I've never rung in, but they read out pretty much every message I send in. Even the sarcastic one where I tweeted in to compliment Gwilym on his heavy breathing. Overall I don't think they do a terrible job, other than when Gwilym's on obviously, he's quite simply the most incompetent presenter in the history of broadcasting. We get more coverage on there than any of the other clubs, but I'd agree that on the night before a top of the table clash, when there's no rugby on, they really should be talking about little else and that talentless Herbert shouldn't be presenting it.
I have rung in 3 times and got on once so have given up calling. The one time I did get on was a while ago when Rossy was in the studio for an hour giving a questions and answer program.
So they alienate all the Hull City fans with people like gollum just going on about rugby and now they wonder why they have no listeners ringing in except a few rugby fans ?
I've spoken to Burnsy about this, ribbed him a bit, he expected a bigger exodus of players and little in the way of additions. To be fair, he did change his opinion as soon as the window closed.
You cant be fair with the fat **** though. His exact words were, "as it stands now". As it stood we still had Jelavic and others. He cant have it both ways. He's a **** and he needs to do a new "special" and apologise. Its that air of negativity RH loves to spout about City at every opportunity. There's not a ****ing chance he's going to do a special on Rovers on the eve of the season saying they've got more chance of relegation than promotion. Or FC havent got a cat in hells chance of top 4 or top 8.
To be fair, he was hardly a lone voice. We've had threads full of our own 'experts' predicting doom and gloom, and they seem to be trying to rewrite what they meant now, rather than having the dignity to just admit they were wrong.
I think you know that I have respect for your opinions, and for the sake of none other than reasonable debate I am sorry to keep batting on about the same subject, however, the crux of the problem stems from Auntie's wish for no other reason than technical expediency to continue to force two diverse cultures together, when in reality the North and South of the Humber has absolutely nothing in common, sporting or otherwise. As usual you voice the 'experts' view of what we, the paying listeners, should do to enhance our enjoyment of an ensuing situation without questioning that very existence. Maybe, for a change the London centric BBC management should listen rather than preach how we should act by their rules. Can you imagine trying to balance output in a single station between Merseyside and Manchester or Bristol and Cardiff for instance. Indeed to be extreme for illustrative purposes only, maybe Dover and Calais, who each stand geographically only a few miles apart. In each case the two contrasting places have nothing in common!!!
Hi Mussie, I wouldn't disagree with any of that. Although, the technical issue is part of the reason, in the digital age this should be less so. Folks in Warrington don't see themselves as Greater Manchester but they share a town border with St. Helens which has foot in Merseyside and GM and in turn Wigan which does see itself as in GM. Yet they are all within 10-20 miles of each other and have both services - especially good for sports fans. I'll tell you this much, believe me or not, that if there was public demand and groundswell for changing the regional set up here, they would do it. However, there is no evidence of folks clamouring for it. As much as I agree with you, it is an economic/technical decision and won't be changed unless they are petitioned to change it. Start the petition Mussie and I'll be the first to sign it! Hope you're well mate!
What are you basing that on? Other regions (I think Kent was one and Cornwall another) campaigned against similar geographic nonsense and got nowhere. I spoke to a variety of people up the chain of command in the BBC and they acknowledged it wasn't popular, but not before offering the 'results' of a nonsense of a survey, which they couldn't provide any information for. Doing that confirmed to me that they're fully aware it isn't popular, but I couldn't for the life of me find any logical reason for them keeping things as is, despite me asking the question several times. The nearest to an 'answer' was it looked better corporately to have 'estuaryside' regions, like Mersey, Tyne etc.
I am basing my response to Mussie on talking to the managing editors - (please feel free email Charlie Partridge at BBC Lincs if you don't believe me); my own experience of having worked for the BBC and finally, through my own academic research. I can remember people moaning about Look North being Leeds and West Yorks centric! From a contemporary perspective, it seems bizarre to think that part of the remit to create 'The Archers' was to pull the West Midlands and the south west regions together as one region! Yet arguably that's what happened with our set up. Please understand that I'm not an aunt Sally for the BBC, it does many great things and some pretty awful stuff. I have met some pretty arrogant London centric gobshoites working for them, who think they know better. However, I will defend public service broadcasting to my last breath, because it produces content that the commercial sector wouldn't. The BBC research surveys are taken by an independent company these days. The BBC issues an annual report, which is independently audited. If it lied, the select committee in parliament would be all over it like a rash. I hear the same moans from folks in Lincoln & N. Lincolnshire about the news being Hull centric in both TV and radio. It's not, it's balanced. However, I'll repeat what I said earlier, if there was a sizeable petition or demand from either side of the Humber they would have to act. The cost of having a BBC radio in every city, nay town in the UK would be phenomenal and local radio is pretty starved of funds as it stands, and the BBC has effectively had a 20% cut! Finally, I agree with the folks in Devon & Cornwall, and with folks in Bath (who have to look to Bristol) and I wish we had BBC Radio Hull. As I said the people who created the East Yorks & Lincs region set it up on technical & economic grounds. They got it wrong, but it was set up for logical reasons of technical and economic compromise!
I don't doubt they said what they did to you, but equally my experience is that there isn't a hope in hell, and that's based on direct personal conversations with the regional and national directors. I've probably still got some of the replies somewhere. The misinformation they offered wouldn't form any part of annual report, but it happened all the same. The experience I read regarding other regions seems to support my view.
DMD I too can smell bullshit when it's sprinkled on my chips. I am not being flippant here, but I agree with you about the substantive point, you have no argument about the seemingly nonsensical regional set ups from me whatsoever in terms of news and culture. However, I have no knowledge as to the level or basis you put your questions and/or in what forum. To be fair, I have seen well put and well meaning questions in BBC public forums and in private that have had BBC senior staff squirming, and I have seen ranting nutters complaining that their village doesn't get a mention on BBC Whatevershire, or the BBC have been disrespectful to the Queen etc etc, these folks were frankly so anti-BBC that they simply had another agenda. So in this sense, and with sincere respect I can't really comment on the responses you have had. In the same way that you can only take what I say 'on trust', (although I can prove my credentials and access), I have no reason to doubt what I have been told, witnessed and what I know from a serious lifelong professional and academic involvement in the media & cultural industries. The people I know would know that I knew they were bullshitting. So, if you believe that you have deliberately misinformed by senior BBC staff, then my sincere suggestion to you DMD is to provide the evidence of this misinformation to Secretary of State for Culture, Media & Sport John Whittingdale, the BBC Trust and Ofcom. Whittingdale is no fan of the BBC as it is now, his office are all ears at the moment. The BBC Trust are in pre-charter renewal panic and are listening to the public and demonstrating they are listening to the public. It is pretty much odds that after charter renewal the trust will have gone and Ofcom will be the full regulator. If you are being misinformed, Ofcom will have to act - that's how is in the Independent Broadcasting sector right now. I have dealt with Ofcom as I founded a Community station - they are ferocious. Also, you could always raise this on R4's feedback and or Media Show? It's a political point and it's good one - I am pretty sure they would take it up. I will leave you with this thought. The government have dumped the cost of the BBC World Service, back onto the BBC. Personally, and I am no little Englander by any stretch of the imagination, but I would have said 'No, we'll close it down and use that money to develop local broadcasting' ... but there you go. Anyway I have work to do...cheers LT EDIT: I forgot to say that the BBC produce audited regional reports. I wasn't referring to the big BBC overall report - though I didn't make that clear. They have regional boards made up of members of the public that you can take this up with too
It wasn't on a forum, it was direct conversation with those individuals, some face to face, some by telephone and some by email. That includes some on the regional boards. There was no ranting on my part, and plenty of bullshit on theirs. It was a couple of years ago, so maybe it will change in the future. They would fight very hard against changes no matter what the public say, and have done so. You have your experience, and are going to stick with that, I have mine, and you cannot change that. I also know others who have asked similar questions on other occasions, and had the responses and left with the same opinions I have. The comment about the estuaryside corporate image was given by different people on different occasions. It seemingly over-rode any local feelings. As with other issues, I don't just grumble on here, there's a few things I do to make my feelings known and find out the bigger picure.
I may sound like a 'little yorkshireman' and I have long since stopped listening to RH on the grounds that it has no relevance to my lifestyle at all. For instance if I travel, which is often by the way I go West via M62. If I travel South, I go via M18/M18. So pointless travel alerts about Kirton on Lindley or countless minor villages ending in '...by' on the South of the Humber have no use to me. Indeed I can't remember the last time I had a useful need for the Humber Bridge. What I need from a 'local' radio station is news and information I can relate to which is useful to me. RH provides neither of these to me or those to the South, and all they seem to broadcast is in the interest of this balance you talk about. I prefer 'usefulness' to 'balance'. The most ridiculous fact is that I live 20 miles from York, but I cannot receive Radio York. Instead I can find out what is happening in some obscure '...by' near Lincoln or Boston, or even Grantham I believe. Incidentally I once discussed this very issue with the talisman. David Burns himself on the day RH invented the never to be repeated 'Humber Day', coincidentally and quite comically the day after Yorkshire Day (hmmmm). To paraphrase his reply: "...the corridors of power are asking for this". Yeah right. What he really meant: "...it keeps me in a job so I am always going to promote it!".
Whereas I actually need that Bridge - Lincoln - Lincolnshire traffic news! But no argument from me as I wouldn't be against switching stations though to get it! As Radio Lincolnshire to me should mean the whole of Lincolnshire!
And doesn't it mean the whole of Lincolnshire. You mean those in Grimsby an Scunthorpe can't receive it?
