Kinda tired already about the Burden in Rome bashing. If any of you guys knew what you were talking about, you'd known that since DQF, 5 live are now essentially at the bottom of priority list for correspondent and reporter time from the central BBC newsgathering operation.
That does make a bit of mockery of Five Live's position as 'the home of breaking news'. I'm not a Catholic myself but the first Pope to resign since the Middle Ages is a huge news story.
That does make a bit of mockery of Five Live's position as 'the home of breaking news'. I'm not a Catholic myself but the first Pope to resign since the Middle Ages is a huge news story.
And therefore a good reason to have a presenter reporting from the location...
Errrr? That's the whole point of the thread.....to say who & what we like and don't on 5 live.....
You'll find the words talent & Nolan don't actually go together by the way......
Actually we were talking about travelling to Salford & be best if neither of them do.....
Yes, and I've given you my opinion on it.
You'll find that the words "talent" and various presenters do go together - certainly if figures and awards are anything to go by.
You don't like Nolan. I get that. But that doesn't give you the right to see his expenses claims and personal accounts. Just as LBC wouldn't be party to such details via an FOI.
I remember when he presented the programme between 9am and 10am on a Sunday and he would always try to ask a question where the answer could be used in the sports bulletin at 9.30am. In many ways his interviewing style used to remind me of Alan Partridge! He just used to ask the most banal questions in order to get a quotable answer. I do remember when Sir Bobby Robson used to appear on the programme, he had Gary Richardson's number and used to sometimes leave Richardson frustrated that he couldn't get Sir Bobby to say what GR wanted to hear! I do remember Sir Bobby once answering a question with something like "Gary I know what you're like and what your trying to get me to say but I've given you my answer"...
Just over 4 years ago, I posted this spoof interview transcript in a thread about Gary Richardson on DS- and, for the first time in a couple of years, I was listening to Sportsweek last Sunday - and sod all has changed. So, at the risk of being 'fingered' at recycling my best material - here it is again..
(Gary Richardson) "So, I know you have some transfer targets in the window, can you give us an exclusive. What names you are targeting. Can you say who they are?" (Random Premiership Manager) "No, Gary I can't and this is not the place to say them" GR - "Not even a clue?" RPM -"No - I'm not getting drawn into it!" GR -"Well - are these names that have been printed in todays papers correct?" RPM -"I'm not aware of them - and even if they were, I wouldn't confirm it" GR -"So, no names, and no exclusives?" RPM -"No Gary" GR- "No hint of a clue? Does he play in Europe for example?" RPM -"Like I've said, I'm not telling you, your listeners, this programme or this station anything this morning on this subject, Gary" GM -"Ok, you are not being drawn on this so I'll move on - I've read a report this week that your club's talent scout is looking at some players overseas - any names for us?"
You'll find that the words "talent" and various presenters do go together - certainly if figures and awards are anything to go by.
You don't like Nolan. I get that. But that doesn't give you the right to see his expenses claims and personal accounts. Just as LBC wouldn't be party to such details via an FOI.
ahh here we go again..........
do you really just wait till the likes of lone drinker or streaky or myself post anything slightly negative about the BBC just so you can defend them?
well we may not actually work in the media industry unlike yourself but it's quite simple to understand "how it works in the media"
i think anyone on here is quite intelligent enough to work it out though you seem to think somehow they don't know enough about it to comment -
well - as i have both graduated in business and owned my own & lectured in it amongst other things
i think i have a decent enough grasp on how industry works to have an opinion.....
awards and figures?
how is that a measure of talent?
...well 5live rajars flatlined and how industry backslapping indicates public enjoyment is a mystery to most of us....SONY awards...honestly?
FOI............................jessus....how many times must we go through this conversation?
LBC are a limited company there is no FOI act to apply on them.....these don't apply to private sector....
the BBC are a public sector body funded by the taxpayer and therefore subject to FOI requests........
i,(like all taxpayers are actually entitled to request how our money is spent)
.....and i told you before I didn't request them but they have been requested by others.........
I'm quite happy for all the expenses of Peter Allen et al to be declared as well whether we like him or not....no bias on presenter preference.....
I'm sure you enjoyed the telegraph article on expenses.....
do you really just wait till the likes of lone drinker or streaky or myself post anything slightly negative about the BBC just so you can defend them?
well we may not actually work in the media industry unlike yourself but it's quite simple to understand "how it works in the media"
i think anyone on here is quite intelligent enough to work it out though you seem to think somehow they don't know enough about it to comment -
well - as i have both graduated in business and owned my own & lectured in it amongst other things
i think i have a decent enough grasp on how industry works to have an opinion.....
awards and figures?
how is that a measure of talent?
...well 5live rajars flatlined and how industry backslapping indicates public enjoyment is a mystery to most of us....SONY awards...honestly?
FOI............................jessus....how many times must we go through this conversation?
LBC are a limited company there is no FOI act to apply on them.....these don't apply to private sector....
the BBC are a public sector body funded by the taxpayer and therefore subject to FOI requests........
i,(like all taxpayers are actually entitled to request how our money is spent)
.....and i told you before I didn't request them but they have been requested by others.........
I'm quite happy for all the expenses of Peter Allen et al to be declared as well whether we like him or not....no bias on presenter preference.....
I'm sure you enjoyed the telegraph article on expenses.....
I don't wait for anything. But I have done and will continue to argue against silly comments like this.
I perfectly understand the difference between the BBC and a commercial organisation. But you're confusing the issue here. You ARE entitled to know how's public money is being spent. But you're NOT entitled to scrutinise every last accounting entry for individual members of staff.
In the case of presenters, in particular, there is a justifiable defence of "commercial confidentiality", even in the BBC.
You claim to be able to understand "how it works" in the media industry, but posts like this add nothing to the credibility of your argument.
Meantime, your supporters continue with snide remarks about people's voices, travelling arrangements etc like some kind of creepy obsessives. How is THAT constructive opinion or debate?
Meantime, your supporters continue with snide remarks about people's voices, travelling arrangements etc like some kind of creepy obsessives. How is THAT constructive opinion or debate?
I would I thought a presenters voice is a relevant area of discussion on a radio forum being an audio medium?
Victoria Derbyshire rarely venturing to Salford is a justifiable topic of discussion especially in the light of the large licence fee investment in the move, other presenter and staff being forced to relocate or quit, BBC claims that at least 60% of VD shows coming from Salford and the whole argument justifying the relocation in terms of changing the feel of the station by getting out of London. The quality of the program is also affected by VD and her team being in different cities from each other.
‘creepy obsessives’
Now who is getting personal, at least we are not on here posting a 4.28 am
‘creepy obsessives’
Now who is getting personal, at least we are not on here posting a 4.28 am
Remember it is just a discussion board.
Who cares what time he's posting ? I do nightshifts occasionally and while on my break have a quick look at digital spy as theres no one else in the office at the time. Other times i have to be in work for 4am so when i get in i quite regularly have a flick around the internet while its still quiet to see whats going on. Mapperley works in Radio/Media like me so its highly likely he does shifts like me, a 9-5 Monday - Friday is virtual unheard of in this industry.
Who cares what time he's posting ? I do nightshifts occasionally and while on my break have a quick look at digital spy as theres no one else in the office at the time. Other times i have to be in work for 4am so when i get in i quite regularly have a flick around the internet while its still quiet to see whats going on. Mapperley works in Radio/Media like me so its highly likely he does shifts like me, a 9-5 Monday - Friday is virtual unheard of in this industry.
Sense of humour bypass me thinks :rolleyes:
It was meant as a joke in response to Mapperley calling those he/she disagrees with ‘creepy obsessives’
Victoria Derbyshire rarely venturing to Salford is a justifiable topic of discussion especially in the light of the large licence fee investment in the move, other presenter and staff being forced to relocate or quit, BBC claims that at least 60% of VD shows coming from Salford and the whole argument justifying the relocation in terms of changing the feel of the station by getting out of London. The quality of the program is also affected by VD and her team being in different cities from each other.
I looked at the webcam and she is not there again, so just Tuesday this week so far.
The special treatment Derbyshire is getting makes defending the £1 billion cost of relocating BBC departments and staff to Media City harder.
What about using the BBC journalist who is based in the Vatican? After all he has specialist knowledge....
There isn't one in the Vatican.
There is a BBC correspondent in Rome, Alan Johnston. There is also a retired BBC correspondent who still contributes occassionally, David Willey. And they work, or are occasionally contracted to, BBC Newsgathering. They don't work for 5 Live.
Call it internal politics if you like, and that will always be a part of it. But 5 Live are part of BBC North. They're not even part of BBC Audio and Music, of which all the other national networks belong. They're also not part of BBC News, which is why the Italy based correspondent's time is not a priority to supply material to 5 Live. Their priority is Radio 4, the BBC News Channel, and BBC World News, who pay a commercial rate to BBC Newsgathering to be able to use their resources.
Sending Rachel Burden to Rome not only gives 5 Live reporting power there, but as I have previously said, it puts a main 5 Live anchor on the ground to present 3 hour programmes. That is a lot of air time, and it simply isn't realistic to just:
There is a BBC correspondent in Rome, Alan Johnston. There is also a retired BBC correspondent who still contributes occassionally, David Willey. And they work, or are occasionally contracted to, BBC Newsgathering. They don't work for 5 Live.
Call it internal politics if you like, and that will always be a part of it. But 5 Live are part of BBC North. They're not even part of BBC Audio and Music, of which all the other national networks belong. They're also not part of BBC News, which is why the Italy based correspondent's time is not a priority to supply material to 5 Live. Their priority is Radio 4, the BBC News Channel, and BBC World News, who pay a commercial rate to BBC Newsgathering to be able to use their resources.
Sending Rachel Burden to Rome not only gives 5 Live reporting power there, but as I have previously said, it puts a main 5 Live anchor on the ground to present 3 hour programmes. That is a lot of air time, and it simply isn't realistic to just:
There. That's the facts. But the facts still won't be good enough for the fanatics who clearly know better.
Which if correct only goes to prove what a dysfunctional organisation the BBC is. If it does indeed operate as a series of individual fiefdoms in the way that you describe, then there must be a fantastic amount of duplication and waste, and the organisation is in desperate need of a major reorganisation.
Which if correct only goes to prove what a dysfunctional organisation the BBC is. If it does indeed operate as a series of individual fiefdoms in the way that you describe, then there must be a fantastic amount of duplication and waste, and the organisation is in desperate need of a major reorganisation.
Here's a comparson:
Global Radio have an political reporter, Tom Cheale, who will spend most of his time 'contracted' to LBC. He will also file for other outlets (capital, heart, etc) as needed. But his main 'home' is LBC, so LBC have him as a priority.
It's no different for the BBC, with, for example, Alan Johnston's time being used by his home department to file for the people who pay for his time, eg Radio 4, as a priority.
Let me give another example:
John Smith works for a company selling paperclips. This company also sells notepads. The notepad division is short staffed one day, so John Smith is asked to go and help out for a but, but his boss says he will need to come back if it gets busy in Paperclip world.
Global Radio have an political reporter, Tom Cheale, who will spend most of his time 'contracted' to LBC. He will also file for other outlets (capital, heart, etc) as needed. But his main 'home' is LBC, so LBC have him as a priority.
It's no different for the BBC, with, for example, Alan Johnston's time being used by his home department to file for the people who pay for his time, eg Radio 4, as a priority.
Let me give another example:
John Smith works for a company selling paperclips. This company also sells notepads. The notepad division is short staffed one day, so John Smith is asked to go and help out for a but, but his boss says he will need to come back if it gets busy in Paperclip world.
Does that mean that the paperclip company is
I think not.
That's life in every big organisation in the world. Otherwise, you have chaos.
That really is a very poor example, and shows a complete lack of understanding of how a large commercial organisation works. They all operate in an integrated way, and a person going abroad would be expected to represent the full range of products that are in the portfolio of that organisation. You certainly would not have the situation where staff from the same organisation are tripping over themselves in the way that BBC reporters are doing.
If what you say is correct that really is a dreadful indictement of the way that the BBC operates, and it is indefensible at a time of economic stringency.
I looked at the webcam and she is not there again, so just Tuesday this week so far.
The special treatment Derbyshire is getting makes defending the £1 billion cost of relocating BBC departments and staff to Media City harder.
VD is married to Mark Sandell, a top BBC exec as well as a presenter on BBC World Service. That means she knows she can pretty well do as she pleases, because if the Beeb start snapping at her heels over her non-appearances at Salford, then they are going to have to deal with her husband as well which could turn into another embarrassing public row for the Beeb which is the last thing they want at the moment..
VD is married to Mark Sandell, a top BBC exec as well as a presenter on BBC World Service. That means she knows she can pretty well do as she pleases, because if the Beeb start snapping at her heels over her non-appearances at Salford, then they are going to have to deal with her husband as well which could turn into another embarrassing public row for the Beeb which is the last thing they want at the moment..
I would I thought a presenters voice is a relevant area of discussion on a radio forum being an audio medium?
Victoria Derbyshire rarely venturing to Salford is a justifiable topic of discussion especially in the light of the large licence fee investment in the move, other presenter and staff being forced to relocate or quit, BBC claims that at least 60% of VD shows coming from Salford and the whole argument justifying the relocation in terms of changing the feel of the station by getting out of London. The quality of the program is also affected by VD and her team being in different cities from each other.
‘creepy obsessives’
Now who is getting personal, at least we are not on here posting a 4.28 am
B
Remember it is just a discussion board.
@mapperley ridge _ business is business I don't have to justify my credibility though gave you some background politely,
Calling comments silly doesn't help yours....
Comments
It was the biggest story yesterday. Many people probably don't care about North Korea conducting nuclear tests.
I agree, more so about yesterday's coverage than today's. It was largely pro-RCC.
And therefore a good reason to have a presenter reporting from the location...
Yes, and I've given you my opinion on it.
You'll find that the words "talent" and various presenters do go together - certainly if figures and awards are anything to go by.
You don't like Nolan. I get that. But that doesn't give you the right to see his expenses claims and personal accounts. Just as LBC wouldn't be party to such details via an FOI.
I don't see for example any such comments about Peter Allen who I suspect also travels a lot non expenses but then we like him don't we?
Inconsistency part 3
Sounds like another lot I know of. Some BBC bosses can do no wrong in their eyes and are heroes of the corporation.
Until they dare to disagree. Then they're dirt.
Just over 4 years ago, I posted this spoof interview transcript in a thread about Gary Richardson on DS- and, for the first time in a couple of years, I was listening to Sportsweek last Sunday - and sod all has changed. So, at the risk of being 'fingered' at recycling my best material - here it is again..
(Gary Richardson) "So, I know you have some transfer targets in the window, can you give us an exclusive. What names you are targeting. Can you say who they are?"
(Random Premiership Manager) "No, Gary I can't and this is not the place to say them"
GR - "Not even a clue?"
RPM -"No - I'm not getting drawn into it!"
GR -"Well - are these names that have been printed in todays papers correct?"
RPM -"I'm not aware of them - and even if they were, I wouldn't confirm it"
GR -"So, no names, and no exclusives?"
RPM -"No Gary"
GR- "No hint of a clue? Does he play in Europe for example?"
RPM -"Like I've said, I'm not telling you, your listeners, this programme or this station anything this morning on this subject, Gary"
GM -"Ok, you are not being drawn on this so I'll move on - I've read a report this week that your club's talent scout is looking at some players overseas - any names for us?"
ahh here we go again..........
do you really just wait till the likes of lone drinker or streaky or myself post anything slightly negative about the BBC just so you can defend them?
well we may not actually work in the media industry unlike yourself but it's quite simple to understand "how it works in the media"
i think anyone on here is quite intelligent enough to work it out though you seem to think somehow they don't know enough about it to comment -
well - as i have both graduated in business and owned my own & lectured in it amongst other things
i think i have a decent enough grasp on how industry works to have an opinion.....
awards and figures?
how is that a measure of talent?
...well 5live rajars flatlined and how industry backslapping indicates public enjoyment is a mystery to most of us....SONY awards...honestly?
FOI............................jessus....how many times must we go through this conversation?
LBC are a limited company there is no FOI act to apply on them.....these don't apply to private sector....
the BBC are a public sector body funded by the taxpayer and therefore subject to FOI requests........
i,(like all taxpayers are actually entitled to request how our money is spent)
.....and i told you before I didn't request them but they have been requested by others.........
I'm quite happy for all the expenses of Peter Allen et al to be declared as well whether we like him or not....no bias on presenter preference.....
I'm sure you enjoyed the telegraph article on expenses.....
I don't wait for anything. But I have done and will continue to argue against silly comments like this.
I perfectly understand the difference between the BBC and a commercial organisation. But you're confusing the issue here. You ARE entitled to know how's public money is being spent. But you're NOT entitled to scrutinise every last accounting entry for individual members of staff.
In the case of presenters, in particular, there is a justifiable defence of "commercial confidentiality", even in the BBC.
You claim to be able to understand "how it works" in the media industry, but posts like this add nothing to the credibility of your argument.
Meantime, your supporters continue with snide remarks about people's voices, travelling arrangements etc like some kind of creepy obsessives. How is THAT constructive opinion or debate?
I would I thought a presenters voice is a relevant area of discussion on a radio forum being an audio medium?
Victoria Derbyshire rarely venturing to Salford is a justifiable topic of discussion especially in the light of the large licence fee investment in the move, other presenter and staff being forced to relocate or quit, BBC claims that at least 60% of VD shows coming from Salford and the whole argument justifying the relocation in terms of changing the feel of the station by getting out of London. The quality of the program is also affected by VD and her team being in different cities from each other.
‘creepy obsessives’
Now who is getting personal, at least we are not on here posting a 4.28 am
Remember it is just a discussion board.
Who cares what time he's posting ? I do nightshifts occasionally and while on my break have a quick look at digital spy as theres no one else in the office at the time. Other times i have to be in work for 4am so when i get in i quite regularly have a flick around the internet while its still quiet to see whats going on. Mapperley works in Radio/Media like me so its highly likely he does shifts like me, a 9-5 Monday - Friday is virtual unheard of in this industry.
Sense of humour bypass me thinks :rolleyes:
It was meant as a joke in response to Mapperley calling those he/she disagrees with ‘creepy obsessives’
What about using the BBC journalist who is based in the Vatican? After all he has specialist knowledge....
I looked at the webcam and she is not there again, so just Tuesday this week so far.
The special treatment Derbyshire is getting makes defending the £1 billion cost of relocating BBC departments and staff to Media City harder.
There isn't one in the Vatican.
There is a BBC correspondent in Rome, Alan Johnston. There is also a retired BBC correspondent who still contributes occassionally, David Willey. And they work, or are occasionally contracted to, BBC Newsgathering. They don't work for 5 Live.
Call it internal politics if you like, and that will always be a part of it. But 5 Live are part of BBC North. They're not even part of BBC Audio and Music, of which all the other national networks belong. They're also not part of BBC News, which is why the Italy based correspondent's time is not a priority to supply material to 5 Live. Their priority is Radio 4, the BBC News Channel, and BBC World News, who pay a commercial rate to BBC Newsgathering to be able to use their resources.
Sending Rachel Burden to Rome not only gives 5 Live reporting power there, but as I have previously said, it puts a main 5 Live anchor on the ground to present 3 hour programmes. That is a lot of air time, and it simply isn't realistic to just:
There. That's the facts. But the facts still won't be good enough for the fanatics who clearly know better.
Which if correct only goes to prove what a dysfunctional organisation the BBC is. If it does indeed operate as a series of individual fiefdoms in the way that you describe, then there must be a fantastic amount of duplication and waste, and the organisation is in desperate need of a major reorganisation.
Here's a comparson:
Global Radio have an political reporter, Tom Cheale, who will spend most of his time 'contracted' to LBC. He will also file for other outlets (capital, heart, etc) as needed. But his main 'home' is LBC, so LBC have him as a priority.
It's no different for the BBC, with, for example, Alan Johnston's time being used by his home department to file for the people who pay for his time, eg Radio 4, as a priority.
Let me give another example:
John Smith works for a company selling paperclips. This company also sells notepads. The notepad division is short staffed one day, so John Smith is asked to go and help out for a but, but his boss says he will need to come back if it gets busy in Paperclip world.
Does that mean that the paperclip company is
I think not.
That's life in every big organisation in the world. Otherwise, you have chaos.
That really is a very poor example, and shows a complete lack of understanding of how a large commercial organisation works. They all operate in an integrated way, and a person going abroad would be expected to represent the full range of products that are in the portfolio of that organisation. You certainly would not have the situation where staff from the same organisation are tripping over themselves in the way that BBC reporters are doing.
If what you say is correct that really is a dreadful indictement of the way that the BBC operates, and it is indefensible at a time of economic stringency.
I'm playing 'spot the accurate fact'.
None in your post.
Try again.
@mapperley ridge _ business is business I don't have to justify my credibility though gave you some background politely,
Calling comments silly doesn't help yours....
In the main though....
Streaky I couldn't have said it better myself
Would be interesting to find which period of time actually saw the Queen pitch up for 60% plus of her shows.
Not married - but then probably not a good idea to marry someone who's been divorced twice.