertising
(of Global) than it would be a breach of ASA rules to make a statement
that is either misleading or cannot be substantiated. I think they
would need to analyse IP addresses or use another methodology.

[Mary Wolstenholme]

Post by MB

Post by Scott
Do you think there is an argument for redefining the likes of Smooth,
Heart etc as national stations.

Never heard to them because of their lack of coverage partly and also
because I never listen to commercial radio anyway. :-)

Never do I because I can't stand adverts.

[charles]

Post by Mary Wolstenholme

Post by MB

Post by Scott
Do you think there is an argument for redefining the likes of Smooth,
Heart etc as national stations.

Never heard to them because of their lack of coverage partly and also
because I never listen to commercial radio anyway. :-)

Never do I because I can't stand adverts.

and, of course, the Radio Licence was created so people did not have to
hear adverts.

[Scott]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 16:58:04 +0000, Mary Wolstenholme

Post by Mary Wolstenholme

Post by MB

Post by Scott
Do you think there is an argument for redefining the likes of Smooth,
Heart etc as national stations.

Never heard to them because of their lack of coverage partly and also
because I never listen to commercial radio anyway. :-)

Never do I because I can't stand adverts.

Some would say the BBC's repeated trails have the same irritation
value as the adverts.

[Tweed]

Post by Scott
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 16:58:04 +0000, Mary Wolstenholme

Post by Mary Wolstenholme

Post by MB

Post by Scott
Do you think there is an argument for redefining the likes of Smooth,
Heart etc as national stations.

Never heard to them because of their lack of coverage partly and also
because I never listen to commercial radio anyway. :-)

Never do I because I can't stand adverts.

Some would say the BBC's repeated trails have the same irritation
value as the adverts.

Well I wouldn’t. The only commercial station I listen to is Times Radio,
and it has reneged on its promise of no adverts. It now has some VERY
irritating adverts (MacDonalds) and the only thing that keeps me listening
is my car has a mute button on the steering wheel. There’s no comparison
between programme trails and adverts.

[Scott]

On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 18:41:59 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Scott
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 16:58:04 +0000, Mary Wolstenholme

Post by Mary Wolstenholme

Post by MB

Post by Scott
Do you think there is an argument for redefining the likes of Smooth,
Heart etc as national stations.

Never heard to them because of their lack of coverage partly and also
because I never listen to commercial radio anyway. :-)

Never do I because I can't stand adverts.

Some would say the BBC's repeated trails have the same irritation
value as the adverts.

Well I wouldn’t. The only commercial station I listen to is Times Radio,
and it has reneged on its promise of no adverts. It now has some VERY
irritating adverts (MacDonalds) and the only thing that keeps me listening
is my car has a mute button on the steering wheel. There’s no comparison
between programme trails and adverts.

Classic FM runs for extended periods late at night without ads. Gold
often runs '40 minutes of the greatest hits of all time, non stop'.

With regard to the BBC's trails, it infuriates me when the weather
forecast is cut short and omits where I live to make way for trails.
This annoys me more than ads do. After all, the ads are paying for
the service.

[Liz Tuddenham]

Post by Scott
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 16:58:04 +0000, Mary Wolstenholme

Post by Mary Wolstenholme

Post by MB

Post by Scott
Do you think there is an argument for redefining the likes of Smooth,
Heart etc as national stations.

Never heard to them because of their lack of coverage partly and also
because I never listen to commercial radio anyway. :-)

Never do I because I can't stand adverts.

Some would say the BBC's repeated trails have the same irritation
value as the adverts.

I do !

[Mark Carver]

Post by Liz Tuddenham

Post by Scott
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 16:58:04 +0000, Mary Wolstenholme

Post by Mary Wolstenholme

Post by MB

Post by Scott
Do you think there is an argument for redefining the likes of Smooth,
Heart etc as national stations.

Never heard to them because of their lack of coverage partly and also
because I never listen to commercial radio anyway. :-)

Never do I because I can't stand adverts.

Some would say the BBC's repeated trails have the same irritation
value as the adverts.

I do !

+1

[MB]

Post by Scott
Some would say the BBC's repeated trails have the same irritation
value as the adverts.

They are nowhere near as bad, at least not on TV (I have not heard a
radio advert for years and that was for a reason.

[Liz Tuddenham]

Post by MB

Post by Scott
Some would say the BBC's repeated trails have the same irritation
value as the adverts.

They are nowhere near as bad, at least not on TV (I have not heard a
radio advert for years and that was for a reason.

On R4 there are six to eight in every hour - and that isn't counting the
articles and news reports that are nothing more than 'plugs' for
television programmes. They scrabble through weather forecasts, cut
interesting interviews short and take minutes off every programme to
squeeze in as many trails as possible.

The trails are jarring and patronising with jump cuts, loud percussive
music and effects overlays - and the sound is heavily compressed and way
above normal programme levels.

[Scott]

Post by Liz Tuddenham

Post by MB

Post by Scott
Some would say the BBC's repeated trails have the same irritation
value as the adverts.

They are nowhere near as bad, at least not on TV (I have not heard a
radio advert for years and that was for a reason.

On R4 there are six to eight in every hour - and that isn't counting the
articles and news reports that are nothing more than 'plugs' for
television programmes. They scrabble through weather forecasts, cut
interesting interviews short and take minutes off every programme to
squeeze in as many trails as possible.
The trails are jarring and patronising with jump cuts, loud percussive
music and effects overlays - and the sound is heavily compressed and way
above normal programme levels.

I agree. I have just been listening to 'More or Less' on Radio 4. I
would be interested to know how the number of minutes of trails during
the hour on the BBC compares with the minutes of adverts on commercial
stations.

I thought Ofcom moved to subjective sound levels in place of peak
sound levels some time ago and that Channel 4 was fined for turning up
the volume of the ads. Is there a similar rule for the BBC (for
non-programme material)?

[MB]

Post by Scott
I agree. I have just been listening to 'More or Less' on Radio 4. I
would be interested to know how the number of minutes of trails during
the hour on the BBC compares with the minutes of adverts on commercial
stations.

I never hear any radio adverts but TV adverts tend to be much more
moronic than most trails on BBC TV, some seem to intentionally be
annoying - presumably the 'experts' have told them that people remember
them better but often results in thembeing muted or turned off.

One factor with programme trails, I have often asked people if they had
seen a programme that I thought would interest them and they have said
they did not know it was on and even complained that the BBC did not
inform them!

[Scott]

Post by MB

Post by Scott
I agree. I have just been listening to 'More or Less' on Radio 4. I
would be interested to know how the number of minutes of trails during
the hour on the BBC compares with the minutes of adverts on commercial
stations.

I never hear any radio adverts but TV adverts tend to be much more
moronic than most trails on BBC TV, some seem to intentionally be
annoying - presumably the 'experts' have told them that people remember
them better but often results in thembeing muted or turned off.

Why do you watch commercial TV if you object to the adverts to much,
but not listen to commercial radio?

Post by MB
One factor with programme trails, I have often asked people if they had
seen a programme that I thought would interest them and they have said
they did not know it was on and even complained that the BBC did not
inform them!

I assume you point out that the programmes are available on iPlayer.

[MB]

Post by Scott
Why do you watch commercial TV if you object to the adverts to much,
but not listen to commercial radio?

They do not tend to be as annoying and easier to mute until over.

[Scott]

Post by MB

Post by Scott
Why do you watch commercial TV if you object to the adverts to much,
but not listen to commercial radio?

They do not tend to be as annoying and easier to mute until over.

Okay, fair point.

[Liz Tuddenham]

MB <***@nospam.net> wrote:

[...]

Post by MB
One factor with programme trails, I have often asked people if they had
seen a programme that I thought would interest them and they have said
they did not know it was on and even complained that the BBC did not
inform them!

That is the purpose of service announcements: to *inform* listeners
which programmes they may choose to listen to for some time ahead. The
purpose of trails is to *promote* paricular programmes and persuade
listeners to listen to them.

As there are no service announcements any more, I just switch off
whenever a trail comes on and miss a lot of potentially interesting
programmes. I I had been *informed* I might have made a point of
listening to them.

[Brian Gaff]

Don't you feel that most promos are very hard to actually listen to. They
are compressed,a and do not really explain what the show is about,
preferring soundbytes and voxpops that leave most people just dazed.
Brian
--
--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
***@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!

Post by Liz Tuddenham
[...]

Post by MB
One factor with programme trails, I have often asked people if they had
seen a programme that I thought would interest them and they have said
they did not know it was on and even complained that the BBC did not
inform them!

That is the purpose of service announcements: to *inform* listeners
which programmes they may choose to listen to for some time ahead. The
purpose of trails is to *promote* paricular programmes and persuade
listeners to listen to them.
As there are no service announcements any more, I just switch off
whenever a trail comes on and miss a lot of potentially interesting
programmes. I I had been *informed* I might have made a point of
listening to them.
--
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

[Liz Tuddenham]

Post by Brian Gaff
Don't you feel that most promos are very hard to actually listen to. They
are compressed,a and do not really explain what the show is about,
preferring soundbytes and voxpops that leave most people just dazed.
Brian

I never listen to them, I just hit the 'off' switch.

The only reason I am aware of the compression is if I am in the bathroom
and not near enough to the radio to switch it off. Then I find the
trail is cutting through the general splashing and gurgling noises even
though I was unable to follow the programme before and after it.

[NY]

Post by Brian Gaff
Don't you feel that most promos are very hard to actually listen to. They
are compressed,a and do not really explain what the show is about,
preferring soundbytes and voxpops that leave most people just dazed.

There seems to be school of thought with modern broadcasting that shots and
sound bytes should last no more than 2 seconds, so you get very disjointed
telling of a "story" (whether fictional or documentary). I wouldn't advocate
going back to the long lingering reflective shots and convoluted voiceovers
that you got in drama of 40 years ago (as lampooned in parodies of
Brideshead Revisited by Hale and Pace or someone similar). But there is a
happy medium: a shot should last long enough to work out what it is showing,
and a sentence should have more than a couple of isolated words, and should
make logical sense (eg it should have subject, verb and object).

Essentially, substance is far more important than style.