Sir: The objectives outlined in the BBC's "promise to the public" are welcome, but some aspects do need questioning.
First, why did the BBC axe Radio 5 and its children's programmes if it feels that the young are not being properly served? What are they going to do to rectify the loss, and are they going to appoint anyone with overall responsibility for coordinating the few children's programmes still broadcast on radio?
Second, if the BBC is not serving the "less well off", how do they propose to improve matters? What assumptions can they make about the sorts of programmes people should have if they consider only income levels?
Third, why has the BBC only now discovered that those who live furthest away from London feel it should do more to reflect their lives and concerns? BBC controllers shouldn't be thinking solely in terms of age, income or geographical location. Their aim should be excellence across the widest possible range of genres. That's what's made the BBC distinctive and respected in the past. That's what will keep it that way in the future.
Voice of the Listener and Viewer
Gravesend, KentReuse content