[stevotrash]

Well i'll stop the immature and pathetic insults when you stop the pathetic and immature observations love.

They were just too old and they never really accepted the fact that music had moved on since the '70s.

So you'd be more interested to listen to a conversation involving charlie from busted as opposed to a legend like al pachino because 'he's too old, whilst charlie is a young whirlwind of a sauce.' Just because someone is old doesn't mean they can't do there job and connect with an audience that might be younger than him/them.

Buy a copy of 24 hour party people and learn how mark radcliffes northern bbc show was fundemental in the promotion of the manchester music scene, britpop and rave culture. They embraced new talent and promoted it during the course of their radio 1 tenture.


To be fair, given the amount of pato banten and shite jonny hoare favoured dance music that moyles bangs on about...theres a case that moyles has less knowledge and acceptence of music circa 2003.

They would love Stereophonics if the accepted it had moved on. They hate them because they are newer than the '70s

What bob is trying to explain to you is that the stereophonics are regressive rather than progressive. Stuck in a pub rock time warp, m & l hate them because they rip off old material and do nowt modern with it and are a clot in the artery of music.

[djsteveomac]

I'm not doubting M&L have done things for the music scene but you prove my point by stating examples from the early 90's. They way you talk about them you remind me of Uncle Albert when he kept saying "during the war" etc

You seem to be forgetting that the catchment audience for Radio One is 15 to late 20s so M&L really can't justify being on R1, which way I think they were shown the door.

I love Radio One a it's promotion of new music and its specialist shows like Jules, Westwood etc for promoting new tracks but M&L just seemed to be stuck in some post punk era all the time.

[Dopey]

Radio1 needed some differance in DJ's as even though it's aimed for 16-24 year olds the BBC would like to pull in more listeners. They were a nice break from all the other rubbish on radio1 even though I dislike M&L I dislike others more. The fact that the did the same or similar features every day is no different to other shows, changes in features show that the previous ones werent sucsessful.

[djsteveomac]

also shown in the radar listnership figures of two years ago

Shouldn't that be Rajar?

[djsteveomac]

Took this excert from http://www.spleen.dsl.pipex.com/awards- ... whymonkeys

"for how long can tired catch phrases such as "Stop.... Carry on" or "Musshn't Grumble" be considered humour, they are musically talentless yet shameless promote their shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiite band "The Shirehorses" Humour also? Naah! it just smack's of two northern monkeys trying to cash in when they know they are on the pig's back"

Although the wording is a little harsh I agree with the content. "Stop....Carry On" and "Musshhn't Grumble" are two good examples of when they took repetitiveness to a whole new level. The first time I heard it is ws funny, the tenth time, it became an amusing catchphrase, the 100th time it irritated me and the 1,345,057th time I was close to slitting my wrists.

Also the Shirehorses, whom I originally thought were just a humourous concept. Little did I know that M&L really were using their R1 show to cash in on the most untalented band in the world, because people will find it "funny".

[stevotrash]

I know that M&L really were using their R1 show to cash in on the most untalented band in the world, because people will find it "funny".

Which was the whole concept of the band.

I'm not doubting M&L have done things for the music scene but you prove my point by stating examples from the early 90's. They way you talk about them you remind me of Uncle Albert when he kept saying "during the war" etc

No actually I think I disprooved your statment which suggested mark and lard were stuck in a 'pre-70's' time warp. I gave you an example of mark radcliffes involvment in a musical movement in manchester from the 90's. Thats a twenty year age gap.

You seem to be forgetting that the catchment audience for Radio One is 15 to late 20s so M&L really can't justify being on R1, which way I think they were shown the door.

Ultimately, in Novemeber 2003 Mark and Lard had the most listened to show on the radio. Higher than coxic, moyles, etc. The only show I recall, to have a significant rise in listenership. Theres a good justification. They were booted from their slot due to age (or shock horror poor R1 management) and is a further example of why radio 2 has grown in popularity.

[Clare]

I agree with dopey, they're just not to my taste.

[djsteveomac]

No actually I think I disprooved your statment which suggested mark and lard were stuck in a 'pre-70's' time warp. I gave you an example of mark radcliffes involvment in a musical movement in manchester from the 90's. Thats a twenty year age gap.

You're paraphrasing me again. I said they were stuck in the 70's and did not use the word 'pre'. I did use the words 'post-punk' though which is late 70's early 80's and you said they were a big help to the rave scene which was late 80's early 90's, thus that is 7-8 years at the least and 12-13 at the most so no where near 20 years

Stop being pedantic,it doesn't suit you You know what I mean about them being stuck in the past. The reason I chose the 70's is because every time I heard them play a non-playlist record it seem to be some punky, screamy, thrash metal shyte

[Uglybob]

they broke new acts along with john peel. just because they dont like techno doesnt mean they are out of touch.

[Sidders]

You seem to be forgetting that the catchment audience for Radio One is 15 to late 20s so M&L really can't justify being on R1, which way I think they were shown the door.

Ultimately, in Novemeber 2003 Mark and Lard had the most listened to show on the radio. Higher than coxic, moyles, etc. The only show I recall, to have a significant rise in listenership. Theres a good justification. They were booted from their slot due to age (or shock horror poor R1 management) and is a further example of why radio 2 has grown in popularity.

Also, the 1-3 slot would mostly be listened to by people in the workplace at that time of day so the target audience would be about say 18~30. I don't think Colin and Edith appeal to people over twenty in the same way that Mark and Lard did.

[djsteveomac]

they broke new acts along with john peel. just because they dont like techno doesnt mean they are out of touch.

What new acts did they break and I mean recently. Whenever I listened to their show they were more concerned with giving listeners local radio style shout outs (bigidy bigidy bong, stop....carry on etc) than playing new music. I would argue that Jo Wiley played a lot more new music than they did, well certainly Radio friendly stuff anyway. But someone like Jules would have to get the crown for breaking the most chart acts. Every week he plays 3 or more white label tunes that end up on the play list (albeit with some cheesy foriegn blonde singing meaningless vocals over the top).

[djsteveomac]

[quote="Sidla

Also, the 1-3 slot would mostly be listened to by people in the workplace at that time of day so the target audience would be about say 18~30. I don't think Colin and Edith appeal to people over twenty in the same way that Mark and Lard did.

I would say workplace audiendce was more 16-65 (sarcasm). But seriously I'm not questioning the Rajar figures, although I did try to check them but you have to pay to get accurate info, but common sense would suggest that the breakfast and drive time shows would beat the 1-3 slot whoever filled either post because of the logistics of how many possible listeners you would have at each of those periods (e.g not everyone can listen to radio at work but nearly everyone listens whilst driving to work etc).

P.S If you were 20, you still wouldn't know what they were on about as they mostly referred to the Sex Pistols era whenever iIheard them

[Ahh_Pathetic]

I seem to remember Mark & Lard living up Radioheads arse for long periods. While this is hardly a good thing (in my book anyway) I admit they are one of the most influential bands of late. To suggest that mark and lard did nothing to bring new music either shows you didn't listen to many shows or you are extremly ignorant.

[djsteveomac]

I seem to remember Mark & Lard living up Radioheads arse for long periods. While this is hardly a good thing (in my book anyway) I admit they are one of the most influential bands of late. To suggest that mark and lard did nothing to bring new music either shows you didn't listen to many shows or you are extremly ignorant.

I agree which is why I never suggested they 'did nothing' for music. However, saying that the indie bands such as Radiohead owe everything to them is just as ignorant and stupid as saying they did nothing. Radiohead are from Oxford, where I live, and they were big here for a while and everyone knew they would make the big time. If M&L didn't support them , there are a million and one other people that would. I mean look a Busted, I don't see M&L supporting them but they are still successful (unfortunatley).

[Uglybob]

they tried their best to get at least some tracks on the show that no other show on daytime radio 1 would play (non-playlisted). Without M&L i wouldnt have known about Mercury Rev, Flaming Lips, Belle and Sebastian and JJ72.
Mark is also a very good interviewer, unlike Moyles who seems to just tell jokes and lick his tongue up their asses.

[jimmy g]

Ultimately, in Novemeber 2003 Mark and Lard had the most listened to show on the radio. Higher than coxic, moyles, etc. The only show I recall, to have a significant rise in listenership.

It wasn't higher in terms of total listeners; Cox and Moyles had more, but it did have the largest audience share for it's particular time of the day (i.e. the largest percentage of radio listeners available) on Radio 1, hence 'the biggest show'. I believe that the chart used to have this previously. It could therefore be argued that M&L was the most popular show on Radio 1.

[Sidders]

P.S If you were 20, you still wouldn't know what they were on about as they mostly referred to the Sex Pistols era whenever iIheard them

You'd have to be pretty ignorant to not know about that era IMO.

[djsteveomac]

P.S If you were 20, you still wouldn't know what they were on about as they mostly referred to the Sex Pistols era whenever iIheard them

You'd have to be pretty ignorant to not know about that era IMO.

Why? I agree you would have to be ignorant to not know that the era existed but I wouldn't expect a 20 year old to know who Sham 69 were or that the Sex Pistols album was called "Never Mind The Bollocks" because they weren't alive then and it's not exactly something taught in schools.

Why would you expect R1's usual R'n'B/Dance/Pop listener to know about the Rolling Stones?

[Sidders]

Well if you've been alive for 20 years and don't know what "Never Mind the Bollocks" was then I'd class that as being pretty ignorant.

[djsteveomac]

Well if you've been alive for 20 years and don't know what "Never Mind the Bollocks" was then I'd class that as being pretty ignorant.

Then you're obviously pretty ignorant and naive yourself. My girlfriend is 22 years old and is into Hip Hop and R'n'B. I asked her what the most famous Sex Pistols album was called and she didn't know and I didn't expect her to. Now I'll ask you, do you know what Usher's latest album is called as she did? I'll save you the Google search it's 'Confessions'. Point is, I wouldn't expect a punk to know anymore about R'n'B than an Urban fan about Punk and niether of them would be ignorant.

So, seeing as the R1 target audience is people that do like R'n'B, Hip Hop, Dance and New Metal I still argue that M&L's little anicdotes and jokes were out of touch with its audience, phew!

[Sidders]

Well you seem to have missed my point that Mark and Lard's target audience were older and more likely to know who the Sex Pistols are.

I still find it hard to believe that anyone over 18 could not know who the Sex Pistols were though...

[jimmy g]

Why? I agree you would have to be ignorant to not know that the era existed but I wouldn't expect a 20 year old to know who Sham 69 were or that the Sex Pistols album was called "Never Mind The Bollocks" because they weren't alive then and it's not exactly something taught in schools.

I don't exactly have the most massive musical knowledge but I probably knew when I was 15. I don’t think it would spoil it too much even if you don’t know.

[djsteveomac]

Well you seem to have missed my point that Mark and Lard's target audience were older and more likely to know who the Sex Pistols are.

I still find it hard to believe that anyone over 18 could not know who the Sex Pistols were though...

Good point, which is exactly why I believe they were shown the door. Because they weren't appealing to this target audience that Parfit likes to talk about.

I do agree with you that their show was more aimed to an older audience but I would find it hard to believe that suddenly at 1 every week day droves of 25+ year old suddenly tuned in and all the teens switched off.

[Dickie]

I think that is feasible with their past history of broadcastingb throughout the years.

i.e. I may watch a certain tv programme on a tv channel that otherwise i would never consider as the programme is what i'm interested in and not the channel.

[djsteveomac]

I think it is dangerous to compare TV and Radio as I've stated in the presenters thread. With Television you are usually at home relaxing and have a remote at your hands. With Radio, the average listener would be driving or at work where the Radio is tuned in constantly to one station or you have to consider other people who are listening with you. There are very few Radio programmes I would listen to when I'm at home and I have a TV at my disposal, maybe a footy match on 5 Live or something but I prefer to watch TV over Radio if I can. Maybe that's just me though