Manx Radio

[Kopek]

3 minutes ago, P.K. said:

Sure the adverts are awful but just view them as money in YOUR pocket. It's a much healthier viewpoint....

....but with the current subsidy system it is money taken out of our pocket despite these e awful adverts.

[P.K.]

5 minutes ago, Kopek said:

....but with the current subsidy system it is money taken out of our pocket despite these e awful adverts.

OK Pedanticus it's LESS money taken out of your pocket than it could have been!

Dear me.....

[Stu Peters]

2 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Any way ... Manx Radio .. many don’t think it’s much good ... discuss? 

They're wrong. What they mean is that they don't like it. I don't mind that some people don't like the music, the ads, the reporters, the presenters or anything else about the station. But to say it's amateurish hospital radio and crap quality is simply wrong by any professional measure.

I don't like seafood so avoid it, rather than eat it and moan like fuck at every possible opportunity. And yes, some of my tax probably goes towards the seafood industry.

[Max Power]

4 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

They're wrong. What they mean is that they don't like it. I don't mind that some people don't like the music, the ads, the reporters, the presenters or anything else about the station. But to say it's amateurish hospital radio and crap quality is simply wrong by any professional measure.

I don't like seafood so avoid it, rather than eat it and moan like fuck at every possible opportunity. And yes, some of my tax probably goes towards the seafood industry.

Of the three local broadcasters I can only listen to Manx Radio. I would probably listen a bit more but for the women's programme in the afternoon. How sexist, how about some men's programming?

[Neil Down]

6 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

They're wrong. What they mean is that they don't like it. I don't mind that some people don't like the music, the ads, the reporters, the presenters or anything else about the station. But to say it's amateurish hospital radio and crap quality is simply wrong by any professional measure.

I don't like seafood so avoid it, rather than eat it and moan like fuck at every possible opportunity. And yes, some of my tax probably goes towards the seafood industry.

Correct Stu. I switch the radio on when I get in the car and have a quick listen to all the stations. There are times when MR has some good music on so my station choice stays there. I use this as my yardstick not an anonymous internet forum where maybe half a dozen people vent their spleens. I think it's called having a choice

ETA, I would rather listen to MR than have my ears bleed with the stuff energy play...

Edited January 9, 2019 by Neil Down

[woody2]

8 hours ago, WKRP said:

Might be worth checking/asking BBC if the local democracy reporters are allowed, under their contract, to work for other broadcasters.

If the answer is yes, that’s fine if not, then Manx Radio will have to use John Moss more! 

yes.......

[Declan]

8 hours ago, WKRP said:

Might be worth checking/asking BBC if the local democracy reporters are allowed, under their contract, to work for other broadcasters.

 

There’s no need, as explained already in this thread, that is the role. He’s not moonlighting, the BBC are paying him to provide content to Manx Radio. 

[craggy_steve]

9 hours ago, thesultanofsheight said:

Any way ... Manx Radio .. many don’t think it’s much good ... discuss? 

Define "good".

If MR were not in receipt of public funds I doubt we'd be having this discussion.

There's little wrong with MR that couldn't be fixed by better directors / board. They have brought down all this controversy and opprobrium upon the station and its staff by over-egging the value of MR to the nation and demanding ever-more subvention, without which we wouldn't really give a toss. It's understandable in a way, they have a very conflicted role directing an organisation which relies on both gov't and commercial funding, but they've misread public sentiment. 

[thesultanofsheight]

8 hours ago, Stu Peters said:

They're wrong. What they mean is that they don't like it. I don't mind that some people don't like the music, the ads, the reporters, the presenters or anything else about the station. But to say it's amateurish hospital radio and crap quality is simply wrong by any professional measure.

I don't like seafood so avoid it, rather than eat it and moan like fuck at every possible opportunity. And yes, some of my tax probably goes towards the seafood industry.

I was summarizing the general tone in this thread. I actually quite like your show now but have to say I totally avoid MR in general as I find that while your show has improved Jon Moss’s increasingly bizarre and Partridge-esque interviews, and the general political coverage, are generally very poor indeed. 

[Andy Onchan]

17 hours ago, Declan said:

I wonder whether you’d feel different if his Dad was someone else?

People complain that the BBC don’t provide value for money on the Island. Here’s a method to increase BBC spend on the Island. 

There do need to be oversight within that these roles aren’t just replacing an employee but adding to what’s being offered. 

Where have I mentioned his Dad?

The BBC is not value for money on IOM. Period. Their "spend" is derisory. The BBC IOM web presence (if you can find it) is woeful; the news items are almost invariably out of date and there's little or no reporting on Tynwald, which as the lawmaking assembly you would think would be important (it is elsewhere in the British Isles). And taken in context, likening IOM to a UK region/city is a bit below the belt IMO. As I say, if all we're going to get is Gawne's/BBC view on things (now it seems in news print as well) then there's something wrong. So the token Local Democracy position is just that, token.   

[Declan]

I think you're not understanding the context.  The BBC is providing these roles all over, to cover the level of Government Below national government, so Gawne reports of Douglas Council and the various commissioners, not Tynwald. 

The BBC has set up the role of Local Democracy reporter and places those people in local radio stations and newspaper offices all over. There possibly are other aspects where the Island doesn't get it's fair share, but remove this role and it becomes another area that the IOM lose out on. Are you suggesting that the IOM shouldn't have tapped into the Local Democracy program?

[gettafa]

It makes one wonder how we and Manx Radio managed without a Local Democracy Reporter.

Edited January 9, 2019 by gettafa

[Andy Onchan]

1 minute ago, Declan said:

I think you're not understanding the context.  The BBC is providing these roles all over, to cover the level of Government Below national government, so Gawne reports of Douglas Council and the various commissioners, not Tynwald. 

The BBC has set up the role of Local Democracy reporter and places those people in local radio stations and newspaper offices all over. There possibly are other aspects where the Island doesn't get it's fair share, but remove this role and it becomes another area that the IOM lose out on. Are you suggesting that the IOM shouldn't have tapped into the Local Democracy program?

I understand the context all too well.

Declan, we already have local reporting via MR. Why would we need a BBC reporter to do the same? If it's to reduce the head count and cost to MR then the MR subvention should be reduced accordingly. As I said, it's a token position. 

I'd be interested to know what benefits (other than what I have outlined above) IOM gets from this appointment.

[Declan]

It's supposed to be an additional role - I would hope as part of the BBC's due diligence they check that Manx Radio and all the other hosts don't replace an additional head. It's seems a basic part of managing a project like that. Perhaps you could put in a Freedom of Info request to the BBC to see that this done? 

Basically it is an extra reporter paid out of the licence fee. The brief on the BBC site is - 

Quote

The brief

• The core purpose of the LDRS is to provide impartial coverage of the regular business and workings of local authorities in the UK, and other relevant democratic institutions such as mayoralties, combined authority areas, P&CCs, quangos, etc.
• The Local Democracy Reporters’ (LDRs) brief is to report on the decision-making process: what decisions are made in the public’s name and how they are arrived at, what evidence is presented to the council, etc.
• In two-tier council areas the LDRs should cover district council affairs sufficiently to ensure that significant decisions (eg planning) are reported.
• LDRs may provide other stories which are focused on local democracy and which are in the public interest so long as that does not detract from the core purpose of the service.
• All their work must be available to all qualifying partners.
• National politics is out of scope.

 

I'm struggling to see why it's a bad thing that the BBC provides a service to the Isle of Man that it is providing everywhere else. This funding would only be allocated elsewhere. 

[piebaps]

1 hour ago, Andy Onchan said:

Where have I mentioned his Dad?

The BBC is not value for money on IOM. Period. Their "spend" is derisory. The BBC IOM web presence (if you can find it) is woeful; the news items are almost invariably out of date and there's little or no reporting on Tynwald, which as the lawmaking assembly you would think would be important (it is elsewhere in the British Isles). And taken in context, likening IOM to a UK region/city is a bit below the belt IMO. As I say, if all we're going to get is Gawne's/BBC view on things (now it seems in news print as well) then there's something wrong. So the token Local Democracy position is just that, token.   

Sorry Andy but there's loads of IOM content on the BBC website. You can even tailor your view so it comes up https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/localnews/im1-im1/0

The undercurrent from the troll here is that Ewan is not doing a real job but instead is getting a wedge of cash cause is Dad is Phil Gawne.

I don't know Ewan or his background. I'll wager however that he has appropriate academic qualifications and is working a full week and he's not getting a handout due to his Dad's background (which is fairly questionable in any case).

Obviously if anyone has a single shred of evidence which proves that young Ewan is getting a free lunch then no doubt he will produce it for us to see.

I've seen no objective criticism of Ewan's content or delivery. All I'm seeing is people whining that he's Phil Gawne's son. Former politicians have children. They get jobs. Some are in the public service. Get over it. Criticize him objectively and professionally. Saying he only got the job coz of his dad is typical of the childish nonsense that's prevalent on here these days.