BBC local radio shows will be replaced after 2pm - 139 jobs expected to go

Aet290204 said:
It’s the lack of coverage for me. I’ve no idea where the journalists and camera crews are based but if it’s the godforsaken outpost that is Norwich it’s a lot longer to get to Milton Keynes from Norwich than Cambridge. Norwich is a pig to get to/from.
Click to expand...
These things are done largely virtually now though. They would have staff based in the Bucks area who aren't travelling to East Anglia every day.
 
atypical_boro said:
Does it matter where its actually broadcast from though? I get that smaller towns are going to get less coverage generally, but I don't see why it matters whether that it is broadcast from Norwich or Peterborough, if you live in Milton Keynes for example.
Click to expand...
Yes, for one thing there is the centralisation of jobs. Presenters, researchers, producers, journalists. This has a knock on effect through local schools and colleges, a brain drain. Surely the strength of local radio is being able to engage directly with the community. Last week I was invited to speak for 5 mins on Scot Mackin's afternoon show. It was probably a lot less than 5 mins but in that time I could highlight and advertise events an open days at Albert Park, Central Mosque and litter picking in North Ormesby.
They may seem small things but they are important to the communities concerned. After this 2pm cut off I will not be able to do that. In aet's case I would be less likely to be able to talk about events in Cambridge to a presenter in Norwich. I would have less chance of access. If I did get on chances are they would never of heard of Albert Park.
 
BBC local radio and tv is tripe. Let the BBC become a subscription service and see how many people would pay up. About as many as the Riverside’s annual attendance next season would be my guess.
 
I’d much rather see the licence fee put towards keeping the stations open and flourishing, and for more local tv output, than some of the other big spend areas.

I watch most football that is on the BBC, but private channels can broadcast much of this.
 
fmttmadmin said:
Yes, for one thing there is the centralisation of jobs. Presenters, researchers, producers, journalists. This has a knock on effect through local schools and colleges, a brain drain. Surely the strength of local radio is being able to engage directly with the community. Last week I was invited to speak for 5 mins on Scot Mackin's afternoon show. It was probably a lot less than 5 mins but in that time I could highlight and advertise events an open days at Albert Park, Central Mosque and litter picking in North Ormesby.
They may seem small things but they are important to the communities concerned. After this 2pm cut off I will not be able to do that. In aet's case I would be less likely to be able to talk about events in Cambridge to a presenter in Norwich. I would have less chance of access. If I did get on chances are they would never of heard of Albert Park.
Click to expand...
There is no way whatsoever that all the presenters/researchers/producers and journalists are all going to be residents of Norwich. They wouldn't be doing it if that was the case. You don't even have to visit Norwich to go on air as a guest.

I have acknowledged that smaller towns will (obviously) get less coverage but the alternative is make cuts to bigger/national/network services which, believe it or not, will be a bigger deal for the BBC than slimming down Radio Tees.
 
atypical_boro said:
There is no way whatsoever that all the presenters/researchers/producers and journalists are all going to be residents of Norwich. They wouldn't be doing it if that was the case. You don't even have to visit Norwich to go on air as a guest.

I have acknowledged that smaller towns will (obviously) get less coverage but the alternative is make cuts to bigger/national/network services which, believe it or not, will be a bigger deal for the BBC than slimming down Radio Tees.
Click to expand...
Am afraid you are completely wrong in these assumptions. I wish you were right but sadly you are not.
 
Couldn't Tees repeat its earlier programmes after 2pm, obviously not the morning drivel but the shows between say 10 and 2 being repeated between 2 and 6?

Look at how much is frittered away on this crew. Is Gibbo setting their wages?

www.prolificnorth.co.uk

BBC reveals 2021/22 top presenter salaries: the list in full - Prolific North

The BBC has published its annual report, including the salaries of its highest-paid presenters and celebrities.
www.prolificnorth.co.uk www.prolificnorth.co.uk
 
In the case of match of day, the highlights you see on there can be seen on YouTube. Without the guff of Shearer, Lineker etc.
Entertainment is becoming more and more digitalised with people not wanting to be restricted to viewing schedules and or recording stuff. It's just the way the world is going.

Saying that I don't see why local radio stations cannot be allowed to air their own stuff from 6am to 6pm? Sounds like the BBC are trying to copy global radio's model which is, how can I put this politely, dreadful.
 
E5ul0
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
Couldn't Tees repeat its earlier programmes after 2pm, obviously not the morning drivel but the shows between say 10 and 2 being repeated between 2 and 6?

Look at how much is frittered away on this crew. Is Gibbo setting their wages?

www.prolificnorth.co.uk

BBC reveals 2021/22 top presenter salaries: the list in full - Prolific North

The BBC has published its annual report, including the salaries of its highest-paid presenters and celebrities.
www.prolificnorth.co.uk www.prolificnorth.co.uk
Click to expand...
I think people are missing the point. I thought you would have got it. This is fundamentally about taking the local out of radio.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
Couldn't Tees repeat its earlier programmes after 2pm, obviously not the morning drivel but the shows between say 10 and 2 being repeated between 2 and 6?

Look at how much is frittered away on this crew. Is Gibbo setting their wages?

www.prolificnorth.co.uk

BBC reveals 2021/22 top presenter salaries: the list in full - Prolific North

The BBC has published its annual report, including the salaries of its highest-paid presenters and celebrities.
www.prolificnorth.co.uk www.prolificnorth.co.uk
Click to expand...
Admittedly Ball and Lineker are grossly overpaid. But when you start getting down to the £400k presenters like Fiona Bruce, how much should a national presenter who works long hours in a high pressure role be paid? How do they compare to other broadcaster salaries? You can pay these people £50k a year if you want but they aren't going to be very good, and people will be moaning about far more than their salaries.
 
fmttmadmin said:
E5ul0

I think people are missing the point. I thought you would have got it. This is fundamentally about taking the local out of radio.
Click to expand...
It's about cutting back the hours. Our local radio (Cleveland then Tees) has cut back a lot of local debate and information over the years itself, now basically being a pop station with occasional local info and an hour dedicated to promoting a football club with occasional mentions for others.

It's like the Gazette with a broadcasting licence.

I'm all for a local radio station full of information and stories for the area it's covering and a variety of music, not just pop.

What we have now is a station producing little more than the other privately run stations, that's not giving us a real choice of listening.
 
atypical_boro said:
Admittedly Ball and Lineker are grossly overpaid. But when you start getting down to the £400k presenters like Fiona Bruce, how much should a national presenter who works long hours in a high pressure role be paid? How do they compare to other broadcaster salaries? You can pay these people £50k a year if you want but they aren't going to be very good, and people will be moaning about far more than their salaries.
Click to expand...
They're not very good, particularly the one you just highlighted. That's the problem.
 
Randy said:
In the case of match of day, the highlights you see on there can be seen on YouTube. Without the guff of Shearer, Lineker etc.
Entertainment is becoming more and more digitalised with people not wanting to be restricted to viewing schedules and or recording stuff. It's just the way the world is going.

Saying that I don't see why local radio stations cannot be allowed to air their own stuff from 6am to 6pm? Sounds like the BBC are trying to copy global radio's model which is, how can I put this politely, dreadful.
Click to expand...
Dreadful and, more pertinently, cheap. Hence why it is dreadful.
 
Corcaigh_the_Cat said:
£400k is paid out due to poor management, it's not exactly a 'market price'. And Lineker at £1 5m?

And I've heard better local presenters than some of those on that list.
Click to expand...
The job is not just about talking into a mic, they work long hours and they have a way bigger remit than that. Also, delivering the news to XXm people that the Queen has died for example (in the case of Huw Edwards) is not really a job for a low paid rookie. They make it look easy but it isn't always. As I say, if you think they're bad at it, imagine how bad it could be if you let someone with far less experience do the job.

You say its about 'poor management' (and you may be right) but what is the justifiable market rate for that role then? Can you suggest experienced alternatives who'd provide better value? As I say, have a look at Kay Burley, Cathy Newman etc in similar roles to make a judgement.

I said above Lineker/Ball were grossly overpaid (not compared to their counterparts at other organisations, but I think the BBC has equivalent talent earning far less), no arguments there and something should be done about that. I was talking about the next rung down. I sometimes wonder if some people won't be happy until everyone at the BBC (even those at the top of their field) earns minimum wage. Its just not realistic. If Bruce was earning £200k some people would be saying she should earn less, if they don't like her, but its not just about that. These people are major TV personalities, you can't just simply pay them loads less and expect it all to turn out better somehow.
 
Last edited:
atypical_boro said:
Admittedly Ball and Lineker are grossly overpaid. But when you start getting down to the £400k presenters like Fiona Bruce, how much should a national presenter who works long hours in a high pressure role be paid? How do they compare to other broadcaster salaries? You can pay these people £50k a year if you want but they aren't going to be very good, and people will be moaning about far more than their salaries.
Click to expand...
Fiona Bruce?? A half cut horse could do her job far better than she can, I'd say someone could easily replace her for 50k.

Not that this is the point of the thread, just couldn't bite my tongue when someone thinks that talent black hole is worth 400k!
 
Colgates_shaving_foam said:
Fiona Bruce?? A half cut horse could do her job far better than she can, I'd say someone could easily replace her for 50k.

Not that this is the point of the thread, just couldn't bite my tongue when someone thinks that talent black hole is worth 400k!
Click to expand...
I think at this point I should just bow out of the thread then, if this is what you (and others) really think. I'd love to see you find someone to do her job for £50k.:confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top