[leewilliams]

That would be great irony if Jordan had been let go for for being too old. Which, of course, he hasn't. So really the fact Jamie is *checks wikipedia* a staggering 15 months older than Jordan is just an irrelevant observation, not irony.

It’s not irrelevant at all, actually.

Radio 1’s target audience is 15-29 and yet the only person in the main daytime line-up in that age bracket is Vicky Hawkesworth. Most of the other presenters are mid-to-late 30s or even in their early-to-mid 40s which means R1 is heading for a “cringy millennials clinging on trying to sound cool with Gen Z” moment in a few years. While I have nothing against Jamie Laing per se, he’s very much in the cringe bracket.

Jordan’s departure to Capital (whose target is a bit older at 15-34) would have been an opportunity to do something different and get a younger voice on who could have started that process. If the R1 controller thinks influencers are what the station needs to drive relevance, fine - hire one in their 20s, there are plenty of them.

The odd thing is R1 already have a wide repository of young and upcoming talent - their yearly Christmas Takeover is evidence of a proactive commitment to nurturing new radio stars (www.bbc.co.uk ). At a time when the BBC is under even more pressure to reach underserved audiences from the widest possible group of communities, giving an aristocrat not in the age demo the second biggest show on the station is an odd move.