Read One Hundred Letters To The Editor

Radio Record, 22 April 1938, Page 6

Read One Hundred Letters To The Editor

A CONTRIBUTOR who, with nice humour, signs himself ‘Pro Bono Publico" here analyses a hundred letters to the Editor of the ""Reeord’’ and makes a few thoughtful remarks about correspondents to the New Zealand Press.

N_ authority once wrote: ‘‘Anonymity is the institution on which the peculiar success of British journalism is founded.’’ If this might be applied equally to

the entire Press of the Empire, might it not also be extended to amateur journalists, contributors to the correspondence columns of the daily weekly Press -the Pro Bono Publico’s of every hole and corner of New Zealand? I wonder. One peculiarity of New Zealand Press correspondence is most marked-its lack of weighty signatures. Is this because there is a more democratic flavour about the columns headed "Letters to the Editor,’’ or is it because the weighty signatures can find a place so much more easily in the news columns? I wonder again. Though lack of signature and authority characterise correspondence column contributors in New Zealand, it is not to say that the opinions they express are either less sound or provocative-it is merely that they are expressed, so often behind the cover of either nonentity or anonymity. ‘The ‘"Record,’"’ for instance, receives a steady, if not a swollen, stream of correspondence from its readers which some might regard as a cross-section of listener opinion. Ina mood of curiosity I recently perused a file of the ‘‘Radio Record’’ and made notes on one

hundred successive letters from readers touching the activities of the National. Broadcasting Service. The: percentage of letters on Commercial Service matters being too small to analyse with i 6

accuracy, I left them entirely out of account. The number of correspondents who signed theit names was six, the remaining ninety-four were anonymous! This must surely go on record as an overwhelming tribute to the modesty of New Zealanders. (Home papers please copy). And out of these hundred listener-correspon-dents, what proportion filled the air with wails of complaint? Precisely nineteen (19) appeared to have specific objections to either programmes, announcers, the Parliamentary broadcasts, or something else. The remaining one-and-eighty all wrote approving either the announcers or programme material, or made constructive suggestions. And regard--ing the suggestions, it should be understood that this little survey did not take into account any letters that were published on the page headed ‘‘Your Side of the Microphone."’ One thing the analysis of the hundred letters showed-it was that there is a broader spirit of tolerance abroad among listeners than is generally understood. To set forth the various objections, suggestions and compliments in detail would take much space and probably prove nothing, but there is an outstanding aspect of this ‘"‘Letters to the Editor’ question and that is that the classical music devotee is a dumb dog. He evidently declines to permit himself the luxury (Continued on next page.)

(Continued from previous page.) of airing even the mildest opinion. For him to reply: "But, my dear fellow, it simply isn’t done," gets us nowhere. This stand-off attitude smacks of laziness. Among other letters that appeared curing the period under review were a number wherein listeners wrangled among themselves and/or dealt with iWatters of not strictly radio interest. ‘f-pese were not taken into account. ere is a theory that the corresponcence columns of the Press may be likened unto Hyde Park in London, where cranks and fanatics blow off steam to their hearts’ content. I don’t think really many cranky letters find their way into print. In the "Record" file I read practically none, though that may have been a tribute to the subeditor. Here, if I might make bold 19 suggest, is an instance where the pen is really mightier than the Hyde Park "‘sward." Nobody can be exact us to what actually constitutes the average New Zealand listener. And when we really do discover him we must not too hastily conclude that he is an ungrateful grumbler. A public service so vast, far-reacn-ing and so intimate as radio is certain to draw adverse criticism of all degrees and kinds. But the fact remains that the postbag is no certain way of detiding which are popular and which are unpopular items. The writer of letters to the Record" is no more representative than he is unrepresentative. Are not mostly all these correspondents just a little different in a way from their fellows’? Without going so far as to dub them abnormal, it’s safe to say they have just that something about them that distinguishes them from the general run of their neighbours. And in conclusion, while the demonstrable benefits of all this reader correspondence may be hard to produce, it would be a mistake to close the columns of the Press to those who had either a brickbat or-a bouquet to hurl at our radio svievices. Shutting out letters would simply arouse suspicion and give ruwour, that "blunt monster with uncounted heads," undeserved encouragement, The listener one meets on bus, tram, ferry, bowling green or at the club has his likes and dislikes, and will suffer no hindrance in’ expressing his opinions freely and with spirit. The New Zealander (as becomes a_ true Briton) delights in a little grumble, but he is not slow to bestow even generous praise where he feels it is deserved. Writing to the papers, however, is a horse of another colour-he usually leaves it to the other fellowund usually it falls to the lot of ‘Mr. Anon," A. pity. A great pity. Perhaps someone shoul] establish a "Times" for wuy retired colonels,