COMMERCIAL RADIO Sia,—In your issue dated December 5, Mr. Peter
Forster writes: Equally much nonsense is talked about the
BBC being uncommercial (as though In Town Tonight has not long been the outpost of com- mercial radio in this country . . .), or above trade (as though BBC Publications was not suc- cessfully in business to the tune of a million pounds' profit a year). . . . From which it seems that he thinks that all some-, body has to do to appear in the In Town Tonight programme is to ring up and book the space, and from then on it is simply a matter of pounds, shillings and pence.
There is not a word of truth in this.
For ten years, up to the commencement of the present series, I assisted in the selection of people to appear in the programme, and when some of theft , needed scripts I wrote them. I helped them through the ordeal of broadcasting, to overcome their natural nervousness of microphones (and later, when the programme was televised, of cameras) and made many friends, some of which I have today. During this whole period I knew of no case where a par ment was made in cash or kind either to the BBC . or, as seems to be insinuated, to those working on the programme. On the contrary, the mono- polistic BBC paid a small fee to those taking part in In Town Tonight; a gesture which is rarelY paralleled elsewhere in the world, as many film stars have told me.
I have never been able to understand why Mr. Forster and one or two others should sneer at In Town Tonight, which at its peak had considerable popularity and prestige. Over the years almost every- one visiting or resident in this country with anY claim to distinction took part in it, including a former Viceroy of India, Ministers of the Crown, High Commissioners, a Chief of Air Staff and other
high-ranking officers of all three services; and, in spite of the almost total prohibition on barristers broadcasting, at least one QC. Even Mr. Forster cannot imagine (so I hope) that these persons would have anything to do with a programme which stooped to accepting under-the-counter payments for a broadcast.
I trust that you will publish this letter, although I have too much respect for your readers to think thni many of them, even after reading Mr. Forster's will have any doubts about the integrity of thL d BC staff who were my colleagues, or my own. —Yours faithfully,
K 59 Chea Road, Ewell, Eps
oEmN,Nu GRENVILLE MY01 SurreyE 'r [Mr. Forster writes: 'I am sorry that Mr. Kenneth Grenville Myer should have taken my little dig so much to heart. I never meant to suggest that anyone actually bought space on the programme; but, in many cases, I fail to see what more valuablc publicity they could have obtained if they had paid' —Editor, Spectator.]
Previous page
