4 ms·

Other podcasts come and fall by the wayside, but I'll always look forward to the next episode of In Our Time ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/iot http://w

Other podcasts come and fall by the wayside, but I'll always look forward to the next episode of In Our Time ( http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/iot http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/iot ). I'm excited to try others listed here that are new to me, though.

mongol 7y ago
I also listen to In our time. But maybe it is because I am not native English speaker, but I find the host quite rude to the experts, often interrupts them unnecessarily etc?
- flother 7y ago
  I know what you mean, but I think it’s more down to the fact that it’s broadcast live on BBC radio, and they have 45 minutes to cover as much as they can of the week’s topic. The host, Melvyn Bragg, has to run a tight ship to keep the guests from drifting from the topic or going in to too much detail. (The opposite problem — a poor chairperson — is often why meetings at work can drag or seem unfocused.) I love In Our Time. Broadcast since 1998, a podcast since 2004, over 800 episodes. And almost every single one is pure gold.
  - tw1010 7y ago
    I agree with you. I find Melvyn Braggs rudeness quite useful. (And it doesn't seem like the quests mind. I mean, they're adults, they can handle some pressure to be succinct.)
- alamortsubite 7y ago
  That's interesting. Without a doubt, he directs the conversations forcefully. I've never thought of him as rude or interrupting, but now that you point it out it's easy for me to imagine him coming across that way.
- hermitcrab 7y ago
  He's from the north of England. They are known for being a big abrupt. ;0)
- jamtax 7y ago
  I definitely know what you mean, and you can see it mentioned in reviews on Apple's podcast app quite frequently. I think it's mostly a cultural difference. It feels like he conducts the show sort of like a stern professor at storied British school or something along those lines. Very concerned with concision and clarity. I don't tend to mind it but I can see why it would seem odd or off-putting to people.
ngold 7y ago
I recently discovered iot, and good lord is that the best podcast. I adore how the host wrangles academics on his show to keep them on topic. Just hilarious. And the topics are all over the place, making each week a real undiscovered gem.
- toyg 7y ago
  I love IOT and appreciate Melvin Bragg, but I’ve increasingly felt he tends to arbitrarily challenge (and even bully) some of his guests - typically younger women. On the other hand, he has “regulars” who, suave as they may be, invariably get a pass to ramble - and they are all old English men. He also clearly has much less patience for scientific topics than the humanities, and on literary subjects he pushes his own biases pretty strongly (which is a bit of an abuse of power). I have this feeling that he’s turning into a latter-day John Humphrys, it might be time for some rotation.
  - jamtax 7y ago
    Yes to all this. I think he has gotten more curmudgeonly over the last couple of years, and definitely seems to let the "emeritus" set hold court for awhile, while being much more curt and critical of others. I think part of his sharpness with scientists is rooted in a commitment to making specialists speak plainly and understandably for the audience, without jargon or insider-y concepts.

mongol 7y ago

I also listen to In our time. But maybe it is because I am not native English speaker, but I find the host quite rude to the experts, often interrupts them unnecessarily etc?

flother 7y ago
I know what you mean, but I think it’s more down to the fact that it’s broadcast live on BBC radio, and they have 45 minutes to cover as much as they can of the week’s topic. The host, Melvyn Bragg, has to run a tight ship to keep the guests from drifting from the topic or going in to too much detail. (The opposite problem — a poor chairperson — is often why meetings at work can drag or seem unfocused.) I love In Our Time. Broadcast since 1998, a podcast since 2004, over 800 episodes. And almost every single one is pure gold.
- tw1010 7y ago
  I agree with you. I find Melvyn Braggs rudeness quite useful. (And it doesn't seem like the quests mind. I mean, they're adults, they can handle some pressure to be succinct.)
alamortsubite 7y ago
That's interesting. Without a doubt, he directs the conversations forcefully. I've never thought of him as rude or interrupting, but now that you point it out it's easy for me to imagine him coming across that way.
hermitcrab 7y ago
He's from the north of England. They are known for being a big abrupt. ;0)
jamtax 7y ago
I definitely know what you mean, and you can see it mentioned in reviews on Apple's podcast app quite frequently. I think it's mostly a cultural difference. It feels like he conducts the show sort of like a stern professor at storied British school or something along those lines. Very concerned with concision and clarity. I don't tend to mind it but I can see why it would seem odd or off-putting to people.

ngold 7y ago

I recently discovered iot, and good lord is that the best podcast. I adore how the host wrangles academics on his show to keep them on topic. Just hilarious. And the topics are all over the place, making each week a real undiscovered gem.

toyg 7y ago
I love IOT and appreciate Melvin Bragg, but I’ve increasingly felt he tends to arbitrarily challenge (and even bully) some of his guests - typically younger women. On the other hand, he has “regulars” who, suave as they may be, invariably get a pass to ramble - and they are all old English men. He also clearly has much less patience for scientific topics than the humanities, and on literary subjects he pushes his own biases pretty strongly (which is a bit of an abuse of power). I have this feeling that he’s turning into a latter-day John Humphrys, it might be time for some rotation.
- jamtax 7y ago
  Yes to all this. I think he has gotten more curmudgeonly over the last couple of years, and definitely seems to let the "emeritus" set hold court for awhile, while being much more curt and critical of others. I think part of his sharpness with scientists is rooted in a commitment to making specialists speak plainly and understandably for the audience, without jargon or insider-y concepts.