Radio days

View image | gettyimages.com

Last week Ipsos Mori asked me if I would keep a radio diary for a week.  I agreed readily as I love listening to the radio. 

Even agreeing to do the survey made me realise how much less I now listen to the radio.  I had bought a DAB radio, but it has proved to be a complete waste of money because it completely failed to find most radio stations.  The reception on my stereo is also poor, so I have ended up listening to radio only via the telly or in the car.  I used to listen to morning radio a lot via my phone when I had a Sony Ericsson phone, but have found reception and sound not as good on newer android phones.  There is also the issue of needing headphones to have the radio on, and I seem to lose them or break all headphone sets with alacrity. 

It was tempting to immediately go back to my old habits for the purposes of the survey, but I didn't.  Being naturally paranoid, I am worried that such a survey is being carried out by the BBC or the government as part of a move to justify cutting out many of its radio stations, so I was tempted to skew the survey by spending the week listening to as many BBC stations as possible.  However it was easier and more honest to just do what I would normally do and record that.  It has made me realise how few stations I now listen to and how I can go entire days without listening to the radio.  

I used to listen to the radio every morning.  I cannot cope with breakfast television, so much noise and primary colour that early in the day makes me feel a bit light-headed.  Breakfast television is like coffee, everyone else does it, I just don't understand why; give me radio and a cup of tea.  When I gave up on the useless DAB radio, I listened on my phone via wi-fi, or a radio app but the sound was poor and searching around every morning for a pair of headphones to plug in for the app to work drove me mad.  Yes a tidy, organised person would know exactly where the headphones were, but then I would not be me would I.  

Eventually I just gave up.  After a week of filling in the radio survey, however, I realised how much I was missing out on.  Since I was a small child, the radio had been part of my daily routine and yet at some point in the past few years, it has become a weekend luxury.

Before my brother and I got our own radios, mum was in charge of our radio listening, so we had Terry Wogan and Jimmy Young on in the day and Ed 'Stewpot' Stewart at weekends.  No Sunday was complete without the radio on whilst mum roasted a joint of meat and boiled the life, vitamins and taste out of a pan of brussell sprouts.  

When I had a transistor radio of my own, I listened to Radio 1 every evening.  No teenager today could even begin to understand the importance of the new singles chart, or the annoyance of trying to record your favourite songs on a clunky cassette player without the DJ talking over the record.  A friend used to sneak a transistor into school so we could listen to the new charts on a Tuesday lunchtime.  We actually thought sneaking a transistor radio in was a small act of rebellion.  How innocent we were!  I thought I was so trendy when I started listening to Capital Radio in the mornings.  When I was in the armed forces, we listened to BFBS and the truly world class BBC World Service.  I can remember being in the Falklands in 1991 and feeling quite emotional at the World Service announcement that Terry Waite had been released after nearly five years of being held hostage in Beirut.   

In the months before I left the RAF, I went to the Ministry of Defence for a couple of short detachments with our trade desk.  They seemed to quite like having me around and were very excited about being allowed an extra biscuit with their afternoon tea - there's not a lot to laugh about at the MoD.  We had a small radio in the office, permanently tuned to BBC Radio 4.  One day when all four of the officers were out at meetings, I very daringly decided to retune it to Capital.  When the three Wing Commanders returned, there were raised eyebrows and a few amused comments, but they let the dial stay where it was.  The Group Captain, however, nearly had a coronary when he walked through the main door and the needle was back to Radio 4 before he'd cross the room to his office.  I am not even sure he knew before that moment that there were alternative radio stations.  

I took my preference for BBC Radio 2 and Radio 4 over Radio 1 as yet another sign of middle age.  I have long abandoned Radio 1 completely except for very occasionally listening to Annie Nightingale on a weekend.  I sleep much better on weekends, so my insomnia and I unfortunately miss out on the legendary Ms Nightingale.  When I first started commuting to Brighton for work in 2008, I listened to Radio 4 in the mornings and Chris Evans Drive Time on BBC Radio 2 or the Radio 4 comedy shows on the way home.  If ever you are stuck in an evening traffic jam, I cannot recommend them highly enough.  It completely distracts you from the teeth-clenching agony that is the M25 during the rush hour.  When Chris Evans took over the BBC Radio 2 Breakfast Show in 2010, I tuned in just to listen to the fabulous Moira Stuart read the news.  I had greatly missed the gravitas of such newsreaders. 

If I am working from home or just having a lazy weekend I listen to the radio all day, via digital television.  I hop around throughout the day, I can't be doing with the Archers or Jeremy Vine, but I still enjoy the Steve Wright show and the plays and books for the week on Radio 4.  If I am driving anywhere I I have the radio on all the time in the car.  For long journeys I also have BBC Radio 4's Clare in the Community on CDs, for when radio is not accessible or just starts to give me a headache.  Even when driving in France, I listen to the radio and try to improve my poor French by repeating everything the presenters say.  

I wish we had more female radio presenters in the day, particularly mornings and early evenings. I think Liza Tarbuck should have a daily slot, rather than just Saturday evenings.  I once wrote to Heart radio and complained that rather than promoting or training a young female radio presenter, they gifted a job to an ex 'Spice Girl'.  They didn't reply, unsurprisingly.  As much as I enjoyed listening to Radcliffe and Maconie in the evenings, I am pleased I was too lazy to search for their new slot on Radio 6 because otherwise I wouldn't have found out how good Jo Whiley was.  

Yesterday, I finally solved the problem of searching around every morning for headphones; I bought a small AM/FM radio for the bedroom.  It doesn't have a clock (I can't stand digital clocks in bedrooms, I hate the weird glow they cast, even if it is dimmed), nor an alarm.  You change channels and the volume by turning the dials.  Not only did I start listening to it when I woke up early this morning, but I have been carrying it round the house with me.  I can now have radio in the kitchen, the bathroom and bedroom.  To avoid replacing the morning headphone search with a hunt for the radio, I can see at least one more AM/FM radio being an essential.  Right now, with perfect timing, Terry Wogan is on the radio, playing Dolly Parton's 'Here you come again'.  My waist and dark-brown hair may be an unobtainable and long relinquished part of my past, but I won't be giving up my radio again. 

Bake Off Episode 2 Series 6

We've all forgotten Stu and his hat already.  Who will go this week?  Apparently there has been such a run of betting on one of the participants that betting has closed.  I hope it isn't leaked, I like the 'who will go, who will win' side of it.  

This week is biscuits.  We are shown a clip of Nadiya engaging in fighting talk - and yet she looks as though butter biscuits wouldn't melt in her mouth.  

Challenge 1 - the signature challenge, to create 24 crunchy biscotti.  Mel loves saying biscotti, so much I have to wonder if she has already been at the limoncello.  Alvin is first up with his biscotti, fresh jack fruit (no, I didn't know either) and pistachio.   The other bakers have all gone for dried fruit rather than fresh.  Matt, our Kent firefighter, is going for cranberry, pistachio and biscotti.  Orange, cranberry and rosemary sounds disgusting, but I am sure Ian has done this before.  He also has orange caramel and almonds in there.  Sandy has gone for chocolate and hazelnut - if only she had the dull cranberry too, Paul H would be in heaven.  

Paul Prison (to distinguish him from Paul H) has gone for chocolate, hazelnut and fig.  Paul H doesn't waste a second in pulling all his confidence out from under him, by pointing out that it is hard to tell when chocolate biscotti is cooked.  Can you imagine Paul as an adjudicator in an exam hall, going round lifting people's papers up and tutting?  I love fennel biscuits, so I quite like the idea of Flora's biscuits.  I feel as if it has been on for hours, but only 9 minutes have gone by. 

Nadiya has gone for coconut, fennel and pistachio, with coconut brittle on the top, adapted from a recipe of her mum's.  I quite like the sound of it.  Their next hurdle is having sufficient time for the biscotti to cool before decorating.  Marie is making the mistake of telling Paul her errors -as if he needs help in criticising them!

Flora comments on how stressful it is just making biscotti.  We feel your stress Flora.  Now the glazing is going ahead.  Nadiya forgot the fennel so is adding it with the coconut crumb, not so sure about that.  

Judging 
Mat's - beautifully even, good crunch, 'nice biscotti'
Nadiya - even, fennel works well, 'nice biscotti'
Marie - don't look too bad, but not uniform, chocolate not set.  Nice crunch and flavour, Paul expected more ingredients.  
Ugne - texture bang on, flavour lovely, 
Alvin - flavour beautiful, needed a little more time
Sandy - good, flavours fantastic, bake is good
Dorret - not much flavour, not strong enough, doesn't think sugar works, 
Tamal - good flavours, nothing over-riding, need to pick a key one.  
Paul - texture as it should be, tricky for chocolate, Paul H would have them again, great biscotti, Mary doesn't feel nuts and fruit and chocolate go together.  I do, even if it is Paul Prison
Flora - not quite uniform, flat, and hasn't overpowered with fennel 
Ian - really nice biscotti, almost ginger flavour, fantastic biscotti

Challenge 2
Mystery biscuit - an arlette - which none of them have heard of, and neither have I - it is a a cinnamon flavoured, wafer thin puff pastry biscuit - like a thin round palmier. 
Paul H says that it's all about the lamination.  
Ian has got the clue that it is puff pastry dough.  The rest of them are not so sure.  

Being thin the biscuits will cook quickly, so whilst they are in the oven, there is a lot of biscuit watching - I could have helped out with that, I look at a lot of food.  
Mat's are like flip-flops - but he is a firefighter from Kent, so I shall support the home team until the end.  Nothing has gone in the bin, always a good sign with Bake Off.  Many of them looks quite close to the desired biscuit.  Marie has not finished hers and can only put 4 on display.  I hate it when they get stuck, I feel so sorry for them.  

Judging
In the judging there were several too chewy and undercooked, a lot of comments from Paul about 'butter pouring out', and 'could be thinner' - couldn't we all Paul, particularly me.  Marie was last, she had got her oven times wrong, such a shame.  Paul Prison was 10th and Nadiya 9th. Flora was in second place, and Dorret was first.  I am so pleased for her after last week, that must be a huge relief.  

Paul suggests before the showstopper that Mat, Ian and Alvin are all in the running for star baker. 

Showstopper
36 biscuits presented in a biscuit box made from a different type of biscuit.  Paul wants to see architecture, Mary wants to see lots of techniques.

Paul - gingerbread box and macaroons in honour of his wife, which is sweet.  Sue suggests the whole world is in love with Paul. I am not so sure.  Paul is my least favourite, but I am not quite sure why.  I think it is the lack of humour.  

Over half of the bakers are making gingerbread boxes, although Nadiya's is gingerbread and cayenne pepper as she is "all about the drama".  I love her sense of humour.  Tamal is making an anise biscuit box, Flora's tea chest is earl grey and honey, Ugne's is lithuanian honey cake and Sandy is the only one making savoury biscuits - with a sundried tomato and cheese biscuit box.  Ian's box is shortbread - made in a cyclinder in a mould he made himself.  I was impressed, Paul points out it could burn on one side and not cook on the other.  I have to wonder at Paul's need to always undermine them.  It may be showmanship, but it comes across as mean.  He then goes on to undermines Dorret for using a biscuit stamp.  I wonder if he was bullied at school?  

When it gets to box assembly, they are all nervous.  I am nervous for them.  I have also had to put away the biscuits I got out, before I am also wobbling for them.   When Sue says 7 minutes, Nadiya looks terrified.  Flora's amazing lid snapped - it looked so gorgeous.  Sue dents Nadiya's chances by breaking her bowl lid, at least she claimed she broke it, but I am not too sure, I saw her saying she had broken it and then confessing to Paul, but don't recall seeing her break it - but I am confident Nadiya has done too well this week to be the one to go.  Nadiya deals with it calmly.  Alvin's snaps look gorgeous.  Both Ian and Prison Paul's macarons look fabulous.  

Judging
Ian: cylinder works, macarons look perfect.  Making that cylinder is really impressive (now you admit that Holywood).
Flora: Ambitious box - but snapped, which is such a shame as it was so beautiful.  Great bake, good piping.  Tea bags - great bake 
Alvin: he didn't have time to get his gingerbread house together, he is so upset.  Beautiful flavour, nice biscuit.  Brandy snaps great flavour - and colour and bake.  I hope that is enough to save him. 
Marie: Russian box looks elegant, biscuits look quite plain, good scotch shortbread biscuit - Paul thinks her flavours are muddled.  The box is not crisp. 
Sandy: biscuit box looks "breathtaking" - I have to agree, I want one.  The cheese biscuits inside are delicious but a bit soft.
Tamal: good flavour and crisp all the way through, the lid has softened up slightly, star anise 'bang on'.  
Ugne: 'over the top', it is too garish for Mary (how can she say that with her taste in jackets?).  Paul loves the biscuits inside.  
Dorret: box of frogs - crisp, not much flavour,  Paul thinks the biscuits are bitter, the gingerbread is fantastic flavour, but soft.
Nadiya: box of fortunes, such a shame she didn't have time to decorate the replacement lid.  The fortune cookies - are all equal, Mary and Paul are impressed with them. 
Paul: memory box - clean cut, different sizes for his biscuits inside, over generous with filling, overpowering top.  Gingerbread lid is very good.  
Mat: fire engine - nice and crisp, looks fun, tea bags, even bake, flavour is good - lid is beautifully crisped, tasted great well baked.

Star baker - Ian!  

Leaving today is Marie.  She was star baker last week.  That is the ups and downs of Bake Off.  I was quite surprised that she went and not Paul Prison.  Google tells me that the run of bets was on her.  Apparently she trained with Escoffier 30 years ago, and many think that gives her an unfair advantage.  Would it?   I was in the armed forces 30 years ago - put me at Bisley on the Great British Shoot Out, I still couldn't hit a target to save my life.  (If anyone now creates a shooting reality show, I want credit for coming up with the horrendous idea).  

Next week is bread - and there will be ten contestants with buns in the ovens.  Mat and Nadiya are still my favourites, with the other seven all a very close third, and then Paul Prison.  I must try harder to like him next week.  Maybe he could try laughing? 

It's back - Great British Bake Off Series 6

Just as memories of season 5 fade so far into the past I am thinking of taking up with another heavily edited reality series, Bake Off comes bounding back into my life with Series 6 and twelve new contestants for me to fall in love with or at least love to loathe.

The BBC website has an introduction to the bakers. Sadly one of them will only be appearing on our screens tonight (meet the bakers).   We meet a few of the contestants.  I am instantly taken with Mat - who looks much like a sixth-former.  I have seen a few snippets online about Stu and his hat.  I have decided, based on no information at all, that it is a gimmick.  This is unfair, he didn't write the items about him, but it's Bake Off, you have to support someone and you have to have an anti-hero.

Mary and Paul are back as well.  Mary is perfect in pink, Paul's perma tan is lighting up the tent. Paul is quickly up to his usual tricks, undermining Nadiya with his eyebrows, which could almost have a show of their own.

Mat becomes even more my favourite, with his gin & tonic madeira cake.  Gin and cake - what could possibly go wrong?  Another recipe I like the look of is Tamal's pistachio and rose cake.  Dorret deems Paul strategically important, possibly a euphemism for patronising gimp.  I quite like Alvin's notion of putting figs in his madeira and the way he stands up to Paul.  Sandy is also unphased by comments from a jaffa with eyebrows.  Those two should go far (the contestants, not the eyebrows).   I still can't warm to Stu.  Paul is a sugar-crafting prison governor, an unusual combination.  

During the first judging session, Nadiya looks terrified but Mary is impressed.  Ugne's efforts didn't go down so well, neither did Sandy or Stu's.  Flora did well, Alvin's figs followed Paul's predictions, but the cake was good.  The term 'wallpaper paste' was used with Ian's efforts.  I instantly decided Ian was a city banker and was surprised to find out he is a travel photographer.  Mat's gin failed to win over the judges, but Tamal's creation worked well.  Dorret's candied peel wasn't up to Nadiya's standard neither was her cake.  Marie's candied peel worked well, and her cake was complimented - Paul even going so far as to call it a perfect cake.

The next challenge was walnut cake, thankfully without coffee - which I loathe.  I am firmly convinced that the BBC should send us all samples of a perfect version of each challenge to help us enjoy the series more, therefore it is important to me that all recipes are to my liking.  I am not too keen on the look of Mary's weird frosting, but the inside looks lovely.  I always kid myself I will try and bake these in the week - and never yet have.  Stu is breaking the rules - wearing a hat and rule breaking, he's a rebel and he'll never never be any good.  Alvin and caramel are not an item.  The meringue icing has whisked them all into a frenzy of confusion (it's Bake Off, bad jokes are a necessity).

The technical challenge judging begins.  Nadiya has just noticed her sides are uncovered and everyone else's are, that would make me throw up with fear, but she handles it well.  Mat's isn't as good as it looks.  The term grainy is being thrown around all over the place.  Ugne does well - and even had time for some sugar work.  Nadiya - naked sides and grainy.  Paul - neat but granular.  Nadiya is last, with Stu 11th.  Ugne takes first, closely followed by Alvin and Marie.   Nadiya is my new favourite 'I'm 12th and I'm OK with that .... of course I'm not'.  Marie and Flora are in the lead with the judges with Stu, Paul and Ian all in trouble.

Time for the showstopper, a black forest gateau.  Again I feel a sample is required.  Now the BBC aren't paying Clarkson's fees, there must be money for it.

Several of them are looking for a new spin on a classic. I think it is the first show and they should go for a perfect classic version rather than reinventing the chocolate wheel.  I struggle to bake anything but lemon drizzle cakes, but I eat a lot so I like to think I have considerable expertise when it comes to cake.  Having said that I like the idea of Nadiya's chocolate with chocolate and more chocolate.  I am not keen on Sandy's chocolate shortbread notion though.  The innuendo has begun, Mel starts talking of romping in Ian's forest.  Paul's cake looks fabulous on paper, as does Ugne's.  I love Sue's prison jokes, Paul is a bit less impressed - I can't see someone with no sense of humour lasting long on Bake Off.  I love Mat's honesty over using the thermometer "I don't know what I"m looking for, just seen everyone else do it".   Sandy is a bit free with the alcohol, always a good sign.

Dorret's cake needs the freezer - let's hope there is time for it to set.  They are all getting quite tense over the finishing touches.  Mel clearly likes her 'through your forests" joke and returns to it, it isn't that funny Mel, let it go.  Poor Dorret, her face says it all as she brings her cake out, I want her to be allowed to try again.  Thankfully Sue is on hand to support her.

The final judging session for this week:
Flora - huge cake - perfection, moist, works well, needs more alcohol.
Ugne - theatrical, good chocolate work, disappointing sponge though.
Marie - different presentation, simple but stunning, light sponge, lovely, wonderful taste - as classic as you can get (I told you so).
Alvin - looks modern, good flavours,
Mat -  fantastic looking cake, taste exceedingly good - well done Mat Kipling.
Paul - impressive chocolate work, good distinct layers, fantastic sponge.
Sandy - different idea with shortbread, Paul deems the piping '1970s' ... isn't that the idea?
Tamal - collared cake, great, and even a little bit special.
Stu - interesting, but no skills with chocolate, beetroot flavoured cake has the wrong texture.
Nadiya -contemporary and minimalist, wonderful shine, beautiful flavour,
Dorret - explains what happened, they are so nice to her.  The sponge is rubber though at the top, the bottom layers are ok.
Ian - totally different, shown many skills, good blend of flavours.

I would say it is between Stu and Dorret to go.  Several could be in top place.  Paul clearly already likes saying Flora's name.

The first star baker is Marie.  She won because she made a classic gateau - and who advocated sticking to classics in week 1 - me.  I don't know much, but I do know cake.

The first to go home is Stu - which I think is the right choice, although it was close with Dorret I suspect. I liked Stu more towards the end of the show, he got less cocky and more likeable, but sadly his baking became less likeable.  What a shame he just got one shot though, but I can't help being pleased for Dorret.

Ah Bake Off, how I have missed thee.  Episode One has lived up to all my expectations and I have discovered that blogging removes all desire to eat my way through the show.

Is it wrong to hate Comic Relief?

“Is it wrong to hate Comic Relief” was a question posted on Friday on Twitter.

Apparently IN ALL PROBABILITY, it was.

Comic Relief has raised over £1 billion in 30 years.  Richard Curtis, co-founder of Comic Relief, acknowledges the generosity of the British public.  That is an amazing amount and incredibly generous of us.  There is nothing to hate about that.

The part that I cannot stand is the continuing worship of the cult of celebrity that accompanies it.  Celebrities telling us how much they are doing voluntarily and suggesting that in itself should make us all keep donating.   Millions of people give more time each day for worthy causes without expecting a standing ovation for doing so.  Palliative care hospices, care homes, hospitals, community centres and animal shelters all have volunteers working for them and supporting them.  Unpaid carers ‘save’ the UK over £100 billion every single year, according to figures from carers.org (article here).  The sad reality is that they don’t save us anything, they are struggling on alone because there is no other choice, the organisations that should be helping them either cannot afford to, no longer exist or have never been set up.  The saving is actually what it would cost taxpayers if we had our priorities in the right place.   Thumbs up for the carers, get them on the stage and the Z List brigade off. 

An argument for Comic Relief and other charities’ telethons is that they raise awareness.  I can understand and agree with that.  It is much of the content that I can’t be doing with.   If many of the sketches associated with Comic Relief were actually any good, Ben Elton would have written a musical by now featuring Davina, Lenny and Dermot disappearing up their own backsides.   Luckily for us all, he hasn’t.  I also can’t help suspecting that charity awareness days are doing as much for the Onesie industry as they are for good causes.  If only the producers of shell suits had thought to accessorise with a few charity buckets, we’d all still have a few fluorescent nylon tracksuits in our wardrobes.  

I admire the amount Curtis and Henry’s idea has raised.  I particularly admire and respect the generosity of us, the British people.  Over-taxed, overworked, disenfranchised – but we still give an amazing amount to charitable causes.  I just don’t want some smug, talentless celebrity screeching at me that I must keep giving.  So no, I don't think it is wrong to hate Comic Relief, no more than I think it is wrong to love it, to be ambivalent about it or to be mildly entertained by it because you've just got in from the pub and there isn't much else on.  It is for each of us to choose to which charity we give our time and our money.  I am merely amongst those who prefer not to be pressured into it by people who on any other day make me reach for the remote control to change channels with a speed that might suggest my life depended upon it.

Following on from originally writing this blog, I was discussing Comic Relief with a colleague who agreed with much of what I had said and added that Comic Relief is limited in the regions in which it chooses to help, it is mainly the UK and Africa.  My colleague asked why so much money was diverted to Africa but so little to other countries, I could only agree.  Neither of us objected to the amount of money given to Africa, but there are so many other poor regions in India, Asia and South America - and also in Europe.  Why just the UK and Africa?   We then had a look at their website.  They have a map of where they have projects (link here).   In Asia, only Cambodia (£400,000) and the Philippines (£150,000) receive any help.  In the whole of India there are 12 projects, totalling donations of around £9 million since 2011.  Across Africa there are hundreds of projects, for example, 32 projects in South Africa alone totalling £23 million.  India, with a population of 1.25 billion receives only 40% of the amount donated to South Africa, population 53 million and yet India's GDP per capita is less than 25% of that of South Africa.  It goes without saying that it is better to help some than none, I just wonder why Comic Relief focuses so much on Africa. 

BBC SOUTHEAST TODAY BY-ELECTION HUSTINGS

The by-election hustings which took place this weekend was billed as 'The Battle for Rochester and Strood'.  Everything in modern life is a battle or a war, because that makes it so much easier to pretend we're all fighting the good fight, when we're just pawns in large corporations personal pension plans.  All the candidates and most of the audience wore poppies, you know the kind that we all proclaim make us 'remember them'.  If we genuinely remembered them, we wouldn't trivialise the hell that they went through by referring to a small town political debate as a battle.  

Having applied online, I was called by BBC Southeast to offer me a place, after checking my voting tendencies – flip-flop would be a fair summary of those.  The email encouraged attendees to submit two short questions prior to the event: “Make your questions short and provocative.  …Issues likely to be covered are Trust & UKIP; Europe & Immigration, NHS and the Economy”.  I didn’t quite understand how having UKIP as a topic in a debate for a by-election in which UKIP were standing fitted in with BBC’s remit of not showing bias, but maybe my lack of an Oxbridge education just prevented me from such insight.  I also wondered at the time if expressing a different voting tendency would have ruled me out, but decided that may just be me being ultra-suspicious of the BBC.

I turned up on time with my photo ID, which was checked twice, just in case between the front door and the desk I turned into one of the eight candidates not allowed into the debate.  Once inside we were invited to drink tea and coffee and had the opportunity to mingle with other attendees, who were a mixture of those who had signed up much earlier in the week and last minute additions, rumour having it that the BBC had struggled to fill the debate. 

I chatted to a woman who agreed with me that immigration was the scapegoat of choice and how unfair it was.  Then we moved on to the parlous state of the National Health - we were warming up well for the debate.  Another audience member came over to chat to us - and quickly moved on to what a huge problem immigration was, I studied the carpet, it being more interesting, and wondered how many other attendees actually did think immigration was THE big issue.   We were there for about 45 minutes until the debate chair, Polly, came to greet us and warn us that although she would like as many of us as possible to ask our questions, it would not be possible to get to all of us.  We were then very slowly placed in seats.  I wondered at the strategy - aesthetics, balance of gender, age etc.  I had been pleasantly surprised to see so many younger people there, particularly young women voters.  

A man sat in front of me was wearing a t-shirt over his shirt with a slogan on it – which I think was ‘glass half empty’.  The producer asked him to take it off saying no advertising, political or otherwise, was allowed.  The man was clearly unhappy about this, but did as he was asked.  The warm-up man asked for five volunteers were asked to sit in the place of candidates for light and sound checks.  We had clapping drill with instructions to clap for 20 seconds at the start and 40 seconds after the introduction of the candidates.  It turned out that we were quite poor at clapping so we had to have quite a bit of practice.  Warm-up man advised us that the camera could be on us at any time, so could we all try and look as though we were watching – not sleeping or yawning etc.  We were also strongly encouraged to shout out comments and to boo candidates if we wished.  Boo candidates?  Why ever would they want us to do that?  Could it possibly be because it was a BBC televised debate with a UKIP candidate?

Once the candidates came in, Polly then started off the debate with a practice question, the debate not yet being televised.  A member of the audience was asked to read out her question, which was asking each candidate if they didn’t win, which candidate they would be least unhappy to see win instead.  Clive Gregory, the Green candidate, stated that if it couldn’t be him, his choice would be anyone other than UKIP, which was echoed by Kelly Tolhurst – so there are at least two votes for Britain First!  Geoff Juby and Mark Reckless were the only ones who could bring themselves to be least unhappy with any of the other candidates, choosing respectively the Green candidate and the Conservative candidate and Naushabah Khan, the Labour candidate, categorically stated she didn’t want anyone to win other than her. 

Then we were off …. to a false start, flunking clapping school was beginning to show because we had clapped for far too long for the first round of applause, so we had to start again.  Then we were really off, finally having mastered the concept of ‘only 20 seconds’.   I didn’t take notes after the candidates came in, so I am now trying to remember which questions were asked and in which order.  I am pretty sure Polly went for the jugular with her first question, citing Mark’s defection and asking Mark about Grant Shapps’ comments about him lying.

We didn’t get much opportunity to ask questions.  Polly led the focus on immigration with a short section at the end on the state of Medway Maritime.   When Polly asked for comments from the audience she said she was not seeking questions but comments – and would state what kind of comments, i.e. after one gentleman stated his views on immigration asking for comments from others agreeing with him.   At one point she asked for a comment from the gentleman in front of me, who stood up to ask his question – with his t-shirt now hanging from his waistband (he was wearing a shirt).   He was actually protesting about having lost three quarters of his pension due to the Standard Life scandal.  Polly thanked him and moved on, back to immigration.  I doubt very much that his comment will be shown.  At the time I thought she should have made the candidates give him a response.  Looking back I think we, as an audience, should have insisted on it.  It is our town, our by-election, our questions, why did the BBC think they should limit the debate to the anti-UKIP angle and not actually give us the opportunity to hear what the candidates had to say on the issues that affect us, the issues that deprive us of affordable housing, decent healthcare and hospitals, that leave us with sub-standard public transport, that can allow huge companies to plunder pension pots.  We get the politicians we deserve, so I regret sitting there and saying nothing.  Polly moved on to the EU referendum, a young lady very near me had an excellent question which she put very well, Polly wasn’t interested in getting the candidates to answer, she just moved on to another question.  I felt that was very dismissive.  The young woman’s question and composure were impressive.  Polly’s dismissal was not a way to encourage the young to take part in political debate. 

One surprising and unscripted outcome of the debate was the support for the Green candidate, Clive Gregory.  He came across as more sincere and more passionate about his beliefs.  He also pointed out that immigration and people on benefits had not led us into a state of perpetual austerity (albeit austerity only for some), the banking scandal and allowing debt to be such a huge commodity, were the cause.   We mastered applause perfectly in agreement – you see, all the stats in the world won’t give people an education, but a committed teacher who believes in their subject will. 

One audience member was asked whom he would vote for.  He replied, to much applause, that he was a floating voter but based on that evening’s performance he would probably vote Green.   Clive’s comments and the audience’s response seemed the least contrived part of the entire debate.   When Polly had told us at the beginning that she wouldn’t be able to get to all our questions, we assumed it was due to time, but really it seemed that the BBC weren’t interested in getting the candidates to answer.  They had set the debate, we were there merely to clap and boo, our clapping had been sub-standard and I really think the BBC had hoped the entire debate would be the candidates and the audience turning on the UKIP candidate.  In truth four out of the five candidates didn’t come across well, and I recall both Kelly and Naushabah also being subjected to the audience’s derision, although not as often as Mark was.  I felt very sorry for Geoff Juby, the Liberal Democrat candidate.  He has had little support from his party and the lack of campaigning suggest that neither he nor they expect him to get many votes and his place on the election is seemingly paperless.    

The event was interesting, even if the debate revealed little.  Only having five out of the thirteen candidates does seem biased and unfair on the remaining eight.  At the end of the debate, Polly did read out the names, parties and policies of the other eight – so two seconds of airtime each.  The audience booed so loudly at the mention of Britain First that we didn’t hear the next candidate.  At mention of the Monster Raving Loony Party we all cheered.  There is something very comforting about them taking part in elections. Our politics may deliver little at times in terms of democracy, but we can always hope one day the OMRLP will have its day.  It is already responsible for getting the voting age down to 18 and passports for dogs, so I don’t see that they could make a worse job of governing than the out-dated and corporate friendly two / three party system we currently suffer.

Another aspect of the debate that intrigued me was once it had finished, seeing the candidates chatting and laughing with each other.  Even in local by-election, we get so used to their political personas and attacks on other candidates / parties that I forget they are people, it was good to see a brief snippet of camaraderie. 

I want to see how the televised show, going out later today, matches up to my memory of the event and which parts have been edited out.  I don’t understand why the BBC asked us to pose questions but then stuck rigidly to only two topics, both the BBC and the candidates seemingly oblivious of the questions the audience really wanted answers to.  The Westminster bubble must have quite thick walls for the mood of the audience not to get through. 

I would like to see a list of all questions submitted by the audience as well as voting tendencies of the audience.  I bet the focus of the debate, immigration, was not the most popular question posed by the audience.  Also UKIP didn’t have much support in that debate – and that isn’t representative of what I hear and see locally, neither does it reflect the polls.  The bookies, never ones to lose money lightly, put UKIP’s odds at 1/33, so it seems odd that out of 150 constituents the BBC couldn’t find more than a handful who supported UKIP.   I don’t want a UKIP MP.  I particularly don’t want another victory for Nigel Farage to take credit for; when I suspect that it is more down to voters tiring of the same old parties failing to deliver on their promises.  But, even more importantly, I don’t want a biased BBC and tactical voting by Conservative and Labour supporters to deny other candidates and other constituents a fair vote.  It will be very interesting to see how the Green candidate fares in the election.  The Green party has long protested about the inequality of coverage for their candidates.  It will be truly ironic if the media and the establishment obsession with UKIP actually work in the Greens’ favour. 

It's not spin if you're on their side

This week I had a short lesson in the power of spin, albeit on a very minor level.  I enjoy watching the occasional politics show on the television, but I am beginning to suspect that what I enjoy the most about it is objecting to everything that is said by everyone who is saying it.  I can only sustain interest in any one show for a limited period of time.  After a few months the presenters' smug certainty that they don’t just report on politics, they determine it, begins to grates on my nerves.  It is very possible that they have a point, however could they rub our noses in it a little less?  I therefore frequently give up on politics shows for months at a time before returning to the fold.  The weather affects me too, I am a foul weather political spectator, it is a sport far better suited to winter. 

Over recent weeks I have been in the habit of watching Question Time whilst reading the Extra Guest's comments about it on Twitter, and exchanging banter with a couple of friends.  These ‘friends’ are actual friends, people I know and like, not virtual acquaintances.  We are coming to the conclusion that you can’t watch Question Time, read Twitter and write tweets all at the same time.  In that we are all of reasonable intelligence, it could be said that we should have reached this conclusion the very first time we indulged in the activity.  However, when you live alone, virtual chat about what is on telly is almost sociable.  Twitter is playing too much of a role in my social activity, and I seriously need to cut down, some days I am up to 40 a day, I definitely need to try and quit.  

Last Thursday the intention was to focus on Question Time and not on Question Twitter.  Unfortunately, I gave in and started reading Twitter whilst I watched.  One of my Question Time tweeting friends insists that the BBC rarely choose an Extra Guest from the right, so he texted me triumphantly that a blue moon event was occurring.   I thought I might as well read what the Extra Guest said.  

All went well until the debate turned to the question of politics as a safe career for women.  This was on the agenda because of allegations against a Liberal Democrat peer.  The Labour MP, Angela Eagle, addressed the question first and commented, very sensibly, that such behaviour should not be tolerated in any workplace.  She also noted that women were referred to in derogatory or patronising terms.  Ms Eagle said that a change of culture is required, with which I agree, yet she then entreated women to ‘get to work’ and change the culture.  I would have thought that everyone should ‘get to work’ for any changes to be effective and accepted. 

A follow up question asked how she would go about this.  David Dimbleby invited the Conservative MP, Claire Perry, to answer this.  As an aside to her main answer on the point, Ms Perry started with a comment that it was interesting to note that if the peer were a woman, there would be endless media speculation and comment on her age, weight and appearance, being a man he wasn’t subject to this, even though he “is not a looker”.   Angela Eagle had made also made the point that media focus on women was often not for their politics.  Claire Perry had a valid point, but I suspect that, had she not followed up with the personal comment, her argument would have been the better for it.  But  it is true that women are too often judged on their appearance as well as and sometimes instead of, being judged on their ability to do their job.   

A few minutes later, Ken Loach, the socialist film director, spoke about the same subject, quite rightly saying it was an abuse of power, which it is.  He then said that the peer’s appearance has nothing to do with the issue, telling Perry that her comment of ‘no looker’ was a cheap shot.  Perry’s aside was about media treatment of women, not about the allegations.  To me, Loach’s aside was a cheap shot at Perry, but better aimed than her comment, and it went down very well with the BBC’s carefully selected audience. 

I wouldn’t have paid this point much heed, had it not been for the BBC Extra Guest, who then tweeted (interestingly after Loach’s point, not after Perry’s)  that it was “Utterly insulting” for Perry to “suggest that this case would be any less serious if he was a “looker””.  I am not sure he could even have heard what was said, to have put this interpretation on it. I challenged him on it, accusing him of spinning to discredit Perry.   Why I bother with such things is beyond me.  I don’t personally know Perry, she seems very capable of defending herself.  But no, being me, I had to jump in and say he was wrong and was guilty of spin.   The Extra Guest claimed that it couldn’t be spin, because it was his opinion, and anyway, he is in the same party as Perry.  This makes me feel very sorry for women in politics,  when even your own party are spinning and plotting against you, you have to fight just to stand still, let alone move forward.  To my mind, by my definition of spin, it was spin.  I even looked up ‘spin’ in the Oxford English Dictionary.  My version didn’t have a definition which matched mine, so very remiss of them.  I then looked it up on Wikipedia, the font of all knowledge.  Much to my relief, they aligned with my thinking.  Spin was defined as manipulative and a ‘form of propaganda’ resulting from an interpretation designed to persuade public opinion for or against something or someone, e.g. public figures.  Mr Extra Guest either didn’t hear what Perry had said, but somehow thought he had better jump on Loach’s bandwagon, egging the mixture along the way, or did hear what Perry had said and was quite happy to twist her words and stab her in the back.  He was very certain that she did suggest it would be less serious, even tweeting afterwards from his own twitter account, so I do believe he genuinely thought she had said what he accused her of.  I can't help but suspect that Loach's comments carried more weight with the Extra Guest's processing of Perry's comments, than had her actual words.  It was a very cleverly aimed jibe, a minute or so later, when the actual comments would have left spectators' echoic memory, placing an entirely different interpretation of Perry's comments in people's minds.  

In the meantime by daring to defend a right wing politician, I had made myself fair game for the left to come after me – and they did.  I was informed, by women, that Perry’s comments were ‘outrageous’, ‘insulting and sexist’ and the most pretentious comment tweeted to me, that Perry had used the words ‘no looker’ to “desensitise the allegation”.  This last, most vociferous tweeter is a proclaimed socialist, proud to be part of a feminist movement.  I looked with interest at some of her other tweets – she called Perry a ‘bitch’ several times and expressed her desire to smack Perry in the face and 'lamp' her.   Good thing she is so feminist and anti-fascist, because she was sounding very much like a boot boy advocating violence against a woman.   I was quite relieved that such ire was saved for Perry and not directed at me.  I was also taken aback that the interpretation of her comments was so different from what I had actually heard.  Loach put one spin on it, the Extra Guest followed that with another and that was becoming the accepted version.  Spin is part of our culture and is endemic throughout politics from all parties, but I always thought of it as large campaigns, not small comments carefully placed to undermine people at every level.  

Does any of this really matter?  No.  I only blog about it because they were all so insistent that the Extra Guest interpretation was right and I was wrong, that I actually began to doubt myself and ended up watching the whole thing again on iPlayer to check I had heard correctly.  Does it change my view of women in politics?  Yes.  If this is the kind of misleading crap they have to put up with, even from those allegedly on 'their side' I have even more respect for all of them, whatever their party.  Does it change my view of Perry?  I admire her for her thick skin.  I also suspect if I were to enter politics, I would be scarily similar, i.e. quite loud, quite bossy and far too prone to say what comes into my head without editing it to appeal to a very left-wing, ‘everything the Tories say is wrong’ BBC audience.   Perry’s main point, which her detractors chose to ignore, was that more women should get involved in politics.  The way to make your voice heard is to speak up.  I think she is right, I am just not sure I personally would have the courage to do it.  Neither could I toe a party line well, nor be so thick-skinned against such propaganda.  However, going forward I will pay far more attention to the way I perceive all politicians and to what they actually do say and far less to what the media and other detractors like to tell us has been said and done.    

Claire Perry’s actual words, transcribed from BBC iPlayer “ I think the fascinating thing in all this coverage is if this had been a female of any note, there would have been lots of commentary about her appearance, her age, whether she’d lost weight, but this chap is not a looker, let’s be clear and nobody has mentioned that”.