Language and swearing on BBC Radio 4

As always, I try to be fair to everyone so here is the response I got from the BBC to my recent rant against falling language standards on BBC Radio 4. I have provided here my further response.

Anyone can comment on the BBC's views and on my own ... but not anonymously!

DW

--oo0oo--

Dear Mr Williamson

Thank you for your e-mail which was forwarded to this department for reply.

I understand that you feel the BBC are not maintaining high standards of spoken and written English and feel that a number of our presenters are using 'Americanisms'.

The BBC is conscious of the need to maintain high standards of spoken English and pronunciation throughout its broadcasts. However, much of the influence on our lives comes from the United States and some American words and terms have been imported. American forms of pronunciation are preferred by many young people and if widely enough adopted, some eventually become accepted. In the end it is actual usage which decides whether or not a pronunciation is acceptable, whereas a particular pronunciation learned some years ago may not be the only correct form today.

With regards to the issue of bad language being used on Radio 4, if I can explain, BBC Radio does not operate a watershed policy in the same way as television. Our research shows that the number of children or young people listening to Radio 2, 3 and 4 is so minimal as to hardly register. Radio 1 and Radio Five Live's popularity with younger listeners brings with it special responsibility which the stations take very seriously.

We try to provide programmes of adult interest at times most convenient for a general audience without imposing unnecessary restrictions on writers and artists. This is a difficult area of judgement. We are guided by our experience of public reaction and our understanding of the kind of audiences drawn to particular programmes. The constant feedback from our audiences helps us know what material is and is not acceptable to them.

Again, I do appreciate that you deep concerns regarding the standards of spoken English across our networks and I can assure you Mr Williamson that we have registered your comments on our audience log. This is the internal report of audience feedback which we compile daily for all programme makers and commissioning executives within the BBC, and also their senior management. It ensures that your points, and all other comments we receive, are circulated and considered across the BBC.

Thank you once again for taking the trouble to contact us.

Regards

RC BBC Information

--oo0oo--

Dear R,

I wonder on what basis you are able to assert that young people prefer American pronunciation to some words and phrases? I also wonder why you think that the BBC should lie down and die on this matter.

I have had debates before, as have thousands of us I don't doubt, along these lines. No one is saying that what was good in the 1950s is bound to be good today. However, I find it really cheapening to listen to people who are clearly well educated and articulate speaking in the way they now do.

I would also like the official policy from the BBC on why they are prepared to accept Americanisms that emanate from an uneducated stratum of American society? As an example, just consider the use of prepositions by Americans: the BBC is now adopting wholesale that some prepositions are superfluous so can be abandoned. I know many educated Americans and they continue to use their prepositions properly.

Similarly, there has been a major trend to the abandonment of the definite and indefinite article both in speech and in writing: why have you allowed this to happen?

Are you really telling me that your reporters and editors are monitoring poorly educated people both in the USA and the UK and are then satisfied that we all should talk like them? If you are that is dreadful. If you aren't then I don't understand what you are saying. You might not be aware of it but the part of your response relating to swearing begins with one of the Americanisms that grates on me, "With regards to the issue of bad language ..." Why did you not say "With regard to the issue of bad language ..." as you should have?

I first raised the matter of swearing on Radio 4 a few years ago and received the same, to my mind astonishing, response: that virtually every listener to Radio 4 is an adult, so swear away. Again, is this editorial policy now? Are you telling me that swearing is no longer an issue for you?

I can't even write the word that they used on the Laurie Taylor programme I referred to in my previous message because it is so offensive yet it was used in the middle of the day and yet far from being a prude I was really saddened to hear it.

I wonder what you mean by "... unnecessary restrictions on writers and artists ..." Is it really felt to be the case that simply because an author or a presenter wants to use a swear word that they must?

Finally, you are seeming to assume that simply because your audience comprises almost entirely of adults that any swearing is acceptable. That's the astonishing part. You might tell me next to switch off the radio if I don't like the swearing: hardly a mature argument; but I have heard it. I like Radio 4 and you already know that I listen to it almost all day and almost every day and I don't see why anyone feels the need to impose swearing on me when it is absolutely unnecessary. If there were no swearing at all, no one would notice. No one would tell you that you ought to put some swearing into a play because a gangster is bound to swear ... it's just a ludicrous argument.

I think the BBC should be at the forefront of standards in all aspects of its work: upholding good standards of grammar and pronunciation as well as refusing to stoop to profanities.

Best wishes

Duncan Williamson