to be addicted to woman's hour on Radio 4?

[HistoryMad]

I usually catch up on woman's hour using their podcasts. Don't you think it is one of the best programmes (ever)? And am I the only one who is a bit addicted?

[VileyRose]

I love it.

[Whatsoccuringlovely]

Loved it since I was young and mum listened to it. I am 50

[HistoryMad]

Pleased to hear it is just not me :)

[FlowerPot1234]

I used to enjoy it and it used to be really insightful, there was intelligent debate, and I learned so much.

Now I cannot bear it any more. I don't appreciate the political bias, I don't even enjoy the subjects they touch on, and I absolutely do not see what endless stories about trans men has to do with Women's Hour.

[CaoNiMa]

It's brilliant. Jane and Jenni are my icons.

[HistoryMad]

@FlowerPot1234 "I don't appreciate the political bias"- that's interesting. Which way do you think is bias?

[LoveYouTimMinchin]

I can take it or leave it.

[Gruach]

Goodness, these days I have to turn it off. (Have listened for decades, along with the Archers - which I don't switch off.)

[OddMollie]

I'm an addict too. My daily routine (work from home) is ridiculously based around it.

However, recently Jenni's presenting style has started to get on my nerves. She does that thing wher she really slows down at the end of a sentence, so it sounds like there are. Full. Stops. Between. Each.... Word. Once noticed, impossible to unnotice.

[Sludgecolours]

I like some of it. Love Jane but turn off when Jenni is presenting ( I just find her presenting style - the way she swallows parts of sentences - really irritating). Switch off when the fiction bit comes on too - why do they need it - just sits oddly in the programme. Some of the features are v interesting though and I like being introduced to topics I know nothing about.

[Sludgecolours]

Snap!! Xposts OldMollie

[Neverender]

Love it! I just hate it when they're interviewing someone and you can hear them typing in the background!

[Neverender]

And I not sure if I'm the target audience?? (36)

[HistoryMad]

I'm much younger @neverender but still love it :)

[FlowerPot1234]

HistoryMad
@FlowerPot1234 "I don't appreciate the political bias"- that's interesting. Which way do you think is bias?

I don't like - nor respect - biased comments by the BBC against any political viewpoint. For example, Jenni especially increasingly makes comments such as (my words for examples, these are not quotes) "with the unfair policy suggested by xx" = her assumption it's unfair, not ours, or "the suggestions by x that have been met with so much opposition" = these suggestions are also met with support, but she doesn't say that. I'm not giving great examples here I know that, I wish I could have a recording and point out to you and say "this is what I mean!"

I want the BBC to be unbiased, when guests come on with their biases which is perfectly acceptable to hear (because we get to know their opinion), I don't want the BBC interviewer to agree and say "ooh I know, it's so bad", I want them to remain impartial, challenge them no matter which side of the political sphere they are, and draw out interesting stories and viewpoints.

[OddMollie]

sludge I was screeching at the radio recently when she really hurried someone up at the end of an interview and cut them off mid-point, then did a bonkers self-indulgent drawn out link. If I was the guest I'd have been

[Ruffian]

Never been able to stand it despite being a radio addict generally. There's something very dull and grating about it.

[HistoryMad]

@FlowerPot1234 That is a good point, but don't many presenters do that? I am however going to keep my ear out for that now.

[AmySueGina]

I love WH. I only discovered it a couple of years ago but I'm addicted. I've looked for other podcasts (because I catch up on WH and sometimes run out) but nothing matches up.

But I have some gripes!

Jenni's style (as perfectly described by OddMollie) is very irritating. She also has this way of asking questions where she puts lots of emphasis at the start of the question as if she's asking a big, important controversial thing when she's not. Like "How much did your sandwich cost? And where did you get it?"

I like Jane but sometimes I find she often finishes guest's sentences for them. A few weeks ago a guest pulled her up on this, was awkward but necessary. I also find that Jane will try to add quips to what guests have said and it's just not necessary.

I love Emma Barnett though. She's fab and has a lovely voice

[AmySueGina]

I really hate that they've introduced the parenting podcast. I'm not a parent so it's of no interest to me anyway but I find it a bit grating that a focus on parenting is shoved into a programme for women.

For me it kind of conflates womanhood with motherhood and I'm surprised WH have done this.

I get that women do take on most childcare so women are interested in listening to parenting-related stuff but I think WH should stand for the fact that women are more than just mothers.

R4 could do a really good parenting programme, which WH could advertise but I just don't think making it a part of WH is the right thing.

If any of that makes any sense at all

[FlowerPot1234]

@FlowerPot1234 That is a good point, but don't many presenters do that?

I listen to R4 avidly and have done for years. There are some other dreadfully politically biased programmes on there. But Women's Hour in particular has got worse over the past couple of years in my opinion, and the line between presenter/chair of the discussion and the guests (whose selection is increasingly politically biased anyway) is unacceptably blurred sometimes.

I want every one who presents any political opinion on Woman's Hour, or makes a claim, or makes a demand to be held to account for their opinion/claim/demand. It doesn't need to be Question Time or like the Today programme, but it does need to be substantiated and supported, and definitely not met with a fawning and loaded-with-preconceptions "oooh yes, yes.. yes, now what should we do about this dreadful situation?".

[OddMollie]

Yes! I've noticed the weird question emphasis too, AmySue She did it this morning, in fact - can't remember the question, but she started it with quite a high-pitched WHY, which made it sound quite aggressive and accusing.

[AmySueGina]

OddMollie Yes, I think accusing is exactly the right word to use. It really piddles me off.

[HistoryMad]

So you'd like the commentary to be more evidence based?

[Sludgecolours]

Oddmollie (and huge apologies for misspelling your
name before!)

It's so strange, I was sure she used to be a fairly decent presenter a while back ... . I've noticed that about her cutting off guests (reasonable when short of time) but totally unreasonable if she then goes on to ramble. It's very odd indeed.