Talk:Radio Times/Archive 1

Archive 1

History and Publication

The Christmas Double Issue does not necessarily contain listings for Christmas week and the week after. In 2011 the two weeks covered by the Double issue covered the week before Christmas and Chrsitmas week, but not the New Year. This forced people who wanted listings of Christmas and New Year programmes to buy - in effect - three issues of the magazine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.201.70 (talk) 11:28, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Improbable?

I performed this removal because it seemed improbable, but now I'm not so sure. Is my memory playing tricks? Did the BBC and ITV really not display one another's listings prior to deregulation?

Until deregulation of television listings in 1991, the Radio Times carried only listings for BBC channels, while the ITV-published magazine, the TV Times, carried only ITV and (from 1982) Channel Four listings.

Does anybody have a source to confirm or refute this? --Jenny (recently changed username) 17:21, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, here's one that is good enough for the purpose. [1]. --Jenny 10:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for researching and finding the ref :) Stephenb (Talk) 19:15, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes it does seem incredible now that for years you had to shell out for two different magazines to get details of only three TV channels. (81.129.3.32 (talk) 09:23, 24 April 2009 (UTC))

It certainly WAS the case that Radio Times published just its own programme listings until 1991, with the ITV (and later Channel 4) listings contained within the pages of TVTimes.86.143.201.70 (talk) 11:50, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

2013 Price increase

I have entered details of the price increase of the latest issue. This was deleted earlier on. I have my copy for next week's programmes and the issue clearly costs £1.60 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.201.61 (talk) 00:57, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

I would think that the cover prices - at least for the most recent - would be better dealt with in a table, rather than in prose. The repetition of "this is an XXp increase" seems rather infantile, as if people can't understand differences between stated prices. Nick Cooper (talk) 12:04, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

The reference to an amount of increase in cost is important. A 'hike' in price of 20p (especially following on from a similar imcrease exactly one year ago) on an item previously costing £1.40 represents a 14% increase. Pay - nor pensions - rarely, if ever, increase by such a percentage! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.166.67.22 (talk) 17:10, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Agenda for "Chimps Tea Party."???

Relevant that "RT" was the agenda for the Dept. Heads meeting in B209 of Television Centre??? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq2GPVlO8nUUser:JCHeverly 03:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Cover usage

I was thinking of adding something about this cover, which was recently chosen as the "best British magazine cover of all time". But there are already two Doctor Who-related images in the article, and a third seems excessive even to a hardcore Who fan like me. (That said, from an image use point of view the cover with the least textual justification is the EastEnders one.) The "best of all time" cover seems encyclopedic to me, and I suppose it could replace the Frank Bellamy pic (lovely as it is). Would anyone object? Anyone have any other thoughts? —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 22:11, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I've no objection to changing the Christmas one that I scanned and uploaded. Although a Who fan, I actually uploaded it as an example of the annual Christmas artwork cover, which just happened to be "Who"-related that year. :) I agree that the winning cover deserves to be there somewhere. Note that the Frank Bellamy cover is also used on his article, so it wouldn't be lost. Stephenb (Talk) 07:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd rather not change the Christmas cover, partly because the tradition of Christmas covers is discussed in the article, and partly because it's so nice. I suppose I'll replace the Bellamy pic, then. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 08:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Out of interest, how often does someone or something from the medium of radio appear on the cover? Mr Larrington (talk) 22:38, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

First publisher

Who published the early editions? The BBC was not a Corporation until 1927, and the magazine was most certainly not "originally published in-house by BBC Magazines from 1923..." as currently stated. Did the British Broadcasting Company publish the early RT? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:04, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Issue 1 says, on page 34, "Printed by Newnes and Pearson Printing Co Ltd ... and published for the Proprietors by George Newnes Ltd ...". The magazine is headed "The Official Organ of the B. B. C." which is elsewhere defined as the British Broadcasting Company. So I think the answer is "by George Newnes Ltd for the British Broadcasting Company." --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Boycott

"It was founded in 1923, and originally carried details of BBC radio programmes in response to a newspaper boycott of radio listings." What was the reason for this boycott? Anyone know any more about this? — Trilobite 20:11, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I can't find any specific information which backs this statement up, but I suspect it might have something to do with the difficult relationship between newspaper proprietors and the BBC in its early years. (The proprietors were fearful of the impact of the BBC on their circulation figures I believe) Drc79 11:06, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Speculation, of course, but in the early days of the British Broadcasting Company (as it was then) the announcers used to read out news from the newspapers. The BBC only really started doing news in earnest in 1926, when the General Strike crippled newspaper production and distribution and the British Broadcasting Company emerged as a potential propaganda tool for the government--which resulted in a fierce battle between Lord Reith and the government over the BBC's editorial independence. But that's another story. --Jenny (recently changed username) 17:21, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Genome says "In early 1923 the Newspaper Publishers' Association refused to print BBC programme details without the payment of advertising fees, and in response, the BBC decided to publish its own magazine - The Radio Times ('The Official Organ of the BBC') - to alert listeners to what was on and when." - http://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/about --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:55, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Radio Times. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080514152215/http://www.offthetelly.co.uk/features/rt3.htm to http://www.offthetelly.co.uk/features/rt3.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:14, 18 October 2015 (UTC)