Skip to main content

In a BBC cellar

I spent quite a lot of yesterday glancing at the pictured clock and the white light underneath it.

This is on the wall of the NCA Studio at BBC Swindon/Wiltshire (the two 'separate' radio stations are really just two studios in the same building). The white light means the link is live.

If I'm honest, I'm being a little over-dramatic when I say 'in a BBC cellar', because the studio is on the first floor, but it has a splendid feeling of isolation, that wouldn't go amiss as a cellar. The NCA Studio is the network studio - thanks to the wonders of ISDN, it can connect up with any other BBC studio in the country and the occupant can (in sound quality terms) appear to be in the same room as the interviewer. Yesterday I had six interviews on Ecologic through the day with various local radio stations from BBC York to BBC Devon, all conducted from this small (and a touch chilly) room.

It's not the first time I've done this, and as always the BBC staff made me feel very welcome. You'd expect them to think 'who is this upstart author, no one's heard of?' but, no, they're very friendly and helpful.

Once they'd settled me in the blue chair and plied me with drink (water and coffee, I mean, it isn't that kind of green room), they pretty much left me to it. Every now and then the magic box clicks into life and another local radio station appears on the headphones. As you can see, it's no palace, but it still feels rather special.

Having said that, having an interview down the line is always second best to the real thing. I had mentioned I was a touch disappointed that I'd got interviews with six other regional stations, but not my local one. In a gap in the chats, one of the Swindon/Wiltshire presenters, Mark O'Donnell kindly fitted in an unscheduled interview. Though recorded rather than live, this was in a real studio with the sort of setup you usually see when a radio station appears on TV. Although the remote interviews were great, speaking face-t0-face with Mark was better, because it was a real conversation - it just works so much better when you can see the other person.

My first job after leaving university was at British Airways, and I always find two other organizations - the BBC and the Met Office - remind me hugely of my early BA days. It's like coming home. I had a great day, so thanks to all at Radio Swindon/Wiltshire and the other stations we linked up to.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why I hate opera

If I'm honest, the title of this post is an exaggeration to make a point. I don't really hate opera. There are a couple of operas - notably Monteverdi's Incoranazione di Poppea and Purcell's Dido & Aeneas - that I quite like. But what I do find truly sickening is the reverence with which opera is treated, as if it were some particularly great art form. Nowhere was this more obvious than in ITV's 2010 gut-wrenchingly awful series Pop Star to Opera Star , where the likes of Alan Tichmarsh treated the real opera singers as if they were fragile pieces on Antiques Roadshow, and the music as if it were a gift of the gods. In my opinion - and I know not everyone agrees - opera is: Mediocre music Melodramatic plots Amateurishly hammy acting A forced and unpleasant singing style Ridiculously over-supported by public funds I won't even bother to go into any detail on the plots and the acting - this is just self-evident. But the other aspects need some exp
117 comments
Read more

Is 5x3 the same as 3x5?

The Internet has gone mildly bonkers over a child in America who was marked down in a test because when asked to work out 5x3 by repeated addition he/she used 5+5+5 instead of 3+3+3+3+3. Those who support the teacher say that 5x3 means 'five lots of 3' where the complainants say that 'times' is commutative (reversible) so the distinction is meaningless as 5x3 and 3x5 are indistinguishable. It's certainly true that not all mathematical operations are commutative. I think we are all comfortable that 5-3 is not the same as 3-5.  However. This not true of multiplication (of numbers). And so if there is to be any distinction, it has to be in the use of English to interpret the 'x' sign. Unfortunately, even here there is no logical way of coming up with a definitive answer. I suspect most primary school teachers would expands 'times' as 'lots of' as mentioned above. So we get 5 x 3 as '5 lots of 3'. Unfortunately that only wor
25 comments
Read more

Why backgammon is a better game than chess

I freely admit that chess, for those who enjoy it, is a wonderful game, but I honestly believe that as a game , backgammon is better (and this isn't just because I'm a lot better at playing backgammon than chess). Having relatively recently written a book on game theory, I have given quite a lot of thought to the nature of games, and from that I'd say that chess has two significant weaknesses compared with backgammon. One is the lack of randomness. Because backgammon includes the roll of the dice, it introduces a random factor into the play. Of course, a game that is totally random provides very little enjoyment. Tossing a coin isn't at all entertaining. But the clever thing about backgammon is that the randomness is contributory without dominating - there is still plenty of room for skill (apart from very flukey dice throws, I can always be beaten by a really good backgammon player), but the introduction of a random factor makes it more life-like, with more of a sense
6 comments
Read more