World Service vs Radio 4

[scarlett]

I am fed up with the repetition and lack of objective discussion of controverial issues on the BBC World Service. I have attempted to encourage the BBC to put Radio 4 and other terrestial stations on their spare channels on the WorldSpace system. They have declined. Based in the eastern Med. I do listen to the World Service a lot, but I am forced to use WorldSpace to hear alternative stuff from the US, Australia, Austria, China, New Zealand etc. But it is not what I want.

I want Radio 4. Has anyone found another way of getting Radio 4 such as off the Astra without going through the clat of getting a Sky contract etc.? Getting it via the internet at 60p an minute via mobile phone is too much, even if the connection were fast enough.

If that wern't a tall enough order I want to be able to do it on an ordinary cell powered radio, without mains power.

If anyone is intersted, the furthest south I have got it is Lyon on Long Wave.

It is a good job this isn't important.



<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[[3889]]

Not sure if it will work in eastern med but using astra doesn't need a contract, Buy a digibox off Ebay circa £50 and a dish for £25 and radio 4 is free to air eternally gratis with other BBC output ( not much of an incentive, I know). You need a friendly UK address to get digicard.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Modulation]

Oh your so wrong!
The world service is the best thing the uk has ever produced. It offers a truly international view of the world - isn't that what you really want ? I am totally fed up up of the completely spurious "arguments" and "debates" on radio 4 They contribute nothing to understanding and have the pernicious effect of making you feel that some how you are connected with the thrustring edge of debate . Nothing cou ld be furrther from the truth. R 4 is now a game show.

<hr width=100% size=1>Brendan

 

[Sybarite]

Listen to it on the net with ADSL.

John

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Guest]

I may be wrong but I seem to recall that the BBC announced that they would not be using the Astra satellite in the near future and that this would mean that ex-pats in the Med would no longer be able to receive BBC broadcasts.Does anyone have definite knowledge of this?


<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[LadyInBed]

I also understood that to be the case.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[scarlett]

Dear Bredan

I do agree that the BBC World Service {WS} is the best of the government sponsored world service radios. One of my problems is that it is suffering mostly by being controlled by the Foreign Office. Journalistic staff are choosen or self selected, on the basis of being able to follow the goverment line. The goverment line is strictly observed and for example, they refuse to discuss the mechanics of this process, such as who is in the meetings where the lines is set.

Because money is tight the station is forever repeating items. If you are unlucky it is possible to hear a programme, such as Westway, half a dozen times. I don't want to hear it once.

Though I might have many complaints about Radio 4 it gives the impression of being independent compared with the WS. I would be happy to pay a subscription to the BBC, as the weather channel asks, to receive Radio 4. on WorldSpace.

In the mean time I will nurse my WorldSpace receiver where I can get Bloomberg, CNN, National Public Radio, and news in English from broadcasters around Asia, Australasia, Africa and Europe, as well as the BBCWS

But I miss Radios 4 and 5 Live.

Scarlett

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Gunfleet]

Having known several World Service journalists, I can't let this pass. They are not chosen on their ability to follow the government line. THe government is at arm's length from the WS of the BBC... the foreign office pays for it but has no editorial control.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[scarlett]

Dear John

Thank you for writing. I wrote to the WS about four years ago asking how they decide news items and the line to take. They ignored the question and directed me to some out of print books on the WS as it was decades ago.

I have listened to it, when I am on the boat, for the past six summers and I am convinced that they hold a regular editorial meeting at which someone with connections to the Foreign Office makes pointed comments. It is just the piper calling the tune I suppose.

But it is not just 'the line' probem. The journalist never interview anyone with other than 'soft ball' questions. Never follow the weak arguements with the obvious next question. You sit there saying to yourself --- ' well ask him ....... '.

I was listening to the WS for the whole of the recent war during which all programmes except repetative war coverage, were abandoned. The lack of support for the war back home was mentioned but the difference between the WS and others was dramatic.

I appreciate your comments that show me that there is another view, but I am not convinced. If you like to put one of your journalist friends on to me, I am open to discussion.

Thanks again.

Scarlett

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[NeilE]

You are entirely wrong. The BBC World Service, although funded by the government with a grant in aid, is editorially independent and does not follow government lines. The BBC tries to follow an impartial line and give a balanced view of a story. Facts are paramount and opinion clearly flagged. It is a great travesty to accuse the WS of being biased.

By the way I must declare an interest, I used to work for BBC Television and the World Service, and nobody ever told me what to say or even hinted, pressure was to present a balanced, accurate relevant story.

Sorry to all you unbelievers, but this is the truth.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[scarlett]

Dear Neil

Thank you for your informatiom. OK, so how do you explain the uncritical following of current government views? Can you explain the difference between the World Service and Radio 4? Surely it cannot be that Radio 4 shares the views of HM Opposition. It would seem not from the amout of 'stick' they give them.

I am convinced that the government controls the news output by some method. Maybe there is a F O demand too, for the loading of programme schedules with 'current affairs' programmes which turn out to be denigration of our 'enemies', EG Iraq, Zimbabwe or Burma.

The comparison between the outputs of the home terrestial stations, like Radio 4 or 5 Live and the WS is so dramatic.

My experience of the BBC World Service amounts to many hundreds of hours every year. They are still the best over other government sponsored Engish language radio services. But they could be so much better, a gold service, with better leadership whether at the BBC or the FO.

I am glad you were not subjected to pressure when at the BBC and thank you for your contribution.

Getting back to trying to receive Radio 4 etc.----- the 'new' digital radio service. Has it got the propogation pattens of VHF, MW LW or short wave? Is there room for hope for those in the Med., now or in the future?

Scarlett




<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[NeilE]

I think you are wrong - the WS is not uncritical of government and follows the same broad editorial lines as the rest of the BBC. This means R4.

It is a matter of approaching the subjects without any preconceived bias. Whilst employed by the BBC, I televised all of the Party Conferences - each party thought I was mildly interested in what they had to say. I did my best for them all, regardless of my own politics at the time.

It is not hard to separate your personal views from professional detachment, which is what most journalists at the BBC do - I would love you to apply your theories to the national newspapers!

I don't think the word "enemy" has been applied to Zimbabwe for example, but there may well have been a critical look at Mugabe and his actions, together with the repression of Changarai.

People work very hard to bring you an unbiased service - please try and look at it without preconceived ideas

As a matter of interest the government and opposition pressure BBC editors every day of the week, they have media monitoring units and call people like the editor of the 10 O'Clock News and Today almost daily complaining of bias - this is, of course, resisted, but all complaints are taken seriously, even those with a huge axe to grind. Many a time have very senior members of governments of both political persuasions tried to apply massive pressure over the licence fee and other matters.

Why do you think BSkyB was allowed so much cross ownership? They say the "right" things politically.

You can forget DAB in the Med by the way, it is only for the UK. The best long term hope is DRM - Digital Radio Mondial which is digital radio on shortwave. Pioneered by BBC Research, it should revolutionise SW listening when it catches on. The first transmissions are being made now, but I think it will be some time before there are wide transmissions. Your best hope in the short term is a Skydish - but even that is in doubt since the BBC is in trouble for broadcasting domestic services outside the confines of the UK! Maybe when broadband is cheap in the Med marinas - that will be the best bet! Remember there are local FM broadcasts in certain cities - look at the BBC website for frequencies - there is certainly a relay in the English part of Provence.

The difference between WS and R4 and 5 is one of target audience. WS is targetted at people who do not have the familiarity with UK politics and life which residents do, hence there are many more explanations. Also it is assumed that everyone listening is doing so in their second language - that may explain a lot too.

WS is not really aimed at ex-pats who live in stable countries, but is an attempt to bring truthful, unbiased broadcasting to those countries without access to homegrown services of this nature. I am afraid ex-pats are not foremost in the FCO thinking, so there is no real money for broadcasting to the likes of France etc...

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[HaraldS]

Had been following this thread with interest and thought with English beeing my second language, there is little that I could contribute to this discussion. Yet like everybody of us I'm interested in getting a blend of differing views, even while far away from home. And normally I wouldn't even know of R4.

However, last year, while readying my boat in Scotland, I tuned into R4, and then left it running for a week, while doing all sort of prep work. I remember that I was very positively impressed and enjoyed listening to it.

I did not have the feeling that as a foreigner I had difficulties understanding some of the local UK issues, it was just interesting to hear of their existence.

Bias is a very subjective impression I think. Most services cannot avoid coming across as supporting a main-stream opinion, either by selction of the contribution or by how the news are worded. If bias is a deviation from mainstream opinion, then I would class R4 more biased than WS. Still I find listening to R4 more interesting. And I'm missing it now. Feels a bit like listening to KQED in California.

I think there is a differnce in getting the news very timely, hard to beat CNN on that, and forming an opinion about the implications of those. For the later, many of the world wide services, WS included, fall rather short. Still I think WS is the best of the world broadcasts that I can receive. Definitely more interesting than my mother tounge, Deutsche Welle, where you get the feeling they are reporting for ex-pats that left Germany 30 years ago. Infinitely boring.

NeilE's comment that WS is not really aimed at ex-pats who live in stable countries, but is an attempt to bring truthful, unbiased broadcasting to those countries without access to homegrown services of this nature seems to say it all, but it also gives it a rather sterile touch, that could be mistaken for politically correct.






<hr width=100% size=1><A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.taniwani.de>http://www.taniwani.de</A>

 

[NeilE]

Harald,

I think you are right, WS does come over in a rather sterile fashion sometimes. It does carry rather too many news programmes for my taste.

I too prefer Radio 4 which I consider as the greatest radio station in the world. It is the only one I can leave on during all waking hours and not become bored with!!! It certainly does away with the need for television.

In the UK there is an annual row when R4 Longwave carries the cricket commentary displacing normal programmes. Non cricketing sailors etc who can only get R4 on LW are incensed, especially since R5 Live is supposed to be a news and sport channel!

I just got rather hot under the collar at the accusations of bias - which there is not!!!

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[scarlett]

Neil. Thanks for the information about the short wave proposals. I won't hold my breathe.

I was interested in the other contributers comments on the WS, CNN and the German staion, all accessible vis WorldSpace together with Bloomberg and quite a few others, which make a change.

I am back on the boat in Greece this weekend, till October. I will do some research to try to back up my comments. 'Road test' a Judy Swallow against a John Humphreys for [cruel] example!!!! Did you hear a good sample of JH interviewing John Reid at about 0730 today? A classic. I will miss it.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[TonyMS]

On the question of Astra, the BBC are moving all their output from Astra 2A to Astra 2D this summer, which will restrict access to the UK, Normandy and Britanny with a normal (40 cm) dish. A big dish would go as far as N Spain. Med is no go.

And I'd just bought a Digibox hoping to listen to the proms in Spain!

Tony

<hr width=100% size=1>