"Classic FM claims BBC Radio 3 'apes' its output for more listeners" - Telegraph
Inkblot
Posts: 26,889 Forum Member
✭✭✭
The Daily Telegraph continues its campaign to vilify the BBC at every opportunity with a report that Classic FM has submitted a complaint to to a Culture, Media and Sport Committee review into the “future of the BBC”, ahead of the government reconsidering the licence fee in 2016.
BBC Radio 3 is trying to “ape” its commercial rival Classic FM by copying its most successful innovations in a bid to increase audiences, it has been claimed.
Classic FM, which classes itself as a direct competitor of Radio 3 “in a market of two”, has accused the corporation of making “major programming changes” to “gradually erode the gap” between them.
The “stark” changes, it claims, include a “lighter” repertoire, playing shorter extracts of works, introducing phone-ins, scrapping daily classical music for children and bringing in a new film score programme broadcast an hour before its own.
However the Telegraph's listeners aren't entirely convinced by Classic FM's offer. A letter in today's paper says
SIR – It seems to me that several times a week, when I happen to be within earshot of Classic FM, Rimsky-Korsakov’s “Scheherazade” is being played.
I emailed Classic FM some time ago for an explanation but did not receive a reply. With such a huge choice of music available, why does it happen? Yes, it’s a nice piece of music, but so what?
Funnily enough I've noticed the same thing - every time I tune in they're playing Scheherazade. On the other hand, last time I tuned in to Radio 3 it was playing Remembering A Beginning by Colorado transcendental folk band Elephant Revival. You don't hear that on heavy rotation on Classic FM.
BBC Radio 3 is trying to “ape” its commercial rival Classic FM by copying its most successful innovations in a bid to increase audiences, it has been claimed.
Classic FM, which classes itself as a direct competitor of Radio 3 “in a market of two”, has accused the corporation of making “major programming changes” to “gradually erode the gap” between them.
The “stark” changes, it claims, include a “lighter” repertoire, playing shorter extracts of works, introducing phone-ins, scrapping daily classical music for children and bringing in a new film score programme broadcast an hour before its own.
However the Telegraph's listeners aren't entirely convinced by Classic FM's offer. A letter in today's paper says
SIR – It seems to me that several times a week, when I happen to be within earshot of Classic FM, Rimsky-Korsakov’s “Scheherazade” is being played.
I emailed Classic FM some time ago for an explanation but did not receive a reply. With such a huge choice of music available, why does it happen? Yes, it’s a nice piece of music, but so what?
Funnily enough I've noticed the same thing - every time I tune in they're playing Scheherazade. On the other hand, last time I tuned in to Radio 3 it was playing Remembering A Beginning by Colorado transcendental folk band Elephant Revival. You don't hear that on heavy rotation on Classic FM.
0
Comments
Who cares what Global think.
The BBC's "ape-ing" hasn't been very successful.
The two stations are completely different. Radio 3 has done much to make its programming more accessible but that has been common sense changes - there's little point having long form pieces at breakfast. They still manage to play music that Classic FM would never play.
Instead of giving Classic FM licence fee money, why not leave it where it is?
It's not a complaint, the Culture Media & Sport Select committee has asked for written evidence from all interested parties (including commercial broadcasters) as part of their work on the BBC Charter renewal (due in 2017). ITV & Sky have also made submissions.
There is nothing to see here, Global were simply making a written submission as requested and the Telegraph have tried to make it into news, which it isn't.
The Telegraph reported the story as Classic FM accusing the BBC of changing its programmes to erode Classic FM's audience. The word "accused" implies that the BBC is in the wrong. On the other hand a Telegraph reader points out that Classic FM has a repetitive playlist. I was highlighting the two points of view - anti-BBC bias and the reality that listeners don't always prefer small playlists - both appearing in the same paper.
Radio 3 will forever be caught in-between the need to increase audience (to justify its existence and to satisfy the BBC Trust) and to keep its output unique. In any case, like the whole corporation it can't win either way.
Odd from the Telegraph, a fairly cultured newspaper to back Classic FM over Radio 3. Who did they upset over there?
Unfortunately the Telegraph has become very anti-BBC. It has good, impartial culture articles, theatre and film reviews etc, but it rarely publishes anything positive about any BBC programmes.
Under the odious Barclay brothers it's become a sort of Tea Party rag that relentlessly promotes a virulent religious, rightwing, homophobic agenda. It utterly detests the BBC, and has a quota of at least one anti-BBC story every day.
And the Telegraph (like the Mail) won't, of course, let an anti-BBC story pass if they can help it.
Radio 3 has little overlap with Classic FM, in the same way as 6Music has little overlap with Absolute. It has expensive production material that could not turn a profit commercially due to the audiences, and so can only be produced under the Public Service Broadcasting model.
It was probably a thowback to the launch of ILR two decades earlier: there had been great pressure on the brash, upstart commercial radio organisations to appease the Establishment. Capital Radio had gone to great pains to stress that they would be playing light music, easy listening and a couple of serials, only competing with the ultra-respectable Radio 2 and not playing anything so vulgar as pop music that, heaven forbid, might attract any of the great unwashed that infested Radio 1...
But Global is required to say these things. Their shareholders could benefit greatly if Radio 3 were closed, and they are obliged to put forward arguments for that to happen.
If Radio 3 were not competing for their audience, they could condemn it for being elitist and obscure. That argument successfully led to the closure of Denmark's classical music network, and its frequencies being handed over to commercial radio. Clearly such lobbying can pay dividends, and I think shareholders would ask serious questions of Global if they weren't doing it.
But I hope the government (which supposedly understands industry) will recognise that and treat Global's bleating with a pinch of salt.
I think you'll find Global has "owners" rather than shareholders in the traditional sense and their identity is carefully obscured via a Jersey holding company which in turn is controlled by a British Virgin Islands company.
This arrangement allows them to employ all the usual clever tax avoidance methods ensuring HMRC receives no tax income on the profits the company makes.
An article called "From the Heart of Capital to the Classic Gold Choice, tax avoidance is just a beat away" on the Tax Research UK website explains the ownership questions and tax arrangements very clearly.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/10607639/Why-Radio-3-is-out-of-tune-with-its-listeners.html
complete with unnecessary photo of pretty young Radio 3 presenter.
But to slightly play devil's advocate, since when was imitation prohibited in competition?
It seems to me that Global are happy with competition only if the other competitor has at least one hand tied behind the back and a wooden leg.
I think the premise behind its accusations should be challenged first.
For as long as I can remember there have been moans if Radio 3 did any programme at all that appealed to a more general audience. There is a clique who believe that it should be extremely elitist and I sometimes think that they believe if anyone else but themselves listen then it has failed.
In a shocking move, the other evening Radio 3 spent about 30 minutes discussing Blurred Lines. Turns out it's not the Robin Thicke song, but a play at the National Theatre:
Bllurred Lines is a blistering journey through contemporary gender politics. An all female cast dissect what it means to be a woman today: in the workplace, in cyberspace, on screen, on stage and in relationships.
You don't get that on Smooth Classics with Margherita Taylor.
For sure, but I think there is also pressure from the BBC Trust to push Radio 3 to be more populist, in order to justify its expense.
There has been a history of the BBC reacting to competiton by "ape-ing" them, and Classic FM may have a point. I just wished they did it without the whinging commercial operators before them have done.
For years its output has been reduced to a very narrow selection of the same movements of the same symphonies/concertos and it morphed into an easy listening station that plays orchestral music rather than classical. How often do they ever play any arias which is something they did years back? Thankfully I gave up on ClFM years ago, and I bet it's still like listening to a tape-loop playing "smooth classics" with the Star Wars theme or Ludovico Einaudi featured every hour or so. Nothing will ever change there.