Quiet man
Michael Vestey
Att the time of writing, Mark Damazer, he new controller of Radio Four, has yet to appear on Feedback on Radio Four to outline his plans for the network; nor, apparently, does he intend to before the current season of this programme ends in early December, Feedback is an ideal outlet for sharing his thoughts and ideas with listeners, though, clearly, he's the quiet man of broadcasting. The BBC told me he took over only on Monday last week, but he's had plenty of time to think about the network.
He and the director of radio, Jenny Abramsky, did voice some views about Radio Four at a seminar on the future of the BBC chaired by Lord Burns, who's conducting a review of the Corporation. Abramsky was quoted as saying that there'd been times when some programmes 'had not been good enough' and that parts of the network were 'painful'.
She later explained to MediaGuardian.co.uk that she meant some of the quizzes had been painful. 'Sometimes our scheduling has been safe rather than innovative.'
Damazer himself opined that certain parts of the schedule had become 'cosy'. 'Radio Four is not a museum,' he said ominously, though adding at the same time that it wasn't ripe for revolution. He agreed with the criticism that the network had lost its way. I don't think it has, and I'm not sure in what way he thinks it has.
So what can all this mean? One needs the analytical skills of Kremlinologists from the Soviet era to interpret the words of BBC executives who increasingly sound like Labour government ministers. My normal rule of thumb with ministers is to automatically assume that the opposite of what they say will come to pass. It usually works. One hopes Damazer isn't going to make the same mistake as a predecessor, James Boyle, who soothingly spoke of how impor tant Radio Four was to him, only to introduce 45 changes at once, infuriating the audience. Damazer intends changes but suspect they'll be introduced gradually, accompanied by a great deal of spinning.
In the meantime, I hear that morale at Radio Four is falling again; that Damazer is being regarded as a television man who really wants to return to it as soon as possible. He was, apparently, not known to be much of a radio listener. He's said to want a clear-out of older broadcasters, which is very bad news indeed; some of the younger presenters and reporters sound so naive. Perhaps Damazer is a Birtist, after all, obsessed by youth.
It's true that the network has its faults, though I've nothing against the quizzes. The only one I regularly listen to now is Quote . . Unquote with Nigel Rees. Its gentle humour is right for Radio Four. Give me that rather than the unfunny and speechmangling ramblings of the comedian Mark Steel on Thursday evenings. Last week's about Belfast was particularly dire. Apart from Dead Ringers and Our Brave Boys, the newer comedy is poor but then so is it on television, almost as if comedy-writers have run out of steam. Either that or executives no longer know how to spot a gem.
One only had to listen to the Tony Hancock evening on Radio Two a fortnight or so ago, marking the 50th anniversary of the first Hancock's Half Hour programme on radio, and the four-part tribute to Peter Cook on Radio Four, Peter Cook in his Own Words (Fridays), to wonder where the writers and performers have gone. Although we were familiar with much of the Hancock and Cook material, it still sounded fresh. Similarly, with their winning formats, the older shows, such as Just a Minute and I'm Sony I Haven't a Clue, remain immensely popular.
can think of alterations to the network: You and Yours is too long at almost an hour and should be cut by half. As I've written before, Broadcasting House should be given a proper news and current-affairs identity and moved back to eight o'clock on Sunday mornings. I would personally get rid of Home Truths, the late John Peel's programme on Saturday mornings, though it does have its following. Drama is flourishing on the network, and although the Afternoon Play is often not to my taste I know many home-bound people who listen most afternoons.
The Archers needs to be purged of its political correctness, dealing as it does with largely urban issues such as the tedious anorexia nervosa of Helen Archer instead of the proposed hunting ban, which it hardly ever mentions, and, as the CBI recently complained, of presenting businessmen, such as the unpleasant property developer Matt Crawford, as crooks. Its writers, mostly town people, seem to have no idea about real rural communities.
Yes, there's room for change at Radio Four but not that much. It didn't augur well when Abramsky said that Radio Four needed to reach out to more of the country. I would put it the other way around: let 'more of the country' reach out to Radio Four.
Previous page
