Why I will never give up completely on traditional SW/LW/MW radios

Over the past few weeks I have been thinking increasingly about this arcane subject, having first begun to think about it seriously a few years ago. Like many people I have at least one ordinary radio in every room in my home (including bathrooms), with all of them capable of receiving long wave (LW), medium wave (MW) and frequency modulation (FM) transmissions; I also have several radios capable of receiving short wave (SW) transmissions - one of these is a pretty sophisticated multi-band short wave radio although it is very large and heavy, so I rarely use it nowadays and indeed it generally lurks on a bookcase shelf in my garage. Obviously I also have a radio in my car, able to receive LW/MW/FM transmissions.

About 4 or so years ago I got my first digital radio, also capable of receiving FM analogue broadcasts and a couple of years ago a second digital radio, also with FM analogue capability.

A year or so ago I got my first internet radio and it can be plugged into a broadband router or connected to it wirelessly; this allows easy radio reception from more or less every country on the planet with a huge range of stations available from most countries with very high quality audio; obviously a broadband internet connection is required to make this work. I now have two of these radios.

Long wave transmissions have been broadcast for many decades, although are much less used nowadays, but they have a quite big reception radius (for example I used to listen to BBC Radio 4 LW when I lived in Paris and know that signals can be picked up as far away as northern Spain with adequate clarity under most weather conditions; the number of separate stations that can be fitted into this broadcast spectrum is quite limited though so there is great risk of interference if too many stations try to broadcast on similar frequencies because of the long reception range. Medium wave has a smaller, but still quite large, reception radius, whereas FM has a smaller reception range still, but provided a decent quality signal is available and the aerial is angled correctly, can provide much better quality reception that is hiss- and crackle-free. Short wave broadcasts can be picked up world-wide, but are very dependent on atmospheric conditions and time of day, with different short wave bands being used at different times of day when signals are being beamed to particular parts of the world.

Digital radio is a definite 'advance' (in some respects) on MW/FM broadcasts in particular; the reception is generally crystal-clear, but only domestic broadcasts can be listened to and only those which are carried on the digital platform and this is by no means all of them. I did take one of my digital radios to Spain a few years ago, but the digital receiver did not work there (I understand the technical specifications for digital broadcasts for different countries are different), although I was able to use it for FM broadcast reception, but because of the lack of digital reception capability there I brought it back to the UK to use it to its fullest extent.

Internet radio is mostly a marvellous advance - a huge range of domestic and worldwide broadcasts can be picked up easily - and the sound is of [equally] high quality whether one is listening to voice radio from the UK (such as BBC Radio 4) or similar kinds of domestic and international broadcasts from places such as New Zealand, Australia or Canada; the same is true of other kinds of broadcast such as classical music for example. Without an internet broadband connection however it will not work.

So why am I writing this article, specially with the title I have chosen? I certainly recognise the advantages of both digital and internet radio broadcasts - high quality audio with both and with the latter the capability of easy reception of broadcasts from all over the world. However, digital radio does require a decent signal and I have occasionally experienced signal break-up under certain atmospheric conditions, specially during the summer (I did query this a few years ago with the BBC technical people and was told that atmospheric conditions should not affect reception quality, but in my experience this is simply not true; to digress for a moment this signal fall-off also occurs in summer on Freeview TV reception). I live within line of sight of the broadcast transmitters for both radio and TV and it is not very many miles away, across water, so the signal strength is generally excellent. As for internet radio, it is excellent most of the time, but occasionally reception will break-up, even though there is a broadband signal and occasionally too a broadcast will not be available for "legal reasons" - this happens from time to time on BBC Radio 4 'Today' and whether I happen to be listening on my internet radio here in the UK or the similar radio I have at my home in Spain.

This last point brings me to the crux of my whole article:
- Digital radio is suitable only for listening to domestic broadcasts and not all domestic broadcasts are carried on this platform. We live in the UK in a pretty liberal democracy; the same is true of [most of] Europe and a number of other countries and regions (which I generally classify as North America, Australasia [Australia and New Zealand] and Japan/South Korea/Taiwan/India, plus perhaps a few others, for example parts of South America), but there is no getting away from the fact that one is with digital radio only able to listen to what the licensing authority in one's country chooses to allow one to listen to. The increase in reception quality that digital radio undoubtedly makes possible is at the price of being limited to only domestic broadcasts and only some of those;
- Internet radio is generally wonderful, except when one's internet connection is interrupted, which also of course means when the electricity supply is interrupted (which doesn't happen often either here in the UK or Spain, but it does occasionally), because although the radio itself can work for many hours on its rechargeable lithium battery, the broadband router cannot. Internet radio is also dependent on the proper functioning of the internet, which occasionally suffers technical problems resulting in a temporary interruption of connectivity, but is [more than] theoretically subject to political or perhaps commercial interference here or elsewhere.

Of course conventional radio broadcasts (SW/LW/MW) are also subject to some of these same problems as signals can be "jammed" more or less effectively by governments who do not wish their citizens to listen to certain (usually foreign) broadcasts, often in time of war, but also during peacetime or periods of "cold war". But generally speaking these methods of broadcasting are less-dependent on the full functioning of an advanced technological society and less subject to efforts to stop one listening to them for whatever reason, benign or not. So whilst I make full use of digital and internet radio, I never want to lose my ability to make use of less advanced technology - one never knows when this might become crucial, as people in some countries where governments block some of the internet already know all too well. Whenever there are breaks in my internet radio reception of BBC Radio 4 'Today' (referred to above) for 'legal reasons', I can easily switch to my digital or FM radios, but that may not always be possible under all circumstances. I prefer to retain my freedom to circumvent whatever controls may sometimes be placed on these more advanced broadcasting technologies. My motto is always to be as prepared as possible and not to become complacent - recent events around the world have only hardened this determination on my part.

Criticise Gaelic broadcasting and the "Gaelic Mafia" rears its ugly head!

My last article was about the recently-launched BBC Alba, a development which I regard as fundamentally positive - because it provides a suitable widely-available channel for those who wish to view it to watch programmes in the Gaelic language, but at the same time should relieve other channels (for example BBC2) of the need to broadcast in that language, in my opinion, except in exceptional cases.

Whilst I accept that some may hold different views on this matter, I object very strongly to comments from two of the three persons who chose to comment upon what I write that if I didn't like Gaelic-language broadcasts on BBC2, even now that BBC Alba is widely-available, I should move to England; the 3rd commenter in particular over-stepped what I consider acceptable limits in writing:

If you don't like Scottish telly, in Gaelic or English, then move to England.

- of course this goes way beyond what I wrote. I like a lot of television in Scotland, but even if I didn't to basically be told to move elsewhere just to accommodate the wishes of a pretty small minority of the population (estimates are that there are 50-100,000 speakers of Gaelic in Scotland, in other words between 1 and 2 per cent of the population), speaks volumes about the attitudes of at least some of those who use Gaelic, although I hope and believe not many share these kinds of absolutist 'take it or leave it' views. I have just as much right to live in Scotland (just of course has any other citizen of the UK, whichever part of it they consider 'home'), and to state my views plainly and unequivocally, just as they do. But this is my blog and I will not be told in comments in it that I need to move from my homeland just to accommodate their small-minded prejudices. If they want to express such views, then they should start their own blogs or other means of publication to promulgate them, but I do not propose to allow my blog to be used to promulgate such small-minded and nasty views. Naturally I exclude from these remarks the comment made by the first commenter - he and I differ radically in how we see Scotland's [political] future, but his comments here and his writings in his own blog have always been expressed in a civilised manner, even when as on this particular issue our views do diverge quite a lot.

NB/ I am not permitting comments on this article (this is only the second time in over nine years I have taken this action - the only other time I have felt the need to close comments on an article here was also caused by unpleasantness in comments by Gaelic-speakers discussing the usage of Gaelic on road-signs in Scotland and who seemed unable to discuss the matter rationally without resort to abuse).

BBC Alba, Gaelic-language programming and BBC2 Scotland

This is a mostly-good-news observational article, with some less good news thrown in just to 'keep it real'.

First the good news; from 8th June the Gaelic-language channel TeleG (which broadcast only for a couple of hours a day and was, I understand, an offering from ITV) has been replaced on digital television channel 8 in Scotland by the BBC offering - BBC Alba - broadcasting mainly in Gaelic for 7 hours a day (8 hours a day at weekends) during late-afternoon until midnight.

As all parts of Scotland now receive digital television only (the analogue transmitters having been switched off some months ago), it is now possible for everyone in Scotland and who still wishes to watch terrestrial (as distinct from satellite) broadcasts to see all the Freeview digital offerings, so BBC Alba is now a truly 'national service'. I have no personal interest whatsoever in Gaelic-language broadcasting, but it is certainly a 'good thing' for those who do wish to do so to be able to watch programming in that language, wherever in Scotland they happen to be.

One of the things that has 'bugged' me for years was the two-hours of Gaelic-language broadcasting on BBC2 every Thursday evening, during the peak early-evening schedules, when there were usually much more interesting (to me) programmes airing in England, but which I could not watch in Scotland (although ironically I could in the past few years whilst at my Spanish home). The move of BBC Alba to the Freeview platform seems, happily, to have ended this lamentable state of affairs - next week's Radio Times magazine shows that Thursday-evening BBC2 programming is now Gaelic-free. Hurrah!

However, nothing in the BBC is ever that simple, of course, specially where the Kremlin-on-the-Clyde (the BBC Scotland HQ in Glasgow) is concerned! A close study of the BBC2 schedule for next week shows that a 1-hour Gaelic-language broadcast has been sneaked into the schedule at 7pm on Monday evening; the alternative in England seems to be an episode of James May's Toy Stories - the Great Train Race, which is possibly a repeat, although I'm not sure about that. However, it still does not explain why, or excuse, a 'Gaelic Music Sessions' programmes being slipped into the schedule on a Monday at peak viewing time.

In fact the 7pm slot on BBC2 next week on several days seems to be devoted to local Scottish programming of one kind or another, although only on Tuesday does it seem to be in Gaelic. I have no particular objection to this, except that for example on Tuesday I'd far rather have the opportunity of watching "This World: The Invasion of Lampedusa" (the Italian island which has had an influx of illegal immigrants crossing from Libya and beyond in recent months) to something called 'The Adventure Show' about sporting events based in Scotland this week it seems. Wednesday and Thurday seem to be mercifully free of 'parochial' programming, although it creeps back in on Friday - but at least it's only on Monday that it's in Gaelic, still too much now that BBC Alba is available.

I do have a 'bee in my bonnet' about this issue, don't I? So sue me!

NB/ In view of the unpleasant nature of some of the comments here, I regret to advise that further comments on this article are not permitted.

Another argument for privatising the molly-coddled BBC

The BBC is in many ways a great resource, but has become far too complacent over the years. The strike by these over-paid public-sector employees is yet more evidence that these people are far too insulated from the economic realities the country faces. It is creditable that a couple of the Today presenters broke the stirke yesterday and came to work to present the programme; perhaps it's no accident that one of the two (at least), Evan Davis, has a background in economics, although Sarah Montague perhaps also a similar background, but at any rate she is one of the better presenters there in my view.

The last Labour government debauched the economy with major negative consequences for the private sector, the part of the economy that actually generates the money that the public sector spends. It's the sense of entitlement by well-paid people at the BBC that really grates; their attitude seems to be that the rest of the country can go hang, provided their cosy little cartel is not disrupted. I continue to hope that the present Coalition government will not chicken-out and carry through its promises to reform (i.e. reduce in size) the BBC; if the cost of this tough action, and the sackings that should go with it, is a few days or weeks of 'dead air', then so be it. The Humphrys and Kearneys of this world must be made to realise they are not indispensible. The strikers may whisper malevolently that those who went to work instead of striking will not be forgotten, but equally those who did strike will not be forgotten either.

Digital switchover is coming to Nairn

Nairn is within the area served by the broadcasting transmitter at Rosemarkie, on the Black Isle just north of Inverness. Areas served by this transmitter are broadly known as 'Inverness and the Great Glen' and it is the last area within what is known as the 'STV North transmitter group' to be switched over from analogue to digital television reception. The switchover does not affect those who receive their television programmes via a satellite dish (whether Sky or Freesat for example) or those on cable television systems. But anyone who receives television programmes through an aerial is affected and must equip themselves to receive the Freeview digital broadcasts that will be the only ones available through an aerial once the analogue signals are switched off in the next week or so in this area. You can download a brochure in .pdf format giving full details of the switchover in this area here. The main digital switchover website is here; in it you will find full details of switchover information for every part of the UK; some regions have already been converted, but the final areas to be switched are not scheduled to be affected until 2012.

Most people in this area who will rely on Freeview digital signals through an aerial will probably already have converted existing television receivers by adding a Freeview digital 'set-top' box, or have replaced their television(s) with equipment which has a built-in Freeview digital tuner. However, if you have not done this (or have not signed-up for some form of satellite or cable television reception) you will lose the ability to receive television programmes once the analogue signals are discontinued on the five 'terrestrial' television channels - BBC1, BBC2, ITV, Channel4 and Five.

There are two important dates to remember for those affected in the 'Rosemarkie - Inverness and the Great Glen' reception area:

Wednesday 6th October 2010
- on this date the analogue signal for BBC2 will be switched off, so you will need to re-tune all Freeview digital television equipment to continue to receive BBC2 digital transmissions.

Wednesday 20th October 2010
- on this date the analogue signals for the other four terrestrial channels (BBC1, ITV, Channel4 and Five) will be switched off, so you will need to re-tune all Freeview digital television equipment to continue to receive Freeview digital transmissions on those channels.

Once the digital switchover is complete you will lose all television reception if you have not equipped yourself to receive Freeview digital transmissions or satellite or cable reception. The advantage of these methods of transmission is that there are many more television channels available to choose from, as well as the bonus that many radio channels (including most BBC radio channels) can also be received digitally via your television.

For myself, I have been watching Freeview digital for some years, in earlier years by the use of Freeview digital set-top boxes to convert all my ordinary 'analogue' television equipment to digital reception, but during this year I have replaced almost all of these (bar one) with televisions having built-in Freeview digital tuners. I expect I shall replace the final television before Christmas, although of course as I already have a Freeview digital set-top box for that unit there is no particular urgency.

UK Election - 'The Politics Show' on BBC shamelessly padding its schedule

The BBC has obviously decided that it has to have minute-by-minute reporting every time some politician or other, or newspaper 'pundit', or as today an American actor, sneezes or has something to say. All padded out, in the case of The Daily Politics to a full hour, rather than its usual 30 minutes most days (other than on Wednesdays when it includes the 30 minutes of PMQs so occupies a worthwhile 90 minute slot, whenever Parliament is sitting).

Call me an old curmudgeon, but whilst The West Wing was one of my favourite American TV shows, the people playing roles in it were/are ACTORS, not politicians. I've now seen Richard Schiff (who played Toby Zielgler in the TV show) on two 'serious' current affairs programmes in the past few days (I cannot remember where I saw him a few days ago) and today Andrew Neil had him on. Why? This really far too much like 'life imitating art' for my tastes; he's only in London to 'publicise' his latest movie, after all - he may or may not have individual views which are interesting to hear, but no more than any other foreign visitor and the fact he had a major acting role in a make-believe foreign show about politics is not a good enough reason to have him on what is supposed to be a serious programme about UK politics; the correct place for him is on the Jonathan Ross or Graham Norton 'entertainment' shows. I may not particularly care for Polly Toynbee and her political views, but having her on as one of the guest 'pundits' at least has some relevance to the UK political scene.

I realise that there is a very important election coming up and that, particularly in the week prior to the election there needs to be extensive coverage, but I really do believe that broadcast media (and the BBC is not alone in this - ITV is almost as bad) have gone a bit overboard. The ITV profiles of the three main Party leaders every evening this week, until the first 'Debate' tonight, were at least a decent attempt to let people know a bit more about what makes the three men 'tick', but the padding in The Daily Politics is blatant; the BBC should either fill the show with punchier segments, or cut it back to 30 minutes

The Apprentice USA - well, just wow!

I like to watch the British version of this show, with Sir Alan Sugar in charge, but the original show from the US, with Donald Trump, is I think marginally better. There's a ruthlessness and a can-do spirit in American business which is starker than even Sir Alan and his potential candidates often manage to achieve.

What we're watching in the UK just now is actually the 4th series of the US version, which was aired in the US 4 years ago. I'm pretty sure it hasn't been aired here before on terrestrial television, although it may have been shown before on satellite here, for all I know, because of course we've been having the British version instead.

Donald Trump is a fascinating character. Crass, vulgar - and very successful; and of course he has his golf course project underway in Aberdeenshire, so his name seems never to be out of the news (in Scotland, at least). The American candidates, even when they have no idea what they are talking about, can 'talk the talk' with business school jargon flowing easily, but it all boils down to whether they can 'walk the walk' and perform either in creativity or in sheer revenue-generating ability. The two shows tonight (episodes 5 and 6) showed both these business elements - and there really was no doubt about the result of either show, although the result of episode 6 produced a 'shocker' in the boardroom!

Episode 5 ('Lost in Space') involved producing a parade float to publicise a soon-to-be-released movie. Trump had started this series off a few weeks ago by having one team of 9 women ('Capital Edge') and one of 9 men ('Team Excel') and for the last few episodes the women have been losing, seemingly because of friction within the team fouling up their ability to achieve success - and their numbers had therefore become somewhat depleted. So before this episode got underway he let the women choose one of the men to join them and they chose Randal, an African-American from Philadelphia and the eventual winner of the series. The women's team lost handily, because they hadn't fulfilled the brief and the Sony studio people much preferred what the men's team had done. Randal seemed to work well with the women's team, though, and offered a pretty good analysis of where they were going wrong.

On to Episode 6 ('Take Me Out to the Boardroom'); this involved producing an 'event' in a sporting goods store to see which team could increase sales in their chosen area by the biggest percentage. For this epsiode he got the team leader of the women's team to choose 3 women to go across to the men's team, the 3 women she most wanted to lose. Then he got the team-leader of the men's team to choose the 3 men he most wanted to lose to transfer to join the women's team. Basically the notional women's team (now of course with 4 men in it) won because they increased sales by a huge 74 per cent, with most of the women and the men in the team coming up to the plate and achieving good results. Similarly the notional men's team now of course had 3 women in their number, but in my view the real reason they fouled up was because the team leader allowed one of the men to take over and dominate their effort because he had a favourite sport and he and the rest of the team forgot the object wasn't to show off at the sport or to teach kids to play it, but to push product sales!

Now the shocks started - and illustrated why Trump has been so successful. Trump overrode the right of the losing team leader to choose whom to bring back into the boardroom. Instead he told 2 of the women and 1 of the men (the one who was exempt from the previous episode) to go straight back to the penthouse apartment, as all were thought to have performed well by the whole team. Trump wanted 4 back in the boardroom - the male team leader, 2 men and 1 woman. After an acrimonious boardroom scene, which descended into all 4 bickering and shouting across each other, Trump then fired all four! Undoubtedly the correct decision, although the male team leader and the woman stood out for being in their different ways completely hopeless - he ineffective at managing the team, she not living up to her own estimation that she was a killer salesperson. The other 2 men lost sight of the objective being to sell, sell, sell. Definitely one of the best episodes I've seen, from either the US or British series of the programme; it's just a pity that it has been shunted off to such a graveyard time-slot, particularly the 2nd episode each week.

Beyond this, I'm wondering if the reason the BBC is showing Trump again is because they are dropping/shelving Sir Alan Sugar until after the next general election because of his involvement with the Labour Party as a so-called 'business czar'. Whatever the reason, I'm certainly glad to have the opportunity to see more of 'The Donald', because whether you love or loathe the man he does make a good television personality and his business acumen and judgement aren't in doubt, as was certainly in evidence tonight.

... "except for viewers in Scotland"

Specially for anyone who has ever groaned on hearing this phrase!



- I thought this was a particualrly opportune moment to bleat on about this matter [again], having recently become aware just how interesting have been some recent national 'Newsnight' programmes after the 11pm watershed, when we lucky people in Scotland get to watch the usually less-than-scintillating 'Newsnight Scotland' from the Kremlin on the Clyde. The BBC iPlayer is a great innovation - it allows me to escape the chuchter mafia's electronic clutches, if a little tardily.

This late-night winge has been brought to you by ...

Ofcom looks at 'sharing' licence fee with other broadcasters

More broadcasters, it seems, want to get in on the act by getting their hands on some of the television licence fee and Ofcom, the regulatory body, thinks that there is a case for this so that ITV, Channel4 and Five can get help to fund their 'public service' broadcasting obligations (news, local news, etc).

I'm not in principle opposed to 'sharing' existing revenue (I'd rather see the licence fee reduced or abolished entirely) as I think it would be a salutary reminder to the BBC that it does not exist in a vacuum, irrespective of what the public feels about it - who are increasingly voting with their remote controls for the wide range of alternative broadcasters now available.

However, there is an ominous statement at the end of the linked article:

"Ofcom concludes that if this money comes from the existing licence fee, which generates £3.2bn per year, it could be damaging to the BBC."

- I'm assuming that this does reflect what Ofcom actually wrote and has not been 'doctored' editorially by the BBC - hardly a disinterested party in this matter. However, what this seems to imply is that what is being talked about is not 'sharing' at all(!), but increasing the revenue (and the licence fee, presumably) so that the BBC will not lose out! Apart from the Newspeak attempt to disguise a potential increase in the licence fee as 'sharing', I think it is time that broadcasters realised they do not have any right to our money; I accept that the commercial broadcasters (ITV and Five) have a right to turn a profit, but they should be required to fund whatever public service obligations they have out of their own revenues, not ours - and if they can't achieve this they can go out of business so far as I am concerned. As for the BBC and Channel4, they need to focus on their core obligations and not attempt with public money to compete with purely commercial broadcasters in every type of programming.