Please click here for more information about who I am and why I do this.
The text shown after 1), 2), 3) and 4) is copied exactly from the BBC's daily JV Show web page and I acknowledge their copyright of this text.
The "Find out more..." links to web pages referred to by the JV Show web page are available by clicking on the text following 1), 2), 3) and 4).
"Find out more..." text is only included here when it refers to a non-BBC web page link.
You can follow my occasional postings on Twitter at @JVineBlogMan although @TheJeremyVine has blocked me from following him.
I am subject to the BBC's "expedited complaints handling process" (meaning I'll be ignored) for two years from 25/01/12.

Tuesday, 31 January 2012

Today's show 31/01/12

I'm listening to you on Ken's show. Perhaps I should put use of the word "Next..." when moving on to the next story under some kind of copyright restriction?

11:35, and nothing on the web page yet, but just after 9am it was: Today's programme @BBCRadio2 in four words: Married. Warning. Romney. University.

While we're waiting, I've started writing my complaints appeal letter to the BBC Trust (and loving it!), and you could have a look at this:
BBC must promote excellence and not be vulgar says Lord Patten
Speaking at the Oxford Media Convention yesterday, he said audiences should be given ‘the respect they deserve’ and the broadcaster should make a ‘bold assertion of excellence’, standing ‘four-square’ against any decline into mediocrity.

Respect for audiences? Now, there's a thing. Does this mean that we - your listeners - are no longer to be treated like uninformed idiots? Do you remember Fukushima? Do you remember mentioning that the reactor contained plutonium? Do you remember this being wrong? Do you remember saying the next day "Somebody got upset yesterday when I said the reactor contained plutonium"? How does that one sentence equate with respect for your audience?

11:55, still nothing, and I'm still writing my letter. For once, I am happy to wait...

12:10 and still nothing.

12:20, the letter is going well, unlike your web page. I'll give you another 10 minutes....

From what you said it was...

1) SOMETHING ABOUT DOING NO WORK AT UNIVERSITY : I didn't go to university. Next...

2) SOMETHING ABOUT SUICIDE : Tragic, but not something I have ever encountered. Next...

3) SOMETHING ABOUT CHANGING NAMES AT MARRIAGE : My wife took my name. I don't think she was bothered about losing her maiden name. Next...

4) SOMETHING ABOUT PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE ROMNEY SPEAKING FRENCH : OK, you've got me on this one and I have no idea what this is about.

12:30, and enough is enough. My sincere apologies to my blog readers - it is not my fault!

The Jeremy Vine Show - 30 minutes in, and we still don't know what we are talking about


Some time after 4pm, as the JV Show web site team do their best to decline in to mediocrity and do anything other than promote excellence, this lot appeared...

1) UNIVERSITY - As fees rise, university applications fall and more people are applying for courses which are job related. But shouldn’t university be about reading poetry and studying the history of Mesopotamia for 3 years?

2) SUICIDE - Following the inquest into the death of Gary Speed… How should we react when someone we love threatens to kill themselves?
3) SURNAME - Did you regret giving up your surname when you got married? We speak to someone who did.

4) SPEAKING FRENCH - As Republicans choose their presidential candidate, why is speaking French almost seen as a swear word for some Americans?

Good to see "someone" brought in for item 3, and also good to see that I didn't miss anything important. As if....

But who - other than being TV Licence Fee Poll Tax payers - are we to complain? I'm not allowed to! We need to remember "that the programme holds the right to publish website content at a time convenient to it" and be grateful that it is updated at all. Your BBC, working for... errr... who was it again?

Monday, 30 January 2012

Today's show 30/01/12

Monday morning, and I wait with keen anticipation to see what you have managed to drag out of the newspapers today to talk about. Are you really going to be discussing testing Koala bears today?

Today's issue that affects me: Our wheelie bin was emptied on time this morning without any fuss or mess. Are Gwynedd Council doing it wrong?

So, if you are struggling for news stories today, here are some suggestions:
How the BBC drives down costs... by spending £200,000 on chauffeurs
Mr Thompson, who receives a salary of around £600,000 a year, has a VW Phaeton car on call, according to the Daily Telegraph, at an annual cost of £67,000. A further £65,000 was spent on providing a chauffeur-driven car for Mr Thompson’s deputy Mark Byford, who received a pay-off worth almost £1milion after his redundancy was announced last year. Sir Michael Lyons, outgoing chairman of the BBC Trust, also had a Lexus on call at a cost of £65,000.

BBC News gaffe as paedophile picture is used during report on RBS boss Stephen Hester
The BBC was left red-faced yesterday after a picture of paedophile teacher Nigel Leat was mistakenly flashed up on screen during a news bulletin report on RBS boss Stephen Hester.
The female newsreader was talking about the controversial decision to hand Hester almost £1million in bonuses when Leat's police mugshot appeared on screen with the headline 'RBS BOSS BONUS'.

THE BBC faced a licence-fee backlash last night from TV regions over its controversial £500million move to MediaCity in Salford.
A Commons motion has been tabled calling for licence-fee cash to be used to save television jobs in the Midlands after it emerged that viewers there pay 19 per cent of the levy but receive just three per cent of the funds in return in the form of jobs.
Birmingham broadcasting has been been cut heavily in the past seven years, with more than 6,000 jobs disappearing. Insiders fear other jobs could go as more programmes leave for the BBC’s new MediaCity base.

But, as well know, the BBC can do no wrong in your eyes, so we'll have to make do with the usual outrages du jour...

1) BONUSES - Would you like a politician to decide how much your bonus is? When Stephen Hester heard there was to be a parliamentary debate on his bonus, he turned it down : So multi-millionaire Ed Miliband has complained about multi-millionaire Hester's bonus, but multi-millionaire George Osbourne says that multi-millionaire Miliband was in the Cabinet when multi-millionaire Hester's bonus was discussed and agreed. With reports of over £300million wiped off RBS shares today as a result of this, I am left to wonder how multi-millionaire Miliband justifies his intervention in relation to the zero growth figures announced last week. For completeness, what we need is a millionaire radio personality to discuss this. Any idea who might be available? (
 - half way down). It is interesting to read that Bob Crow's RMT members have also decided to turn down their bonus for working during the Olympics ( but for rather different reasons. Unfortunately, I do not qualify for any kind of bonus, and if I did the only person who would decide its size would be me. Next...

2) GETTING CHILDREN READING - Chris Evans has today launched his 500-word story competition. But before you get your child writing you’ve got to get them reading. We ask: how do you get your reluctant child to read books? : Children? What children? This is just a promotion for another BBC programme. Next...

3) CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION - Criminal Injuries Compensation will no longer be paid out to people convicted of crimes themselves, but what if they’d changed and become a better person in the meantime? Don’t they deserve compensation as much as anyone else? : I am not a criminal, and I am fortunate that I have not been injured as the result of a crime, so this has no relevance to me. Next...

4) PARKING - Listen up, men — women park better than you! It’s official according to a survey, but we put it to the test with Christine and Neil Hamilton : Honestly, is this the best you can do? What's that noise I can hear...? Oh, it's only your Sony Radio Award galloping off in to the sunset.

The Jeremy Vine Show - completely made up, because Ken Bruce said so (11:31 30/01/12)

Friday, 27 January 2012

Today's show 27/01/12

Hello Paddy! Errr... you're not Paddy. Your web page clearly says "Paddy O'Connell sits in" ... has somebody not noticed?
I hope you'll be interested to know that my blog had one of its busiest days ever yesterday, with just under 200 page views, as a result of my complaints debacle with your employers. So thanks for that. The more readers I get, the better!

We watched this week's edition of Panorama last night where Britain's railways were investigated with particular reference to rail fares and Network Rail's infrastructure upgrade costings. I was left thinking at the end if only the same investigative team could do the same kind of job on the BBC. Now that would be revealing!

There was a superb interview with Ed Miliband published yesterday. It can be found here and the BBC have also covered it here THE quote has to be "And you know I think it’s very interesting that David Cameron’s example of responsible capitalism was the chocolate orange. He’s failed to sort it out, why?". Mmmm... chocolate oranges. Now there IS a subject worthy of discussion on your programme!

As we head in to the weekend, what stories of wonder and delight, of paedophiles, wheelie bins, allotments, exploding furniture and the Daily Mail are you going to tempt me with today? Let's see...

1) STEPHEN HESTER - Outrage descends on the Royal Bank of Scotland boss over his £963,000 bonus. But we speak to someone who says Stephen Hester deserves it : Aha! Another "someone"! You keep finding them ... from somewhere. Bonuses are used throughout all sorts of industries, of course, including our beloved BBC. It was only a few days ago that your favourite rag the Daily Mail (
) wrote:
How, then, can we make sense of the revelation that last year the BBC paid bonuses amounting to £275,000 to four senior managers? One of them — Chris Kane, head of corporate real estate at the BBC — received a top-up of £155,000 in addition to his salary of £206,000. The Corporation justifies this apparent ignoring of its rules by saying that Mr Kane and two other executives were entitled to bonuses under contracts entered into before Mr Thompson’s edict. If this is true, one wonders why the BBC did not insist on renegotiating contracts in keeping with the new mood of austerity. No defence, however feeble, can be mounted in the case of a fourth senior executive, programmes general manager Daniel Danker, as he was recruited in 2010 when the bonus ban was already in force. Nonetheless, he pocketed a £40,000 bonus last year, taking his pay package to almost £213,000.
I am no defender of bankers and their bonuses, but perhaps it is time - once again - to look at your own particular glass house before you start chucking stones at somebody else's. But then hypocrisy starts and ends with the BBC, doesn't it? Next...

2) PYJAMAS - A dole office in Dublin has banned claimants from turning up in pyjamas. In what circumstances is it acceptable to wear your pyjamas outside the home? : Is there no real news again today then? Is it so bad that you have go abroad for anything to talk about? I wonder how BBC News 24 fill their air time. As somebody who does not wear pyjamas, perhaps the question for me - and many others - should be: In what circumstances is it acceptable to wear nothing at all outside the home? Just a thought. Perhaps I should buy some just so I can wear them outside my home. Or perhaps not. Next...

3) BRAIN TUMOUR - We hear from a twelve year old who's recovered from a brain tumour and written an open letter to other children with cancer and their parents about how to deal with the illness. Find out more in this article from the Telegraph : Good for him, and what a beautifully written letter. He and his parents should be very proud, and I wish them all well. I only hope that my letter to the BBC Trust turns out that well. Unfortunately, the Radcliffe & Maconie show starts on 6 Music at 1pm, and I promised them I would listen. You know how it is. Next...

4) LOST GENERATION - There's no such thing as a "lost generation". Someone who began his working life in the recession of the early eighties says it was the making of him : Is this the same "someone" as used in item 1? Would you like to speak to "someone" who thinks your programme is pointless, biased, irrelevant drivel? If so, my number appears at the end of this message. I began my working life in 1975 which, if I remember correctly, was not in a recession and I seem to have done OK so far, thank you. You said on Ken's show "This is the time to graduate, this is the time to be 21". So, as a self-employed 50-something year old, how do I do that then?
The Jeremy Vine Show - outraged by bonuses, unless they are ours


Details of the Stephen Hester item were posted on Radio 2's official (as opposed to personal, presumably) Facebook page earlier, and which I have only just noticed. Lots of opinions were expressed as a result, which is what R2 probably wanted, but the most recent one is the one that interests me the most. It quotes an Evening Standard article which I had not seen before and says "And what better person than Jeremy, who has an annual income in excess of £1million per year, to host this debate. You know, just to add some perspective. And like many of Jeremy's stories, it must be true because I read it in the paper, about half way down this article..."

Thursday, 26 January 2012

Today's show 26/01/12

Well, yesterday was a momentous day, thanks to you. I received an email from the BBC Complaints Department telling me that I was now subject to the BBC's "expedited complaints handling process" for two years. Which was nice. Apparently I have submitted "dozens" of complaints (actually only 19 in the last year) and any future complaints will be, basically, ignored unless I can find enough hoops to jump through to make somebody take notice. What does this mean to me? Well, not much really. Not one of my complaints has changed anything, other than being recorded in the mythical being that is the Audience Log. Whooppee. I have been invited to appeal to the BBC Trust about their decision, which I will do with relish. Free speech - alive and well at the BBC, sometimes.

I'll admit that I did briefly consider last night just giving up and stopping my blog, but common sense has prevailed and it WILL continue. I remain comforted by the fact that if you Google "jeremy vine" followed by any subject you have discussed in the last year then my blog appears on usually the first or second pages. That's good enough for me, and good enough to continue. I wonder if the Daily Mail would be interested in my story.

Now, does that invitation you sent me on 17th March ("We'd love to meet you") still stand? With this raising of the stakes, I might just take you up on it. Game on Jeremy!

Meanwhile your programme continues to broadcast poorly-researched ill-informed biased misinformation in the name of "news", and today will probably be no different...

1) ASPIRATION - Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg wants to cut taxes for the poor and increase taxes for the rich. President Obama wants to do the same in America. Is this the politics of envy and class war? We speak to someone who says we all need to be aspirational : Ooohhh... another "someone" telling me what to think. If Clegg wants to cuts taxes for "the poor" (you make them sound like something from a Dickens-era workhouse) then good luck to him, and as somebody who has only a minimal income then it can only benefit me. Is there another "someone" in the studio who earns, say, around £500,000 a year that you could ask about this? Just asking. For a friend. Next...

2) PETER TATCHELL - In his time, the human rights activist Peter Tatchell exposed homosexual bishops, has taken on Robert Mugabe and was beaten up for fighting for gay rights in Russia. Has he now become a national treasure? : You mentioned on Ken's show that Tatchell is famous for "fighting oppression". Have you got any contact details for him as I have some oppression that needs fighting (see above). Do you think he would be interested in helping me? My prediction is that this will just turn into another of your fawning eulogies, and as I am not a fan of Mr Tatchell and what he does, I think I'll give it a miss, thanks. National treasure? Yeah, right. Next...

3) TEENAGERS - Would you let your teenage daughter sleep with her boyfriend under your roof? : I have never been a teenage daughter but I was a teenage son, and this happened to me once, many years ago. I bit of a "discussion" took place with my parents until I mentioned that it was not and never had been my intention for us to share a room. I resolved at the time that I would insist on my parents sleeping in separate rooms should they ever stay with me, but sadly that opportunity has never arisen. Anyway, I am 30-odd years away from being a teenager, and we have none of our own, so this item - as usual - has no relevance to me. Next...

4) REJECTED HONOURS - They’ve finally published the long list of people who have turned down a gong. If you were offered, would you decline a CBE, MBE or knighthood? : The Lunch Time Loather MBE. Sir Lunch Time Loather. Sounds good, doesn't it? Yeah, I'd be happy with either of those. Just one thing, who is the mysterious "They"? Is this a group of "someones" and "somebodys"? Or is it that just the font of all quality research, Wikipedia? ( Good, isn't it? Try looking up oil-fired central heating one day.

The Jeremy Vine Show - tell us what you think, unless you've been banned, of course

UPDATE: Surprise, surprise. The "teenagers" story was nicked from the Daily Mail:

Wednesday, 25 January 2012

Complaints - I've been banned! (UPDATED 26/01)

I take issue with "dozens"....

We have been considering the dozens of complaints you have submitted over the last 17 months regarding the Jeremy Vine show, to the central BBC Complaints unit, the Jeremy Vine show and BBC Radio 2 directly.

Looking at your correspondence, most are about why you disagree with a particular topic covered by the Jeremy Vine show, allegations of bias by Jeremy Vine, the Jeremy Vine show website and Jeremy Vine’s Twitter page.

However, we have explained on countless occasions, why the programme choses to cover the topics it does, that the programme holds the right to publish website content at a time convenient to it, and the BBC’s view on staff use of social media websites such as Twitter.

In our view, this correspondence therefore now represents a disproportionate use of BBC staff time and consequently of our increasingly limited licence fee resources.

In accordance with the BBC's framework for handling complaints, we must inform you that the BBC’s expedited complaints handling procedure will now be applied to any complaints you make which relate to the Jeremy Vine show.

For the period of two years from the receipt of this email, we will continue to read any complaints you submit, whether directly to production teams or via the central BBC Complaints unit, but they will not be investigated unless "they appear to raise a substantive issue or disclose a serious prima facie case of a breach of the Editorial Guidelines where there is a significant prospect that the complaint might be upheld". Full details of the procedure can be found here:

Should you wish, you may write to the BBC Trust within 20 working days to request an appeal against this decision. Their address is as follows:

BBC Trust Unit
180 Great Portland Street

Yours sincerely

Lxx Rxxxxx,
Complaints Manager
BBC Complaints

UPDATE 26/01/12:

I had a long think about all of this last night. This was mainly about whether I should just put up with the rubbish that the BBC attempt to broadcast to me every day and, consequently, whether I should continue with this blog. This is the first time I have felt this way about it.

I thank those who have commented with their support and so after due consideration and with the support of my wonderful wife this blog and everything associated with it WILL continue.

So bring it on BBC! I will be writing to the BBC Trust (the BBC policing the BBC, don't you just love it?) and I have asked for clarification of their accusation that I have sent "dozens" of complaints (see below). According to my records I have sent the following complaints in the last 12 months, and I am not aware that the frequency was any greater in the previous 5 months:

07/01 Slagged off ITV, EastEnders cot death not discussed
28/01 How to steal central heating oil
02/03 No coverage of Welsh referendum
03/03 Show web page incorrect
03/03 Murdoch bias
14/03 "Should have got an expert" to talk about Fukushima
15/03 "Someone got upset" after JV gave incorrect Fukushima information
16/03 Interview with Jeremy Brown MP
17/03 Bullying video removed from YouTube
21/06 2Day - 'nuff said
03/08 Late updates to web page
26/09 JV's use of Twitter
29/09 McGuiness "admit how many killed"
30/09 Removal of newspaper links from web page
11/10 Eulogising of Apple and Steve Jobs
13/12 Late updates to web page
04/01 Blocking Twitter users
19/01 Too much coverage of Costa Concordia
19/01 Policeman/cyclist altercation

19 in all. Hardly "dozens", is it?

All of these can be read in full by going to

Response sent to BBC Complaints Department ... but will I get a reply?:

Thank you for your email informing me that I am now subject to the BBC's expedited complaints handling procedure in connection with my complaints about Radio 2's Jeremy Vine Show.
I am puzzled by your use of the word "dozens" to describe the number of complaints I have submitted "over the last 17 months". I only have full records for the last 12 months and would like some clarification of how the number has been calculated to be "dozens". So that I fully understand the situation, I would be grateful for answers to the following questions prior to my appeal to the BBC Trust:
 - When I chose to respond to a reply from yourselves as I was "Unhappy with the response received", was each occurrence treated as a new complaint?
 - Are Freedom of Information requests included in my complaint count?
 - Have all of my daily emails sent to the JV Show email address with a subject of "Today's show dd/mm/yy" been treated as complaints?
 - Have any of my daily emails sent to the JV Show email address with a subject of "Today's show dd/mm/yy" been treated as complaints?
 - Have any emails sent to been treated as complaints?
 - Have any tweets sent to @theJeremyVine or @BBCRadio2 been treated as complaints?
 - Will I receive a reply to the email that I sent to the Editorial Complaints Unit on 21st January?
A simple "Yes" or "No" answer to each question will suffice.
Thank you.

Today's show 25/01/12

I'm busy today, and to offer some relief from yesterday's diatribe, let's just have a quick one today...

Good to see on your Twitter feed that you are aware of the Leveson Inquiry and today's appearance of the NOTW journalist known as the Fake Sheikh: Instead of reporter Mazher Mahmood appearing off-camera at #Leveson, what about if everyone at the hearing had to dress as a sheikh. How we laughed. Good to see too that your "Murdoch Empire Only" filter is in full working order as you conveniently ignore evidence given by the Daily Mail, Daily Mirror and our very own BBC. Well done. Your masters will be proud of you.
But you won't be discussing that today, will you...
1) GROWTH FIGURES - With growth in the UK down by 0.2%, we talk to someone that says zero growth is no bad thing – it’s time we got used to it and embraced it : It was, of course, Gordon The Great who said "No more boom and bust". Well, he was half correct, I suppose. Do I need another mysterious "someone" telling me what to think? No, I don't think I do, thanks. Next...

2) PARENTS WALKING OUT - One in five parents who walk out on their families end up never seeing their children again. Do you remember the day your dad walked out, never to be seen again? : No, sorry, I don't remember that, because he didn't. Next...

3) SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE - Alex Salmond starts the consultation period on the Scottish referendum. Today we have a special programme on the big questions that will affect Scottish independence: What will happen to the pound, the Queen, the debt, the BBC, passports and the army? : As a resident of Wales, I hope you will understand how little interest this holds for me. Next...

4) NORTHERN LIGHTS - Have you ever seen the wonder that is the Northern Lights? Apparently this week it’s even been visible from northern England : Apparently? Haven't you checked? They may have appeared in Northern England, but not here in North Wales. "Is it Aurora Borealis?", you asked on Ken's show. Prior research never has been your strong point, has it?
Some days you make this really difficult, and today was one of those days, only alleviated by the forthcoming cut-and-thrust of PMQs...
The Jeremy Vine Show - No Costa Concordia today, for some reason

Tuesday, 24 January 2012

Today's show 24/01/12

14,000 and counting...

We live in interesting times, and while you were away I had an email from the BBC Complaints Department. It was in response to my complaint that you had spent too much time covering the Costa Concordia capsize, and in it they referred to me as a "viewer" and to your programme as "television output", so the message has to be taken with a certain amount of sceptisim. However, they did tell me: Factors such as how much national interest there is in the subject matter, whether it is news that has just come in and needs immediate coverage, and how unusual the story is will all play a part in deciding the level of coverage in programmes like Jeremy Vine.

So, how about discussing a story today that IS in the National Interest, needs immediate coverage and is unusual? I am, of course, referring to BBC Director General Mark Thompson's appearance at the Leveson Inquiry yesterday. I have found two reports that I can link to (
 and The BBC page includes a short video in which Mr Thompson shows his inability to string a coherent sentence together...
The thinking was, errr, we, we, I, I took the decision to, ummm, with colleagues, erm, erm, and, errr, erm, after discussions with the, with the Chairman of the BBC Trust to, to do a review, ummm, because the BBC is, is the biggest journalastic organisation in this country, ummm, ummm, evidence had come to light, errr, of, ummm, this practice being used by other, ummm, errr, organisations, at least one other organisation, or individuals in that other organisation, and it, it seemed to me that, erm, that as part of the BBC's overall desire to assure the highest possible standards of its journalism it's appropriate to ask the question, errr, errr, errr, errr, is there any evidence, errr, errr, errr, that that, what, what, what we are told, errr, was happening at the News of The World has ever been done at the BBC.

Give that man a pay rise! Don't you love the way he went from "other organisations" to "at least one other organisation" and then to "individuals in that other organisation"? Make your mind up and get your facts right man!

Perhaps the BBC should get a new motto. How about "Nation, errr, shall speak, ummm, errr, peace, errr, unto, ummm, nation"?

While the BBC is under attack from all sides for all sorts of reasons, would you agree that this response hardly instills confidence in us - the TV Licence Poll Tax payers - that Thompson is worth every penny of his £675,000 salary (
) and the Best Man For The Job is in charge? No. of course you don't.

From the BBC news page:
The inquiry heard that between January 2005 and July 2011, the BBC spent £310,000 on 232 instances when private investigators were used - of which news accounted for 43 occasions, at a cost of £174,500, with the rest for TV programmes.

£310,000 of your listeners' money!?!?! Outrageous! Would you agree that this was, perhaps, a waste of money? No, of course you don't.

He (Thompson) added: "The BBC is not a business and it might well be that someone running a media business might take a different view from the view that I took as director general of the BBC.".

Not a business? Yeah, right.

Thompson said: "The BBC is a public service broadcaster. It is committed to be the most trusted, trustworthy source of news in the world and we want to maintain the highest possible standards in all matters, including matters relating to privacy."

Is this the same BBC that I listen to and watch every day? Or am I living in a parallel universe? The BBC promotes its own agenda and so is not a public service broadcaster. There is a big difference between committing to be the most trusted and actually meeting that commitment. The BBC is now squeezing the last bits of life out of a crumbling reputation earned many years ago. Would you agree with that? No, of course you don't.

Who cares what "the world" thinks? They don't pay for the BBC - we do! Millions of families throughout this land are compelled by law to pay a licence fee so that this buffoon and his cronies can receive millions of pounds a year to brainwash the population into believing their biased propaganda broadcast in the name of "news". Would you agree with that? No, of course you don't.

And what was that about privacy? That will be the same privacy that prevents me - a funder of the BBC - finding out how much your trips to India and Iceland cost, how many complaints were made about your programme, and how many other users you have blocked on Twitter. Pah!

National Interest: Check. Just come in: Check. Needs immediate coverage: Check. Unusual: Check.

And while this is going on, it has been revealed ( by the BBC's own FOI Department that the BBC itself authorised the wording used in 3 million letters sent out last year to innocent citizens who happened to live at an address where no TV licence was registered. The wording used was "We want to ensure you have the information you may need before a hearing is set at your local court". Threaten them ... yeah, that'll work. Guilty until proved innocent!

National Interest: Check. Just come in: Check. Needs immediate coverage: Check. Unusual: Check.

So come on Jeremy, they tick all the boxes! It is time to ignore your "BBC Can Do No Wrong" rule and discuss these stories today. I'll listen!

Today's issue that affects me: Why should I renew my TV Licence? No, really, why should I? I wouldn't bother with writing to you every day if I was not paying for this rubbish!

And, as usual, you never fail to disappoint me...

1) DRUG MULES - Drugs smugglers will get lighter sentences if they've been exploited by others. We talk to someone who was jailed for being a drugs mule : Now, let me think ... no, I've never done this. You mentioned that you have "a woman" coming on the show to talk of her exploits. Perhaps she should just have said "No". Next...

2) BENEFITS ROW - A row has blown up over whether families on benefit are declared homeless if two older children have to share a bedroom. We look at the pros and cons of children sharing a room : Now, let me think ... no, I've never done this. And who voted for those Bishops in the House of Lords? And why do they have so much to say about benfits, yet remain strangely silent when something sordid and/or corrupt concerning the Church comes to light? Next...

3) MISSED DIAGNOSIS - A woman says she has been given eighteen months to live after doctors failed to diagnose her cancer on thirteen occasions. Find out more from Mail Online: All hail the Daily Mail! I have been the subject of a misdiagnosis but it was quickly identified and the correct treatment given. I went on to make a full recovery. I think you should use your celebrity status to promote this poor lady's campaign and I look forward to seeing this on her web site (
) later. Go on Jeremy, just for once, MAKE A DIFFERENCE! Next...

4) COSTA CONCORDIA SURVIVOR - We speak (TO) Rose Metcalf, one of the British survivors of the Costa Concordia cruise ship disaster in Italy. Watch Rose talking to BBC Breakfast : Yay! The Costa Concordia appears for a FIFTH day. My valued blog reader Will will be pleased after a prediction that you would do five days on this story. With this amount of coverage, do you consider your Target Audience to be likely to partake of a cruise? If so, no wonder I find nothing of interest on your programme.

The Jeremy Vine Show - news, errr, ummm, views, erm, errr, and, and, errrr, live, ummm, guests

Monday, 23 January 2012

Today's show 23/01/12

Hi Paddy,

Today's issue that affects me: In a recent email from the BBC Complaints Programme referring to your programme I was told that "not every viewer" feels that you get your story selection right every time and that "We try to provide a wide range of programmes across our television output that will be of interest to every section of our audience". Viewer? Television? Is JV on TV?

I know that Mondays are always difficult to fill with news that is in the national interest, has just come in and needs immediate coverage or is unusual so allow me to help you out today...
Norwich men’s clothing shop ... causes a stir with mannequin’s toilet humour
The Philip Browne menswear shop, in Guildhall Hill, Norwich, features a wooden mannequin posed as a man urinating on a wall and spelling out the word ‘sale’.
Lowestoft landlady pleads guilty to letting people smoke in pub
A Lowestoft landlady has been fined after health and safety officers caught a person smoking inside her pub.

Does this mean that if I go and smoke in a BT phone box (which is against the law) the CEO of British Telecom could be prosecuted? Now there's an idea....

How about this one local to me?
Welsh motorists in parking ticket language protest
Two Welsh motorists are refusing to pay parking fines because the tickets issued by a private contractor were written only in English.

Feel free to use any of those with my blessing. Or just hang on to them for 6 months or more and report them as "news" later this year. You know, just like Jeremy did with the cyclist story last week...!

So, what have we got today...

1) BENEFIT CAP - The government wants to restrict the amount which people on benefits can claim. Employment minister Chris Grayling says if poor people are living in affluent areas, they need to “move to part of town they can afford.” : Unfortunately, I do not qualify for any state-funded benefits. I only wish I did, so how about discussing how people like me can join the benefits system? I'd listen to that. Next...

2) DOG ATTACKS - A 6 year old girl in Essex was attacked by a Staffordshire terrier. What should you do if a vicious dog attacks you? : Horrible. Prosecute the owner? Listen to The Jeremy Vine Show? Or grab its top lip, as you suggested on Ken's show? At least two of those sound unpleasant. Next...

3) GENDER NEUTRALITY - A couple from Cambridgeshire are bringing up their 5 year old child Sasha to be gender-neutral. They say it’s better for him to decide when he’s grown up what gender he wants to be. Find out more in this article from the Telegraph : It is still a free country, I am told, and I am sure that this couple will have strong views about you dragging their private business on to your programme for judgement by you and your listeners. I have no opinion, or interest. Next...

4) RUBBISH TIP - We discuss the street in Brierley Hill which is dominated by a rubbish tip. Do you live near a dump? : My nearest council-run Refuse and Recycling Centre (I am sure that that is the title that Gwynedd Council would prefer, rather than "dump") is a small operation about 5 miles away, so my answer to your question is "No".
Oh well, you tried.
The Jeremy Vine Show - restricted benefits, every day

UPDATE: Concerning the gender neutral item, my wife tells me that this couple have been appeared all over the media, and Will has mentioned in a comment that one of the parents spoke to O'Connell on air today. Perhaps they've got a book out too.

Complaint response 17/01/12

Reference CAS-1254113-H3ZJT9

Thanks for contacting us about ‘Jeremy Vine’ on BBC Radio 2.

I understand you objected to an item about a cyclist with a helmet camera being cautioned by a police officer being one of the discussion topics on 17 January as you felt it to have been too old a story to be seen as news. I note you also believe it to have been poorly researched.

Jeremy described the video as a “the latest Youtube sensation”, and it certainly has been picked up by many newspapers and media outlets in the last week or so, despite the video having been available on Youtube for a number of months, it has only recently gone “viral” and been covered by the media. Therefore we feel it entirely justified to cover it and use it as a discussion topic to look at police cautions and whether or not it’s appropriate to argue the law with officers, as this cyclist did in the video.

We’re sorry if you felt the item was misleading by not mentioning the date of the video; this wasn’t our intention but we don’t believe the date of the video is particularly relevant to the discussion that followed – the talking points under discussion were not time sensitive. We’d also disagree with your view that the item was poorly researched

We appreciate that not every listener will agree with the choices we make as regards what to talk about in any broadcast of ‘Jeremy Vine’; in the end it’s selective and subjective, but we do thank you for your feedback.

Please be assured your complaint will be added to our audience log, a daily report of audience feedback that's made available to many BBC staff, including members of the BBC Executive Board, channel controllers and other senior managers.

The audience logs are seen as important documents that can help shape decisions about future programming and content.

Thanks again for taking the time to contact us.

Kind Regards

Axxxxx Hxxxxx
BBC Complaints

Response sent 23/01/12:

Many thanks for your response.

You state that the video had "been picked up by many newspapers and media outlets in the last week or so" and "it has only recently gone “viral” and been covered by the media". I understand this to mean that the video's belated surge in popularity following coverage on a media bandwagon including the Daily Telegraph, Daily Mail and others was the sole reason for it to become "news", rather than its content. Is that correct?

If my understanding is correct, I am left puzzled. In other correspondence with yourselves (ref. CAS-1254170-QBRMQX) I was told "Factors such as how much national interest there is in the subject matter, whether it is news that has just come in and needs immediate coverage, and how unusual the story is will all play a part in deciding the level of coverage in programmes like Jeremy Vine.". I take this to mean that these factors are applied to ALL stories featured on Mr Vine's programme.
A search for "PC Stout" on the internet reveals many written discussions on this subject on forums associated with both cyclists (example: dated 6th April 2011) and policing (example: dated 2nd April 2011) so I consider it safe to assume that those people who live in this nation with an interest in such matters were probably already aware of this incident many months ago. The news had only "just come in" because the newspapers had finally discovered this story, even though it was several months old. I note that the Daily Mail as part of a quote mentions a date of June 2011 in their article ( so they at least saw fit to make the story's age clear.

I note your disagreement with my assertion that the item was poorly researched. I have just listened to the item again in which Mr Vine was joined by expert commentators Julian Young and Graham Taylor. Both of these experts had to advise Mr Vine on the legalities of being stopped in this kind of situation. Example: Mr Vine said, "You don't caution somebody when you are having a chat with them". Whether there is an implied question mark on the end of this statement or not, it shows that Mr Vine had not researched what should have happened. Mr Young explained the procedure, but Mr Vine chose not to believe him and asked "Is that right Graham Taylor?", suggesting that he disbelieved Mr Young's explanation. I consider that Mr Vine should have researched before the broadcast the procedure that PC Stout should have used, instead of which he chose to question the knowledge of (and potentially embarrass) an invited expert.
I would appreciate your further comments and clarifications.

Saturday, 21 January 2012

Twitter ... again!

I received the following email yesterday (my highlight):

Reference CAS-1235418-P7GXXX

Thanks for contacting us.

We're sorry you were unhappy with our previous response and note you remain unhappy at being blocked from Jeremy Vine's Twitter feed. We note you believe Jeremy is breaching BBC guidelines regarding use of social networking sites.

We disagree with his view that Jeremy Vine’s Twitter account isn't a personal one. The BBC has no rule against presenters referring to their personal Twitter accounts on air or on a BBC website. We're confident that Jeremy Vine adheres to the BBC’s guidelines about personal Twitter account usage.

However, if you believe a serious and specific breach of the BBC's Editorial Guidelines has occurred and you wish to pursue this complaint further, you can contact the BBC's Editorial Complaints Unit, within 20 working days, and they will carry out an independent investigation. You can write to them at the following address:

Editorial Complaints Unit
Room 5170
White City
201 Wood Lane
London W12 7TS

Alternatively you can e-mail the Unit at the address:, but please note that complaints submitted via e-mail must include a postal address as ECU findings are sent by letter.

Thanks again for taking the time to contact us.

Kind Regards

Lxxxxx Bxxxxxx
BBC Complaints

His? Who is "his"?

Never being one to miss an invitation, my email to the Editorial Complaints Unit goes like this. The <Duplicated text removed> messages have already been posted here:

I have been in correspondence with the BBC Complaints Department for the past few weeks concerning the use of Twitter by Radio 2 broadcaster Jeremy Vine. Two case reference numbers have been issued to me: CAS-1235418-P7G2F1 and CAS-1226295-676LCP.

The Complaints Department have suggested that I contact yourselves, and hence this email.

For completeness, the exchange of messages is as follows:

Sent 4th January:
<Duplicated text removed>

Received 9th January:
<Duplicated text removed>

Sent 9th January:
<Duplicated text removed>

Received 20th January:
<Duplicated text removed>
I hope you will understand my frustration with the BBC Complaints Department, as they continually seem to be responding to only part of my messages to them. Their use of "We disagree with his view..." in the 20th January message presumably refers to myself ("his" = me) and is perhaps an example of the pitfalls of cut-and-paste.

My complaints have not been addressed to my satisfaction and so they still stand. To clarify:

 - Mr Vine clearly states at the top of his Twitter page "All views personal of course." yet promotes and discusses the content of his Radio 2 programme. I find his "All views personal" and "This is what is on my Radio 2 programme, see you at noon" and complete with photographs of his programme script to be an unintelligible dichotomy.

 - Mr Vine has chosen to block other Twitter users from following his feed for reasons only known to himself. I have not been able to find any guidance or instruction about blocking, and the situations under which it may occur, in the two BBC documents I have referred to earlier.

 - In blocking other Twitter users, Mr Vine has removed their ability to comment on his programme with the ease that Twitter provides. Sending emails can be far more cumbersome.

 - The distinction between a "personal" Twitter account and one that actively promotes and encourages discussion on a BBC programme is blurred and needs to be redefined, in my view.

While considering my complaint I would also ask you to consider that Mr Vine has a "personal" BBC email address ( but this email address is never mentioned in connection with his programme. I only know of its existence because he has sent emails to me in the past. A different email address ( is used for his radio programme and promoted on his show web page to which any message, whether in praise, criticism or just as part of an ongoing discussion may be sent. Mr Vine is always saying "tell us what you think".

I consider that Mr Vine's "personal" Twitter feed falls in to the exact same category as the show email address. It is heavily promoted in connection with the programme both on air and on the show web page and in the same way as the show email address. In my mind there is no difference (other than technical) between these two methods of communicating with a radio programme that relies on audience feedback and participation for a huge proportion of its content.
I consider the blocking of any other Twitter user from following Mr Vine's feed, especially when unexplained, to be unacceptable. I would appreciate your comments and look forward to hearing from you soon.

Thank you.

Friday, 20 January 2012

Complaint response 19/01/12

If proof were ever need that the BBC Complaints Department haven't got a clue what they are talking about, here it is. This email sent at 22:14 on 20th January, text highlights are mine:

Reference CAS-1254170-QBRXXX

Thank you for contacting us regarding the BBC Radio 2 programme ‘Jeremy Vine’ on 19 January.

I understand you’re unhappy because you feel there has been too much coverage of the Costa Concordia cruise vessel accident. In addition you feel that events such as the Leveson Inquiry have been ignored which you feel are more relevant to listeners.

Choosing the stories to include in our programmes; the order in which they appear and the length of time devoted to them is a subjective matter and one which we know not every viewer will feel we get right every time.

Factors such as how much national interest there is in the subject matter whether it is news that has just come in and needs immediate coverage, and how unusual the story is will all play a part in deciding the level of coverage in programmes like Jeremy Vine.

We try to provide a wide range of programmes across our television output that will be of interest to every section of our audience. However, there will inevitably be times, hopefully rare, when what's on offer doesn't meet your own particular interests and I'm sorry that you have been disappointed with this programme.

As I recognise you feel strongly about this issue, I'd also like to assure you that I've registered your complaint on our Audience Log. This is a daily report of audience feedback that’s made available to all BBC staff, including members of the BBC Executive board, channel controllers and other senior managers. The Audience Logs are seen as important documents that can help shape decisions on future BBC programmes and content.
Once again, thank you for contacting us.

Kind Regards
Axxx Sxxxxxx
BBC Complaints

Today's show 20/01/12

Hi Paddy ... welcome back to the smelly armpit of Radio 2. Jeremy always claims to discuss the "issues that affect you", meaning me, so here is mine for today:

Today's issue that affects me: It looks like our mouse, or mice, is/are still around. The cats are on patrol and a humane trap has been set. What else can we do?

Of course, and like Jeremy, you will not be discussing the issue that affects me but you will instead fill two hours with some old tosh about something or other. Let's see what we have today then...

Except I can't because at 11:55 the web page has not been updated.
12:10, and still somebody there is not doing their job, but today's programme goes something like this...

1) SOMETHING ABOUT HOW PHONE HACKING VICTIMS SHOULD USE THEIR COMPENSATION MONEY : Is whatever your listeners decide today binding on the "celebrities" concerned? I thought not. You ask, "They've got thousands of pounds in 'compo', what should they do with it?". Why don't you get Prescott on the phone and ask him? Can I suggest that it is their business, and not yours, or mine? Jeremy earns over £500000 a year, so perhaps you should discuss what he does with that - I'd listen! This is all just pointless tittle tattle, although it gives you as a BBC servant another opportunity to follow the corporate mandate and attack Murdoch again. And here we go, at 12:06 you started the item with "Rupert Murdoch's empire ...". Click - I need listen no more. Really, can't you do any better than this? Next...

2) SOMETHING ABOUT TEENAGERS STARTING THEIR OWN BUSINESS : As I am not a teenager, I have no children and I already have my own business, I don't think I qualify for this discussion. Next...

3) SOMETHING ABOUT POISONING YOUR BOSS : I am a self-employed sole trader. I am my own boss and I have no employees. Surprisingly, I have never hated myself enough to do myself in. Next...

4) SOMETHING ABOUT OLD PHOTOGRAPHS AND KODAK : Photos on the radio ... brilliant! I have very few printed photos, and if I look across the room from where I type this I can see ... yes, there it is ... the one packet of prints that I have. However, I have many thousands of colour slides, and about half of those used Kodachrome 64. They are stored in boxes and, if I stretch, I can touch them from here. So, what was your point again?

Is there no real news today then? I think there is, and you could have discussed this:
Defiant BBC refuses to apologise for 'tasteless' Top Gear India special that sparked a diplomatic row and complaints across the globe

Huge bonuses, grotesque expenses and spendthrift bosses- so much for austerity at the BBC
Last May, the incoming chairman of the BBC Trust, Lord Patten, said he would ensure that senior managers did not receive bonuses or perks.  He had rightly described management pay at the Corporation as a ‘toxic issue’.
How, then, can we make sense of the revelation that last year the BBC paid bonuses amounting to £275,000 to four senior managers? One of them — Chris Kane, head of corporate real estate at the BBC — received a top-up of £155,000 in addition to his salary of £206,000.

The Jeremy Vine Show - still not talking about the BBC

13:45 and this lot has finally appeared...

NEWS INTERNATIONAL DAMAGES - Dozens of celebrities who are victims of phone hacking have been awarded thousands of pounds in damages by News International. What should they do with that money – keep it themselves because of the pain they suffered, give it to charity or put it towards the cost of the enquiry?

REVENGE - A man who took revenge on his boss by pouring toilet water into his drink has received a suspended sentence. What drives people to take revenge on their employer? Find out more in this article from the Mirror.

YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT - There are over a million young people unemployed. We hear from one of them who says he’s so demoralised, he finds it difficult to get out of bed until 3 in the afternoon. We talk to another who says if you can’t find a job, set up your own business.

KODAK - Kodak has filed for bankruptcy protection. Do you have a box of old discarded photographs hidden away in the back of a cupboard in the attic? We want you to go back and look at them and pull out the best.

Thursday, 19 January 2012

Today's show 19/01/12

There were some interesting comments from my valued contributors on my blog yesterday, and in particular about your Wikipedia discussion and your question as to whether a knowledge database that is not 100% accurate is worth having at all. Will summed it up nicely: Under JV's argument of better being without something that is inaccurate then his show and he should be axed straight away. A fair point, don't you think?

Stonyground also did some more digging on the cyclist/copper video and found that it was originally posted last year. There is a copy on YouTube (
) dated 20th June 2011. Frankly I could not care less that the Daily Telegraph did not check their story (as I have never paid them one single penny for what they do) but I consider that the rip-off £145.50 TV Licence Poll Tax does not constitute good value for money when you present something as "news" when it so clearly is not. I would normally put this down to "Poor Research" but in this instance I think it is a case of "No Research". You relied on the Daily Telegraph to provide the fodder for your programme, they got it wrong, and so did you. This is lazy, lazy, lazy reporting. I feel a complaint coming on.

Just to check MY facts (you should try it some time!) I have just listened to your discussion on the iPlayer. Your knowledge of the law is atrocious. I send my congratulations to your two contributors who put you firmly in your place on a number of occasions and for educating you in to what happens in that place you rarely visit: The Real World. However, I remain completely mystified what your callers and emailers contributed to the discussion on this particular incident. So, no change there then. I think I need a shower.

Let's move now to Facebook where the official Radio 2 presence (
) posted this yesterday: It's that time of year when awards are handed out for the best of the last 12 months - so we were wondering what your top Radio 2 highlight of 2011 was? Is there a stand out moment that still sticks with you? It was good to see that several people included your programme in their comments. There were two in praise of what you do (one for Songs My Son Loved, and one for Terry Walton!) but none at all for your run-of-the-mill everyday work. A middle-of-the-road comment was this one:
I find Jeremy Vine's show very entertaining, as for a working class lad, I find listening to a group of middle Englanders/Daily Mail readers whinging and ranting about various issues each lunchtime to be highly amusing. Calm down dear - life isn't that bad after all! :)

And the criticisms included:
 - Jeremy Vine vs Howard Schultz from Starbucks. It was great to see Vine shown up for the conniving ill-informed trickster ("I've got four cups of coffee here, can you tell which one is from Starbucks?") that he is as Schultz verbally slaughtered him and hung him out to dry. Great radio, and my Radio 2 highlight of 2011. Any chance of putting it back on the iPlayer?
 - I think Vine is out of his depth sometimes. Paddy O'Connell is better and so is Matt Bannister although he ruined Radio 1.
 - Vine is out of his depth from the time he says "On today's show..." to the time he says "See you tomorrow". Never has the word "shallow" been more appropriate in so many ways.
 - The Bad-Jeremy Vine,time the guy gave it up. What an embarrassment. NO awards for him yet again. His show is getting unwanted attention from other BBC stations and presenters;-)

Not going well then?

10:20 and I've just refreshed your show web page in the vain hope that today's topics just might be there, and somebody has changed the formatting! There is an old saying: If it ain't broke don't fix it. Have you ever heard that before? Or is this the BBC attempting to give me perceived value for money again? If so, you have not succeeded.

You posted your daily teaser for today's show on Twitter at about 09:00 this morning: Today's show @BBCRadio2 in four words: Violin. Capitalism. Oxford. Falklands. Violin? Hmmm... my wife told me of a sad story involving a violin player and the Costa Concordia last night. Surely, you are not discussing this for the fourth day in a row... surely? I guess we will have to wait and see, but I feel another complaint coming on!

Listening to you on Ken's show, and it looks like I was correct about the violin story...

11:37 and your web page now says "Sorry, the server encountered a problem - Please try again later" and "Error 500 - Internal Error - This might be because: We are experiencing abnormal traffic to our network or the service or servers it is on is not currently available.". More like somebody is fiddling with something they don't understand, I reckon.

11:56 and somebody has managed to beat the IT Department in to submission...

1) REJECTING OXFORD UNIVERSITY - We discuss the girl who turned the table on Oxford University by writing them a rejection letter : I write you a rejection letter every day and tell you why I think your programme is rubbish. Is that news too? If so, perhaps we really should discuss it on air one day. Next...

2) CAPITALISM - David Cameron and Ed Miliband are both talking today about how to make capitalism better. We want your ideas on how to make our economic system work for the good of everyone : It was on 5th January that you asked if capitalism had failed most of us, so a change of tack here. As somebody who runs his own business I am quite happy with the current arrangements, thank you, although I find some irony in that The State are advising on the best way of running the non-State-Controlled free market economy. Next...

FALKLANDS - Are you somebody who was traumatised by fighting in the Falkland’s War who now thinks: “You know what, that war wasn’t worth fighting”? : No, I am not. Next...

4) RISKING LIFE FOR AN INSTRUMENT - One of the victims who died on the Costa Concordia was a violinist who just had to go back for his violin. What makes someone risk their life for their instrument? : Not being a musician, I have no idea. I can't believe you are discussing the Costa Concordia for a fourth day - see complaint below. While his death was tragic, how is his death more tragic or important than anybody else who died? I take it you will be telling us the background stories for all of those that died so we can rank them accordingly. Or not.

The Jeremy Vine Show - we are obsessed

Complaint number one:

Mr Vine discussed a confrontation between a cyclist and a policeman following an alleged traffic offence. The show's web page included a link to a page on the Daily Telegraph web site ( that included a video made of the confrontation by the cyclist.

The video was later removed from the Daily Telegraph page following the broadcast of Mr Vine's discussion.

Multiple copies of this video have been available on YouTube ( since at least 20th June 2011, and maybe even earlier.

Mr Vine's programme is described as "news, views and live guests" yet I consider that this item, bearing in mind its age, does not represent news at all.

My complaints are: (1) No research in to this story was made before broadcast and that the story was simply copied from the Daily Telegraph (who failed to give a date for the occurrence) and accepted as being "current". (2) The date of the incident and the age of the video were not mentioned during the broadcast, which I consider to be misleading. (3) Other major news stories (Leveson, Labour/UNITE, etc.) were occurring on the same day and were ignored for a trivial story that was 6 months old.

Complaint number two:

While I acknowledge the seriousness and tragedy of the recent capsize of cruise liner Costa Concordia, I feel that Mr Vine has given it too much coverage.

This topic has been discussed on his programme on four days this week (16th to 19th January) and has covered the capsize itself, aspects of the rescue operation, the behaviour of the captain, and the unfortunate death of a violin player. At the same time other major news stories that have occurred, such as the Leveson Enquiry, criticism of the Labour Party by Trade Unions, etc., have been completely ignored by the programme. My complaint is that too much coverage has been given to the Costa Concordia sinking and not enough to other news stories that are more relevant to Radio 2's listeners.

Wednesday, 18 January 2012

Today's show 18/01/12

11:31 and I am listening to you on Ken's show and ... what's this? ... your web page has been updated. Well done! This means that I get this rubbish written before PMQs starts at 12, which I will watch with interest and in preference to your programme.
Talking of this rubbish, you will be interested to know that readership of my blog is growing nicely, with 125 unique visitors yesterday. Total visitors for the month 20th December to 18th January (including the ten days or so when you did not broadcast and I did not write) is 1531. Compare this with, say, the 1061 visitors for the whole of October and it is pretty clear that my readership is growing nicely. Again, I thank my readers for sparing their valuable time each day.
Going back to yesterday's programme... Interesting to see that The Daily Telegraph has removed the cyclist/copper video from their news page, and there has been some suggestions that the tape is not quite as current as they made out and may be up to a year old. But you wouldn't have checked this because you read it in the paper, and they are never wrong....!
So, no Leveson? No Miliband? No new London airport? No news? Apparently not...
1) COSTA CONCORDIA - Have you heard the tape of the Italian captain being told to return to his sinking ship? Do you feel any sympathy for him? We talk to someone who says he’s been made a scapegoat. Find out more in this article from the Telegraph : For the third day running..... Zzzzzzzzz. Have I heard the tape? No. Do I feel sympathy? No. But some poor misguided fool there thinks this will make good radio. And look: you have another mysterious "someone" on the show. Where do you get them from? How can I apply to be a "someone"? I'd love to be one so that I can come on your show and spout irrelevancies in the vain hope that somebody might believe what I am saying. You keep labouring the point that the cruise company appointed the captain and so they should take responsibility for his actions, but that could also relate to your beloved BBC. If (when!) you make a mistake who takes responsibility for your actions? You? Or the BBC? It was, of course, the BBC that appointed you. Next...
2) BIG ISSUE SELLER - A Romanian woman has been told she can receive housing benefit because she sells the Big Issue. Is selling the Big Issue a proper job? Find out more in this article from the Daily Mail : I have no idea, or interest as this story is from the Mail. I've just checked their web site and my nearest outlet for the Big Issue is in Birmingham, which is 120 miles away. Ask me one on capital cities of the world. Next...
3) MASSAGE - We discuss the primary school in Sheffield where children are encouraged to massage each other. The headmaster says it’s great for health and relaxation, but the parents don’t like it : No children, not a parent, don't live in Sheffield, don't need to listen. Next...
4) WIKIPEDIA - The owners of Wikipedia have shut it down for the day to protest against proposed anti-piracy laws in America that they claim will restrict its use. Are you someone whose life has been changed by Wikipedia? : No, my life has not been changed, but I do find it a useful tool. You asked on Ken's show "Are we too reliant on Wikipedia?". Perhaps you should use it more, because then you might have known that a Spitfire has only one seat and that the Germans did not have jets until the closing months of WW2. Just a thought. However, I can't help but think that today would be a good day to go to a pub quiz.
The Jeremy Vine Show - we don't do real news