Today's show 03/02/12

I got the date correct today. I should become a journalist.

Just a quick one due to pressure of work...

The BBC hits the news again...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9055183/BBC-admits-receiving-millions-in-grants-from-EU-and-councils.html

BBC admits receiving millions in grants from EU and councils

The news prompted MPs to raise questions about the BBC’s impartiality when its journalists report on events in the EU.
The BBC admitted in a letter to a Tory MP that it has received nearly £3million in grant money from the European Union over the past four years.

Perhaps this explains why the BBC completely missed the point - and public opinion - when Cameron did his veto thing in December, maybe?

And there was a load of fuss yesterday on the BBC about the head of the Student Loan Company (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16854187) after he was paid through a private firm, yet this is exactly what the BBC did for John Birt:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bbc-helps-its-chief-to-avoid-tax-exclusive-birts-salary-paid-to-his-private-company-1475816.html

BBC helps its chief to avoid tax: Exclusive: Birt's salary paid to his private company

JOHN BIRT, the new Director-General of the BBC, has avoided tax by being paid as a freelance consultant - despite being a full-time employee of the Corporation. Instead of paying tax on his BBC salary, he has been taxed on whatever he chooses to pay himself from his private company.

So, one rule for BBC employees and one rule for everybody else then? Nice one.

On to today's trivia then but your web page (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01b98y7) has details of the Reverend Alan Sorensen's "Pause For Thought" displayed for some reason, but I can always use the script you so kindly posted on Twitter earlier (http://p.twimg.com/AkuY1rUCEAA-r9a.jpg) instead...

1) PRINCE WILLIAM - The Argentinians say sending William to the Falklands is a "deliberately provacative act" : He works for the RAF and so he does as he is told, and I think it unlikely that you will be able to reverse this decision. Is there any chance, do you think, that our beloved news media is making more of this than they should? Just asking. Next...

2) CHRIS HUHNE - Chris Huhne and his wife will be charged over the speeding offence and the penalty points. He's resigned, but why should he - he's not yet been found guilty? : Did you miss his appearance on TV earlier? He said that he was standing down from his cabinet position so he could devote his time to defending himself. His decision, and accepted by Clegg and Cameron. I'm still waiting for Miliband Minor to pop-up on TV or radio to say "the government are going too far, too fast" which, in Huhne's case, was probably true. And I love this piece by James Delingpole: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100134689/huhne-youd-need-a-heart-of-stone-not-to-laugh/. Go on, enlighten me, what is there to discuss? Next...

3) MARTIN LEWIS - Martin Lewis introduces CANCELLATION DAY! Which magazine, insurance, phone, gym, satellite contract are you going to cancel today? : Now, let me think. I get one magazine a month, so I'll keep that. We only have the insurance we need. We have a landline phone which costs little to run thanks to Martin's advice, and my mobile is pay-as-you-go. I do not belong to a gym. And why would I want to cancel my satellite contract when Sky (aka the hated-by-the-BBC Murdoch Empire) provide me with televisual delights every day. I know ... I'll cancel my BBC TV Licence Poll Tax. Martin's advice would be very much appreciated on that one, so please discuss it. Cheers! Next...

 

4) TOP TOTTY - Why did a Labour MP object to a beer called TOP TOTTY being sold in a bar in Parliament? : Sense of humour by-pass, maybe? I am sure that Slater's Brewery will be grateful for the publicity, and good luck to them. Bearing in mind Mr Huhne's situation today, perhaps this brew would be more appropriate...

 

The Jeremy Vine Show - immune from Cancellation Day, whether you like it or not

Today's show 02/02/12

Mmmmm... bacon and mushroom sandwich... yummy!

Good morning Jeremy, and a warm "hello" from my current location: The BBC Naughty Step. Now, I've seen Naughty Steps in TV programmes and, if I remember correctly, a child has to sit on them for one minute for every of their age. Have I got that right? The BBC apparently has a more draconian view of such things as I have been put on the Naughty Step for, roughly, two weeks for every year of my life. Now there, surely, is a subject for discussion one day? But not today, apparently...

09:10: Today's stories @BBCRadio2 in four words: Terror. Twitter*. Fashanu. Soldiers. (*is Twitter better than Facebook?)

Sounds great, and I cannot wait to miss it all later, but I think you need to drop one of your stories for today as I have some important news:

Today's issue that affects me: We had a bit of a frost last night, and I had to scrape the windscreen of my wife's car. There, that should fill 30 minutes easily.

But no, you are not discussing the weather today, apparently...

1) FACEBOOK OR TWITTER? - People are getting a chance to buy shares in Facebook, and we’re also told that social networking sites are more addictive than tobacco. Today we ask, what would you champion – Facebook or Twitter? : Aha! This will be another classic "Daddy or Chips?" discussion (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHA4-5N5AzA) where you attempt to compare two complete disparate entities. What next? How about: What would you champion - expolding glass tables or bonuses for bankers?

Interesting to read that Bono will make a profit of $800million as part of the share sale (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/ireland-business-blog-with-lisa-ocarroll/2011/aug/16/u2-bono-facebook-stake). That should go a long way to sorting out starvation in Africa. Maybe?

I only use Twitter because of you, so thanks for that as I find it fascinating. I have been on Facebook for several years but only in a personal capacity and not as LunchTimeLoather, JVineBlogMan or similar. We all know about your Twitter presence, but how about Facebook? I remember a discussion about it on your programme a couple of years ago and seem to remember that you were not a fan. I've just had a quick search in Facebook for "Jeremy Vine" and, ignoring other people with the same name, this is what it came back with:

Jeremy Vine - 1,023 like this, description copied from Wikipedia : Not sure what this is, is it really you? I am not going to "Like" it to find out. Sorry. 1023 eh? Whooppee.

The Jeremy Vine Appreciation Society - 3 members : No activity since last March. 3 members ... says it all really.
Lets get Jeremy Vine off the Radio! - 36 members : Some good stuff here, but nothing since last August.
Jeremy Vine - What a complete d!ck - 4 members : Good stuff here too, and I particularly liked the CD. Now there's an idea for BBC Sales, yes?
I turn off Radio 2 when Jeremy Vine comes on - 8 members : Closed group, so I cannot see what they are up to.
The King of facial expressions Jeremy Vine - 58 like this : This seems to be a collection of photos of you pulling funny faces that have been posted by somebody who doesn't like Australians. Wierd.
Jeremy Vine's Green-Screen Election Graphics - 57 like this : Only one posting, in May 2010.
Jeremy F*****g VINE - 3 like this : No activity.
The Jeremy-Grape-Vine - 16 like this : Two posts, last from July 2011.
Jeremy Vine's virtual election world - 32 like this : No activity.
Jeremy Vine's ridiculous election coverage simulation scenarios - 14 like this : No activity.
The kangaroo that wants more fans than Jeremy Vine from the BBC - 27 like this : Appears to be run by somebody who thinks you don't like Australians. Any truth?
I Want Jeremy Vines Hologram Room! - 4 like this : No activity other than "He must feel like such a d!ck. Standing in a green room talking about swing."
I wouldn't pay Jeremy Vine to say "Hi, I'm Jeremy Vine" - 9 like this : No activity other than "He may do good things in other programmes but in Panorama, its left to other people to dig deep and investgate this week's scandal". That'll be Points of View, or Eggheads maybe.
Get Jeremy Vine out of the matrix - 4 like this : No activity, other than a picture of you in an election studio.
Jumping in a bowl of soup after a long day of being Jeremy Vine - 4 like this : No activity.

Hardly the greatest Facebook presence for you, I am sure you will agree. As I write this you have 78404 Twitter followers, excluding myself because I am still blocked, so it is safe to assume that you think Twitter IS better than Facebook, and that will be that with no discussion needed. And I cannot believe that you have not heard of Harry Hill's "Fiiiiggghhhhhtttttt.....". Chalk that up as another bit of The Real World that you now know about. Next...

2) BOMB PLOT - Islamists who plotted to blow up the stock exchange have pleaded guilty and will get a much shorter sentence. They could be out in 6 years. But if the intention was to kill hundreds of people, we speak to someone who says the sentence should be similar to if the bomb really had gone off : I find it interesting that you chose to use the word "Islamic" in your description on Ken's show ("an Islamist plot to blow up the London Stock Exchange") and on your web page. This is somewhat different to how your colleagues at the BBC have been describing this. For example, there is no mention of Islam on the BBC news page (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16833032) but Sky News take a different approach in their coverage (http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16160816). Did you not get that email? I need say no more other than to point you to this discussion: http://biased-bbc.blogspot.com/2012/02/half-storyetc.html. Next...

3) JUSTIN FASHANU - Justin Fashanu was the first and, so far, only openly gay footballer. 8 years after coming out, he hanged himself. We speak to his niece. What is it about football that stops gay people from coming out? : Wasn't there something about this on TV last night? While Fashanu's death was tragic (didn't anybody see the signs, ref. Tuesday's programme?), I cannot find words to express how disinterested I am in ANY footballers. Perhaps Stephen Hester should demand that these overpaid clowns return the vast amounts of money they get paid. Fortunately I am not aware of ever giving one single penny to the business that is incorrectly described as "The Game". Next...

4) LOVE LETTERS - We discuss soldiers’ final love letters home from the front line : I am sure that these bring a huge benefit to those people, unlike myself, who have or had somebody in the military.

The Jeremy Vine Show - TV Burp? What's that?

Today's show 01/02/12

It was sometime after 4pm yesterday afternoon that somebody lifted a finger and your show web page was updated. That will be over two hours after your programme finished. What was that about being first with the news? We can only hope that the BBC Director General's chauffeur does not have such poor timekeeping. Can we expect a more timely update today? Not at 11:40 we can't, apparently.

My letter to the BBC Trust is now finished. I do not know who at the BBC reads my blog but I remember you telling me when we last spoke that people there were aware of its existence. For that reason alone I have chosen not to publish the contents of my letter on the blog until the BBC Trust have made their ruling on my appeal. After all, I would not want anybody there who may wish to argue against me to have prior knowledge of what I have to say, would I?

 

12:05, and here we go...

1) FRED GOODWIN'S KNIGHTHOOD - The banker Fred Goodwin is stripped of his knighthood. Some people are saying it’s a victory for the lynch mob : Some people? Who are they? I disagree with your assertion on Ken's show that it is "We, the population" who have demanded the stripping of Goodwin's knighthood. I would suggest that it is actually "You, the media" who have got behind this to satisfy a never-ending bloodlust for such things. If you open the window and listen carefully, you actually hear Fred Goodwin laughing at all of us as he counts his £16.9million pension pot. I am no fan of the man, but he has not committed a crime. Lords Archer, Taylor and Hanningfield and Baroness Uddin have all committed and been to jail for crimes yet remain in the Lords making laws that we have to live under. Media firestorm? Check. Opportunity for Miliband (who was involved in giving the knighthood) to appear on TV/radio? Check. Media hypocrisy? Check. Let's just hope that Strictly Come Dancing doesn't fall out of favour as Brucie had to wait a long time for his honour! You said on Ken's show, "Imagine (being Goodwin and) going in to the newsagent this morning to buy a paper". I'm sorry Jeremy. I can imagine being Fred Goodwin, but I cannot imagine ever going in to a newsagent to buy a paper. Next...

2) READING THOUGHTS - Scientists have discovered how to read the thoughts of patients who are brain damaged. Are you excited or concerned by this breakthrough? : Excited? No. Concerned? No. As usual, I'll go for the Not Really Bothered option, thanks. Why do you have to make these things so polarised? I am sure that the Thought Police will be interested in this development, but unfortunately I am not. Next...

3) NETWORK RAIL - Network Rail have pleaded guilty following the deaths of two girls at a level crossing. Do you have a dangerous level crossing near you? : I might listen to this on the iPlayer later, just to see how you handle it. The two deaths are, of course, absolutely tragic and should never have happened. As for dangerous level crossings, it all depends how you define "dangerous", doesn't it? You will be looking for a crossing where hapless commuters are mown down on a daily basis, but fortunately such a thing does not exist. A Google picture of our nearest one (I think) is attached. Does it look dangerous to you? And yes, that is the sea in the background. The vast majority of level crossing accidents involve road vehicles and are usually the fault of the road vehicle driver. We had a death near here a few years ago (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1210780/Elderly-woman-killed-level-crossing-train-hits-car.html) and it is assumed that the accident occurred only because the driver was complacent and relied on her knowledge of the timetable too much. Crossing a railway line is very much like crossing the road, and looking both ways before doing so can only be a good thing. It is a foolish person who relies entirely on lights when crossing a road, and crossing a railway is not much different. You will, of course, be mentioning that many, many more people are hit and killed by road vehicles in one month than are hit and killed by trains in one year, won't you? You know, just to give some of that ultra-rare ingredient on your programme: Perspective. Next...

4) COLD WEATHER - As very cold weather sweeps over from Siberia, are you somebody who has to work outside in the cold? How do you cope? : With nothing else to talk about, let's discuss the weather. No cold weather here. It is dry and sunny today. We had one morning a couple when I had to scrape frost off the car, but nothing since. I am fortunate that I work indoors with heating if necessary, and take the view that there is no such thing as cold weather, only the wrong clothing.

 

The Jeremy Vine Show - left out in the cold, every day

My appeal letter to the BBC Trust

As I mentioned in today's diatribe, I have been writing to my letter to the BBC Trust today. This letter contains my appeal for me to be removed from the BBC's very own Naughty Step and have my complaints processed in the normal way, rather than just being ignored. Normal processing means that I am thanked for taking the time to comment, my comments are recorded in the mythical Audience Log, and then they are ignored. There is an important difference, I am sure you will agree.

I have said that I will publish this letter here on my blog. I will do that, but not yet. You see, I don't know exactly who from the BBC reads this rubbish, but I have been told by JV himself that people there are aware of it.

My letter contains some good points, I think, and I do not want those who may choose to dispute what I say to have prior knowledge of its contents. For this reason, and this reason alone, I am going to keep it to myself for the moment.

I will publish my letter just as soon as I receive a reply from the BBC Trust, whatever they decide to do.

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:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2091896/BBC-promote-excellence-vulgar-says-Lord-Patten.html

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



UPDATE:

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?

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:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1364809/BBC-cuts-costs-spending-200k-chauffeurs.html

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.

No? How about this one?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2012/01/27/bbc-news-gaffe-as-paedophile-picture-is-used-during-report-on-rbs-boss-stephen-hester-115875-23722822/

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'.

Still not tempted? Well, there is always this one...

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/298669/Backlash-as-BBC-s-500m-media-city-fails-to-help-North

BACKLASH AS BBC'S £500M MEDIA CITY FAILS TO HELP NORTH

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? (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23755244-fear-and-loathing-inside-the-bbc.do - 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 (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-24031862-tube-workers-reject-pound-500-olympics-pay-offer.do) 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)

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 http://www.politicshome.com/uk/article/44765/ed_miliband_interview.html and the BBC have also covered it here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-16750583. 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 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2088567/Huge-bonuses-grotesque-expenses-spendthrift-bosses-austerity-BBC.html) 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


UPDATE:

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... http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23755244-fear-and-loathing-inside-the-bbc.do"

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? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declining_a_British_honour) 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: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2091807/Would-YOU-let-teenage-daughter-sleep-boyfriend-home.html

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:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/regulatory_framework/protocols/2010/e3_complaints_fr_work.pdf

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
London
W1W 5QZ

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 http://lunchtimeloather.blogspot.com/search/label/Complaint

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 vine@bbc.co.uk 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 vine@bbc.co.uk with a subject of "Today's show dd/mm/yy" been treated as complaints?
 - Have any emails sent to jeremy.vine@bbc.co.uk 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

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 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16677720 and http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9033324/Leveson-Inquiry-BBC-spent-300000-on-private-detectives-says-Mark-Thompson.html). 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 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/8438477/BBC-boss-Mark-Thompson-could-see-pay-cut-Lord-Patten-suggests.html) 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 (http://tv-licensing.blogspot.com/2012/01/bbc-confirms-responsibility-for-heinous.html) 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 (www.helpruthie.co.uk) 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

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...

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/norwich_men_s_clothing_shop_philip_browne_on_guildhall_hill_causes_a_stir_with_mannequin_s_toilet_humour_1_1182777

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’.

No? OK, here's another one...

http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/lowestoft_landlady_pleads_guilty_to_letting_people_smoke_in_pub_1_1182424

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?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/news/9025816/Welsh-motorists-in-parking-ticket-language-protest.html

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: http://londonbikers.com/forums/803031/Ohh-dear-PC-Stout?PageIndex=1 dated 6th April 2011) and policing (example: http://www.ukpoliceonline.co.uk/index.php?/topic/44736-pc-stout-vs-cyclist/ 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 (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2087312/How-cyclist-got-away-jumping-red-light-tongue-tied-policeman-failed-arrest-grab-head-camera-filming-row.html) 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.

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: ecu@bbc.co.uk, 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 (jeremy.vine@bbc.co.uk) 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 (vine@bbc.co.uk) 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.