02-11-2023, 04:00 PM
(02-11-2023, 03:21 PM)DTV Wrote: Sure, but there are various significant political and cultural reasons for that. With maybe a few exceptions, that isn't true for the patchwork of areas with very disparate population sizes that make up the BBC Local Radio network. Beyond petty rivalries, there isn't really much sociopolitical distinction between a lot of neighbouring Local Radio areas, creating arguably unnecessary duplication (even with increased simulcasting).(I suspect that this subject might be better dealt with over in pres.cafe )
While you might be sacrificing a degree of localness, a Regional Radio map that largely corresponds to the TV region map would not be losing much in terms of broader functionality - allowing for fewer, but better resourced stations with an overall lower pricetag. It would also allow for a noteworthy reduction in the BBC's property portfolio, a significant non-content related cost.
In general moving BBC Local radio in England from a countries to regions model wouldn't be a bad idea. There's already instances of counties sharing a single station, notably Three Counties Radio for Beds, Herts, and Bucks.
I dare say for example having a radio station that covered the whole Look East area (e.g. BBC Radio East) might even improve on the current situation. At least this might avoid the need for as many pan-England and larger regional programming, done under the guise of cost-cutting.
If county-linked BBC radio stations are to remain I think there's a reasonable case for the BBC to re-examine whether all the buildings are still needed. For example BBC Essex' is based in its own building at commons.wikimedia.org . Given local radio has fewer unique programmes arguably only one studio is needed these days. With modern technology programmes can even be presented remotely via an internet connection (from home if needed). Potentially rented office space may be more cost-efficient.
Formerly 'Charlie Wells' of TV Forum.