BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear

Subject: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 07:50 AM

I think we have discussed and rehearsed the arguments. I suggest that those who are dissatisfied with the current arrangements for who gets what should keep asking the BBC about two issues:

1. The White Hare, by any current deffinition, is not a traditional song.

2. The method of deciding who gets awards is unclear, unavailable and not trusted by lots of people who are the natural and continuing supporters of folk music.

If these points do not matter then neither do the Awards. Since the Awards are the BBC Awards, the BBC should:

1. Remove the song from the traditional catergory

2. Tell Snooth Opps to reveal the details of exactly how Awards are given

3. Organise a system that is open, transparent and trusted.

BBC Messageboard

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 08:31 AM

Have we finally established the truth of our suspicion that the White Hare is not traditional? I ask because on the Lakeman album, despite being almost unrecognisable, is a version of "The Setting of the Sun" which is I think traditional although you would not know it from the Lakeman rendition.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 08:43 AM

Having heard it. Is it At The Setting Of The Sun, a version of Polly Vaughan? That seems to be about somebody whothought his girlfriend was a swan, not a hare, and then shot her.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 08:55 AM

Yes, CR, that's the song. Then he hoped for death to meet her at the setting of the sun. I learned that one from my late wife (which is why I now sing it) who used to sing it back in the 60s with a band called the Chapmen.

My point is that if SL takes one traditional song and murders it, he might do the same to another, so if there was a traditional "White Hare" the SL thing might be it with a bastardisation of the tune or a wholly new tune

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 09:16 AM

Hmm, the BBC board does make some things clear - it is lyrics Lakeman, melody prob. trad arr. Lakeman.

However the pfaff of having to register etc, and the apparently heavy-handed moderation means I won't be there.

I would like to compliment post 92 (by, I think, Countess Richard in another guise) which reaches IMHO the correct conclusion that the body of "trad" items is probably now fixed unless library research increases their number and post 104.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST, PRS Member
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:21 AM

Just for the record you get the same money for Trad Arr as you do for a fully-written song.

It's all based on percentages. Trad doesn't get a percentage, you get the lot.

So
Music: Trad arr 'PRS Member'/Words: 'PRS Member'
is the same as
Words and Music: Trad arr "PRS Member
is the same as
Words and Music: 'PRS Member."

I've just double-checked

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:41 AM

Oh yes, the money is the same, but that is not the whole of what music is about, is it?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,PRS Member
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 11:50 AM

Of course not.

People were asking why the White Hare was credited as Trad if it isn't.

Why is the writer turning away royalties?

Answer: He's not.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:08 PM

Aye, a right shrewd lad is our Seth.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:11 PM

I suspect a little thread drift here.

Can we stick to the subject of "Open and Clear" for the Folk Awards?

Most people agree Seth has been a bit naive in this - but on the other hand he is a nice enough person.

Which is more than can be said for John "Two-fingers" Leonard.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 12:56 PM

Thanks Dave, I was beggining to loose the will to post for a while.

I feel sure the arguments here are over.

Please bother the BBC

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 11 Dec 06 - 01:03 PM

The mention of "The Setting of the SUN" is intriguing(I think Lakeman takes his version from Baring-Gould's "Songs of the West Country", by the way). You see, Seth Lakeman undoubtedly did issue some recordings of traditional songs this year. So it is odd that the Lakeman fans on the 150-strong jury for the folk awards did not select one of those undoubtedly traditional songs to honour with the nomination in the Best Traditional Track category. Instead, we are asked to believe that a majority plumped for the self-evidently non-traditional "White Hare". Two explanations have been suggested: first, that the voters were so stupid that they mistook the White Hare for a traditional song, and therefore awarded it the most votes(also, of course, because they liked it); second, the explanation could be that that they did not award it a majority of the votes at all, but this was done on their behalf by a "collator" acting for the managaement. Both explanations seem unlikely; which do you think might have happened? I can't immediately think of a third possibility.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:45 AM

The White Hare being issued as a single?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 07:59 AM

First step, get rid of Smooth Operations.

eric

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 09:05 AM

Render unto Caeser what is Caeser's. Lost cause.....just leave it to those who job it is to sell this load of crap.

i get a bit cheesed off when I find it invasive.... for example lakeman and Dillon turned up on the Ralph McTell 60th birthday memorial concert DVD, which wasn't cheap.

There were so obviously people in the folk clubs whose paths had crossed Ralph's in a far more meaningful way. What the hells the point of writing your biography, and then leaving them all out of your 60th birthday bash.

But radio 2, come on....who gives a monkeys bum what they get up to?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 12:01 PM

Well we are getting somewhere with the BBC. I haven't received an ameila from John Leonard - but at least it is a start!!

Dear Mr Eyre

Thank you for your email about the Smooth Operations site. I understand that you raised concerns about the Complaints page of the site -
http://www.smoothoperations.com/complaints.htm.

I've now spoken to John Leonard, Executive Producer BBC Folk Awards, at
Smooth Operations. You should have received an email from him explaining
that the page was simply a joke. However, the site has now been changed to
give people the correct email address through which to complain.

Please be assured your concerns on this matter were added to a daily log
which is made available to senior editorial staff and channel controllers.

Thank you, once again, for contacting the BBC.

Yours sincerely


Ethan Kennedy
Divisional Advisor
BBC Information

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 12:12 PM

Posted on BBC F&A site:

In response to your comments and questions about the Folk Awards, producer John has asked me to post this message on his behalf:

I have been fascinated by current message board discussions regarding 'The White Hare' debate, and I feel it is important to clarify a few points. There have been a number of questions asked, and in no particular order, here are my responses. Forgive me if I miss any specific point.

1. In the nominations round, we asked our panel to nominate up to three artists in each category - one of the categories being 'Best Traditional Track'. When the nominations were returned, members of the panel had cast their votes for 'The White Hare' under that category. (I should point out that the Performing Rights Society, and both versions of Seth's album 'Freedom Fields', credit the song as trad. arr. Seth Lakeman). Some panellists nominated 'The White Hare' for 'Best Original Song', but the majority included it under 'Best Traditional Track'. The number of nominations it received placed it firmly in the top 4 of the category, and thus it went forward into the second round of voting.

My personal definition of a 'traditional' track is any piece of music where we cannot identify the original author and where the song has passed through many hands in an oral tradition, as seems to be the case with Seth's version of 'The White Hare'. Seth and his band obviously came to the same conclusions, because on both versions of 'Freedom Fields', the song is credited as traditional. If it's not traditional, is it an original song? I would be much less comfortable if it were in the 'Best Original Song' category, because it has clearly come from different, unidentified sources. I can think of many wonderful songs, credited as traditional, which have been virtually re-written by the performers, and I think this is part of the process.

It is interesting that we had a similar dilemma last year with John Tams' 'Man of Constant Sorrow', which was in the 'Best Original Song' category, although the first verse was quite clearly heavily influenced by traditional versions of the song.

2. The process of deciding who gets which award is described in full on the Radio 2 Folk Awards website. As stated there, "the awards themselves are voted for by a panel of around 150 broadcasters, folk journalists, festival organisers, agents, promoters etc; people whose job it is to make judgements of one sort or another about folk music during their daily work. I have never asked musicians to vote because I think it is their role to make the music and other people's to judge. The voting is in two stages: the first round is open and the panel can vote for anyone they like in each of the designated categories. These votes are collated and the top four artists in each category declared as nominees. The same panel is then asked to vote again on this shortlist to choose an award winner in each category." To put it simply, those with the most votes in the first round become nominees, and the nominees with the most votes in the second round win.

I have never published the list of panellists because I don't want members of the panel open to lobbying by the better-off record companies and artists. I felt this would disadvantage smaller labels and artists who make their own CDs. However, I have no objections to members of the panel letting the public know that they are on our list if that is their choice.

3. It has been suggested on the message board that the awards must be fixed because the trophies are personalised. The awards are made by acclaimed sculptor Mick Kirkby-Geddes, who doesn't receive our order until the final votes are in and we know who has won in each category. This is the point when we discuss personalising the awards and it happens around mid-December.

4. As regards the picture on the 'Complaints' page of the Smooth Operations web site, it was put up as a joke and had been sitting there happily for 10 years. It was never intended as anything else and I'm sorry if it caused offence. None was meant, and in that spirit, I've asked our web team to remove the picture.

John Leonard
Executive Producer, BBC Radio 2 Folk Awards

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Les in Chorlton
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 12:58 PM

This is probably the wrong place but:

This is all very plausable but "The White Hare" is not, by any definition, a traditional song. Why did so many people think it was?

Perhaps we could be told how many actually voted?

"These votes are collated and the top four artists in each category declared as nominees." What does collated mean in this context?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Vulgar Boatman
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 04:34 PM

Enlighten me, O ye faithful, for I am with the Drummer on this and simply don't understand a)what the fuss is about and b)why any practitioner of traditional music should be even remotely interested in this shite.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 04:38 PM

Hear, hear. Give it a rest.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:32 PM

Go away Leonard - we're onto you :-)

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 05:35 PM

"Enlighten me, O ye faithful, for I am with the Drummer on this"

Read the other thread with an even slightly open mind, Boatman. Please (Drummer's mind has been closed for decades).

It matters to EVERY practitioner of traditional music. S.O. are counting on people like you to say things like this and so let them off the hook.

Read the thread. Please

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 06:49 PM

John leonard's staement is a classic. You think he;s answering the complaints. Please take note, though, nowhere does he assert that Seth Lakeman's track "The White Hare" was in the top four of the votes cast for "Best traditional track". Which, actaully, is the very question he was being pressed to answer.
   And the fact that he is unwilling to answer the question directly cannot help but suggest that we should draw the obvious conclusion.
   Come on John Leonard, it's a simple question: is the answer "yes" or "no"?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Folkiedave
Date: 12 Dec 06 - 07:21 PM

I haven't received an email from John Leonard - but at least it is a start!!


I have. I am not going to post it because I would not see that as fair.

I will keep people up-to-date.......

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 05:14 AM

yeh like I don't play traditional music...

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,ChorleyBob
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 05:56 AM

Have we really come to this : getting all steamed up and self-righteous like Mary Whitehouse about a v-sign.Lighten up folks.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:07 AM

Who's giving V-signs. I just don't think these people are reachable or remotely interested in what's going on in the folk clubs.

point of information for GUEST; folk clubs are where English people are allowed to go and play what they consider folk music. Usually nowadays without let, hindrance or some prat telling you that you don't understand the traditions of the country you have lived all your life in.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:07 AM

Do you like football Bob? How about if the World Cup was decided by men in suits behind closed doors. Would that be a good thing?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:14 AM

folk clubs are where English people are allowed to go and play what they consider folk music. Usually nowadays without let, hindrance or some prat telling you that you don't understand the traditions of the country you have lived all your life in.

Like it weelittledrummer! :-) This could well be my definition of a folk club.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:16 AM

No-one said you donlt undertsand traditions Drummer - only that your mind was closed. You are displaying an alarmin cynicism about the music you say you love.

Of course these people are not remotely interested in what's going on in clubs. At the moment. It is up to us to change that. We have every right to try, and try dammned hard.

Um, "All that's needed for evil to flourish is for good men to remain silent." (help me Countess - what's the quote)?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:27 AM

I think that's one Lizzie Cornish is fond of trotting out.
You'll probably find it in a SoH thread.

I'm a bit alarmed at these clubs where 'English people are allowed to go and play what they consider Volkmusik. Translations of the Horst Wessel Lied perhaps? This is actually entitled Die Fahne Hoch (The Flag On High) and the prospect of this sort of xenophobic, nationalistic claptrap catching on is really scary.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 06:42 AM

not cynicism.... realism. they are part of the MUSIC BUSINESS.

Actually compared to some of the assholes in that business, the folkies are pretty inoffensive. They take care of their own fiercely ...its just minimal business pracice.

We on the other hand practice our MUSIC AS AN ARTFORM. We do it cos our lives are better than without it.

I have observed there is not much confluence of interest between the two parties.

Watch carefully - perhaps your observations will lead you to the same conclusions.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 08:34 AM

"They are the music business / we practice music as as artform?"

Yes to the first, and a partial yes to the second.

We folkies strike an uneasy balance between art and business, (even the most determinedly 'amateur' song club may need a few bob for the room, and most people will buy CDs or books or instruments or something at some point).

But the awards, as you say, seem to be only about business.

In which case, how can the BBC possibly fund them?

Either the project is commercial, (with no BBC funding they could do what they liked, and we could only voice an opinion), or it must operate within the BBC ethos.

For now it's the latter. So the awards must confirm to BBC standards on transparency, honesty, balance, and cultural depth.

They can't have it both ways.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 09:40 AM

Curiouser and curiouser. I've just been into my local branch of HMV (God help me!) and, browsing in the 'Folk' section came across a Seth Lakeman CD. This was the CD containing the infamous 'White Hare' track. I can't, for the life of me, recall what the CD was called - but it did have a flash on the front saying, "revised version" (revised from what, I wonder?).
There was a track list on the back of the CD, but none of the tracks were attributed. There was also some small print, copyright type blurb on the back, but I couldn't read it because it was mostly obscured by the HMV bar code.

What was most surprising, though, was the price - £7.95!! Someone must really want to shift those CDs; I wonder why?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 09:45 AM

Freedom Fields is the CD. Revised version refers to the fact that it has beenm re-recorded. The original version was recorded a few years ago and had simpler more 'folky' arrangements - many folkies prefer it to the new one.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 01:20 PM

It's back! http://www.smoothoperations.com/complaints.htm

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 01:26 PM

Oh no it isn't:


http://www.smoothoperations.com/complaints.htm

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 02:17 PM

well it was - I swear!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 13 Dec 06 - 02:55 PM

We're doing an add-a-line song Over There:
BBC Song Thread
that's already been modded but I think that was because I pointed out that the scansion was sodded up.
Feel free to be topical and defamatory.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 06:42 AM

Anyone hoping to use the Ffreedom of Information Act to get the voting figures will be thwarted.


The Act does not apply to the BBC in the way it does to most public authorities in one significant respect. It recognises the different position of the BBC (as well as Channel 4, S4C and the Gaelic Media Service) by providing that it covers information "held for purposes other than those of journalism, art or literature". This means the Act does not apply to information held for the purposes of creating the BBC's output (TV, radio, online etc), or information that supports and is closely associated with these activities.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 06:30 PM

At the risk of being boring, keep banging on at the BBC and SmoothOps. We have a very bad situation here, and it's getting worse. And it will carry on until someone makes some things about the voting procedures.
I have been in situations in the last few days when casual conversations refer make a common assumption that the awards have been fixed; and people are treating Seth Lakeman as a figure of derision to be sneered at, rather than someone to be congratulated and rooted for. This is very sad for the music we know and love. This situation absolutely must be sorted, and if Smooth Ops are not going to come clean, then the BBC should crack the whip and make them.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 07:04 PM

I reiterate that this is nothing to do with Seth Lakeman. If people are sneering at him, they are missing the point.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 07:23 PM

Has anyone tried You And Yours? They usually go with stories like this (they'll laugh at us crazee folkies, but they'll play both White Hares, so Seth will be content).

Oh,

and one column inch in Private Eye about Producers Guidelines once forced the BBC to cancel a £350,000 series after one episode had been aired.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: GUEST,whistleblower
Date: 14 Dec 06 - 07:34 PM

Greg. I'm so glad to see that Jon Host's reply on the BBC site has not closed down the debate.

I'm willing to accept the statement at face value, while remaining troubled as to why they didn't say as much weeks ago when they were first asked.

But in any event, there are a lot of other carefully phrased and very valid questions on that thread, which have been asked by some thoughtful, reasonable and well-informed people.

If Leonard thinks he can get away with stonewalling on those for ever he's not the man I think he is.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: greg stephens
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 02:45 AM

A pseudonymous "Jon Host" has made a statement on the BBC message board, but(as I have said before as nauseam( what is needed is a clear staement from John Leonard(or whoever coumted the votes). If Jon Host is a person with specific knowledge of what happened, he should identify himself. If he's just heard a version of what happened from someone else, then what he claims is of no particular value. All Jon Host's statement says is his explanation of what he thinks John Leonaeds's previous statement might mean. Interesting possibly, but it doesn't really get you anywhere.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 04:25 AM

'Jon Host' is unlikely to thank me at all for saying this, but he is Jon Lewis, a Smoothops employee, and is standing in for Mel McClellan/Ledgard, the former 'host', who is on a 'career break'. And while we're being 'open and clear' I'm Cecilia Sharp, in case anyone didn't realise.

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Ruth Archer
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 06:56 AM

"I'm Cecilia Sharp, in case anyone didn't realise."

Never!

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Scrump
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 08:49 AM

The Cecilia Sharp?

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: The Borchester Echo
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 09:45 AM

Oh yes, that one . . .

Subject: RE: BBC Folk Awards- Open and clear
From: Fiona
Date: 15 Dec 06 - 09:50 AM

Ruth Archer on mudcat? OHHH NOOOOO!!

fx