Today Podcasts and Editorial Context
A News-watch survey examining how BBC Radio 4’s Today programme selected and repackaged broadcast interviews for its podcast service, and what was lost when items were removed from their original editorial context.
Document type
Monitoring Survey
9 December 2005
29 pages · PDF
Andrew Jubb
The BBC began podcasting Today’s principal 8.10am interview in May 2005, allowing audiences to download the programme’s centrepiece independently of the rest of that morning’s edition. By December, it was the BBC’s second most popular podcast, attracting 413,492 downloads during the month.
This survey examined 54 podcasts made available during nine weeks of monitoring between October and December 2005. It assessed their subject distribution, contributor selection and treatment of European Union affairs, comparing the downloadable interviews with the wider programme from which they had been extracted.
The central concern was structural. The 8.10am interview had been designed as one component of a broader editorial sequence that also included bulletins, correspondent reports and other interviews. Once distributed separately, context and balancing perspectives elsewhere in the programme no longer accompanied it.
Key findings
1. Podcasting gave a single interview new editorial significance
The 8.10am interview was already Today’s most prominent sequence, but podcasting turned it into a separate and enduring publication. The survey argued that material selected for downloading therefore required assessment in its own right, rather than being treated merely as one component of the original broadcast.
2. The service quickly acquired a substantial audience
The Today interview received 413,492 downloads during December 2005, averaging approximately 15,300 downloads for each edition. It was already reaching more than six times as many users as the programme’s existing online audio service and regularly appeared among Apple iTunes’ most popular podcast subscriptions.
3. Selection altered the balance of subject coverage
Across 54 podcasts, European Union affairs accounted for 12.2 per cent of the available duration, compared with 8.2 per cent of Today’s complete output during the same period. The podcast was therefore not simply a portable reproduction of the programme: editorial selection created a distinct news product with its own distribution of subjects.
4. Contributor imbalance became more pronounced
Twenty guests contributed to EU-related podcasts: 13 were classified as broadly Europhile and seven as Eurosceptic. The difference widened when speaking time was considered. Exactly 75 per cent of guest words came from Europhile contributors, while identifiable supporters of British withdrawal were entirely absent.
5. Context available in the original programme was lost
Balancing material could appear elsewhere during the morning—in bulletins, correspondent exchanges or additional interviews—but podcast subscribers received only the selected 8.10am package. The survey concluded that repackaging an interview outside its original editorial sequence could materially alter the range and weight of perspectives reaching the audience.