Nick Griffin and the power of free speech

I've got a lot of time for the BBC. Auntie Beeb gets a lot of stick from all sorts of quarters, but by playing the impartiality card last night on Question Time, the broadcaster showed how the power of free speech was a force to expose the hypocrisy of bigots.

Nasty Nick Griffin, the oleaginous leader of the vile and odious race-based British National Party took his place on the panel of the venerable political Q&A. The show has been attacked today for:

a) allowing Griffin his hour in the zeitgeist; and
b) focusing all but one of the questions on his party and beliefs

Hundreds of people protested about Griffin being allowed on the programme, but I'm glad he got to sit there, slightly sweaty and with the mild panic of a man who's realised he's naked in a room full of strangers. To deny Griffin the chance to be questioned by the voting public would have been shameful. If we stop a right wing politician, do we then do the same to the left? Where do you draw the line...and wouldn't that line get ever closer to the centre?

No, I was glad to see Griffin exposed for the petty, small-minded, narcissistic, racist, outdated and outmoded individual he is. He fared badly. Bonnie Greer ran rings around him. The politicians of the three main parties should have too, but were too busy being on message and party-politicking to kick at the easy targets Griffin provided. Oh for a Tony Benn or a Michael Heseltine to focus in their laser-guided barbs. Griffin would have been mince-meat.

Huhne did ok for the liberals, the Conservative speaker was an obvious choice but not a strong one, and Straw for Labour was weak, muddled and dissembling.

Within minutes, Griffin was toast - but burnt far more harshly by the audience than by his fellow panelists. However, Griffin was made to look a fourth-rate politician by a second rate crop of political opponents.

As for the questions, well those who say they were too BNP-biased miss the point of the programme. I was in the audience for QT when it last came to Oxford - and an almost equally obnoxious 'politician' George Galloway was on the platform. We were all asked to submit a question beforehand and the producers chose the best to pitch at the panel. The questions reflect the mood, and subject choice of the audience. Speaking to someone at QT producers Mentorn today he acknowledged that all but a very few of the questions submitted last night were aimed at Griffin. QT is a case where the audience decides the direction the programme will go.

Griffin earned his place through his party's performance at the European Elections. It was nothing more than a protest vote in an election that very few in the UK felt mattered to them. The BNP's success will not be repeated at the UK elections in 2010. He may feel that all publicity is good publicity, but last night's exposure has made many more people aware of who Griffin really is and what he stands for. I'm with the guy who said he'd like to give loathsome Nick a one-way ticket to the South Pole.

For inspiration: Meet the British

Looking for a bit of inspiration for a creative way to present a fairly staid finance business, I came across a great little programme that aired on BBC 4 last night. Essentially a collation of 'Ministry of Informatiojn'-type films made to 'sell' Britain overseas from the 40s to about 1980, 'Meet the British' is an absolute gem.

Not sure it has given me the inspiration I need, but the research has been fun...

Opportunity lost

I've spent some time on the dissertation over the last week (after a work-induced break of the best part of a month) and it struck me that yet another anniversary of a momentous event passed virtually without comment yesterday.

On July 20th 1969, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin became the first humans to step onto the surface of another world.

Their moon walk was witnessed by some 450 million people on earth with a similar number listening on the radio, primarily tuned to Voice of America. I was only five, but I can remember vividly my Dad getting me up to watch the BBC's through the night coverage, and then having a big fried breakfast as dawn broke over suburban Wembley.

At a time when the war in Vietnam was getting ever worse, when famine gripped Biafra, and while the Prague Spring was still a memory tinged with blood, the world united - all too briefly - in awe of man's achievements.

As the dissertation takes shape, I'm, still debating the reasons for America's journey to the moon. It's too simple to ascribe it solely to beating the Soviets - they were, effectively, out of the race from 1966. Yet the mix of nationalism, romanticism, and frontier spirit that drove Apollo remains nebulous.

Yet on July 20th 1969, it seemed that mankind could achieve anything. How sad that we lost that spirit of endeavour so quickly.

I'm looking forward to revisiting the Apollo period later this week when I interview the BBC's science correspondent of the time, James Burke. He's more of a bit of a hero of mine, but I'll have to put my 'fan' head to one side and button myself down as a historical researcher to pick up Burke's perspective of that unrepeated convergence in world history.

Rough diamond puts Risborough on the business map

So, Princes Risborough's Lee 'That's what I'm talking about' McQueen has been crowned as Sue Ellen Sugar 's new Apprentice.


The BBC series came to a close last night with most money on Claire to take the title, but Lee, the diamond in the rough, had done just enough to convince the beardy wonder that he's got the right stuff to make it in the Sugar'd world where being a grafter counts for more than having a nice line in presentation skills.


Actually, Claire could just as easily won, but perhaps Lee, the slightly inarticulate, bad-spelling, CV-enhancing pterodactyl impersonator needed the role more.


Certainly he seems more of a chip off the Amstrad block that oleaginous Alex or glowering Helene. Actually, I knew she hadn't won as she already had her website set up (ok, in development) several weeks ago.

I don't claim to know Lee at all, but vaguely recognised him when the series started as someone we'd see shopping with his girlfriend in M&S and Tesco in Risborough. He lives in Lacey Green, up the hill from us in Risborough, but hasn't been spotted down in town for ages, prompting speculation that he's been working in Sue Ellen's empire for a little while now (the series was filmed in summer/autumn last year).

I hope he does well. He came across as a naturally warm bloke, without the calculating plan and with the, seemingly, naive view that 'delivering' would be enough to see him through. It turned out not to be naive as the UK's answer to Donald Trump probably saw rather more of himself in Lee than in any of the other candidates.

I don't see Lee gracing the boardroom of many FTSE100s in the future, but for Sugar, the key to success is graft, tenacity and a willingness to learn. Lee, probably more than any of his other apprentices or candidates appears to fit that mould best.

Two highlights of the series stood out for me: why on earth did Lee whose speech is decidedly challenged when it comes to pronouncing his Rs decide on the name Ryan for his target market man in the last challenge - and for that matter, was 'Woulette' the best possible name for his fragrance?

My second highlight was the unmasking of Jenny C as the unmitigated snake in this year's crop. Unpleasant, dogmatic, devious and dishonest, she reminded me so much of my last corporate boss, and will probably end up as the HR director of a large organisation. Watching her squirm last night as Sue Ellen recapped her attempt to climb to the top over the bodies of others brought a very satisfied smile to my face.

Sometimes it's nice to see the good guy win!

Some days are better than others

So, at the outset, yesterday didn't look too promising. I'd arranged to take Rory and one of his mates...also called Rory to Lord's to see Middlesex play Essex. It was 'kid for a quid' which was a real plus, but the weather forecast was pretty dreadful - a definite minus, especially after our visit to cricket nirvana for the New Zealand test.

Anyway, the rain stayed away for most of the day: we enjoyed the privileges of the Members' stand, thanks to my student membership (just about the only time I've exploited my student status since returning to the arms of academe last September), and the boys had a terrific day.

Praise to Middlesex CCC for laying on some half term-ish activities that kept the lads in good spirits even though rain blew out the end of the match - they were particularly taken by the free binoculars for turning up in their club shirts, and the player autograph session at the end. Actually, as we wanted to avoid the England football hoards at Marylebone, heading for 'wemb-ber-ley....wemberley', we hung on around the pavilion and the two Rorys not only collected all the Middlesex signatures (that's Rory S getting his book signed by Middlesex, Ireland and England's Ed Joyce, above), but all the vanquished Essex players too......except the grumpy skipper Mark Pettini who'd been LBW'd for a big fat zero earlier in the day!

But my highlight of the day was noticing a new message on my phone, calling it and hearing an unmistakable voice: "Hello, this is James Burke......."

For anyone under 40, it probably means nothing, but for me, James Burke was the BBC's voice of science, technology and the Apollo missions. My mission for my Masters dissertation this week has been to track him down...and I landed a big step in the the mission yesterday!

Only gay in the village? Nah, it's David Brent

It's about this time each year that I realise that I'm hooked on The Apprentice. I try and fight off being lured into that cosy format with grumpy and not terrifically articulate Alan Sugar berating the latest batch of arrogant business never-weres.

But then, once again, I realise that this isn't about business; it's not about finding the next great entrepreneurial manager. No, it's a very clever editing job that pricks the pomposity of a bunch of wannabes whose high opinion of themselves seems to be in direct inverse proportion to their actual abilities to be a business leader.

Latest to be fired - and it's worth catching on the BBC I-player - was Kevin - a bank manager whose arrogance was matched only by his incompetence. Maybe the credit crunch is all his fault?

I suspect Kevin must have very indulgent parents....and possibly no real friends. I've rarely seen a bloke so deluded.

Now the papers over here have picked on his likeness to Matt Lucas' character - Daffyd, the only gay in the village from Little Britain. and while Kevin's got a whiff of the look and a lot of the walk, vocally and in management style he's purely from the David Brent school.

In some ways, it's a shame he's gone, since he has been a much-needed figure of fun for the past six weeks. But on the task and in the Boardroom, he proved to be as thick as custard and as effective a corporate wheeler-dealer as Brent on a very bad day.

Happy Poisson D'Avril!

Ok, I liked the BBC's story about flying penguins this morning, but it's not a patch on this farming special, which first took to the air in 1957.

Back to student life

I'm off to Brunel shortly to hit the library and also drop off my fourth essay.

Essay writing has been, perhaps, the hardest element of my return to academia - quite surprising really as I've made my living or the last 20 years from stringing words together in one shape or form. But that's part of the problem.

One of my modules last term was on Globalisation - a fascinating and often disturbing issue, since what emerged from 12 weeks of discussion is an impression of continued US hegemony, providing an environment for big business to get bigger at the expense of the developing world. My tutor was a guy called Nafeez Ahmed and while he remained suitably above partisanship in the classes, his extremely well articulated views - found here make compelling reading.

Anyway, I've had real trouble hitting the right level of academic rigour in my essay writing - for 20 years, I've written journalistically, either telling a story from whatever angle suits the publication, or editorialising where my views mattered. Academic writing is so different. I'm reading for a Masters, so what matters is not my views at all, but my ability to summarise an argument and replay it using the voices of those already recognised in the field. My tendency is to summarise journalistically; to simplify the debate too much without sufficient referencing and too often to polemicise. Only four essays in do I feel I'm even beginning to get the hang of both what and how I should be writing.

Aside from the work, my impression is that students have changed a lot too - and not necessarily in a good way. there's a core of us in each seminar who keep the discussion going - and aren't afraid to throw in opinions even if we're ultimately proved wrong. But more than half the class say nothing - which seems a huge waste of the opportunity for debate offered. Even more strangely, there has been a significant number of students who have hardly shown up for classes at all, despite the fact that they're meant to be compulsory. while in my first life as a student, i wasn't the greatest lecture attender, I never missed a seminar or tutorial . Back in the '80s, I was privileged to attend university. Now I get the impression that students feel they're pretty much owed a degree once they've paid the fees. Somehow, the course has become a transactional arrangement, and that's a bit depressing for me.

Allied to this change in attitude, the other thing I notice on campus is how rude people are. Perhaps it's because I'm old enough to have fathered most other students at Brunel (though I would have had to have a pretty fast bike!), but I'm struck on a daily basis by how 'polite society' seems to have disappeared. if I hold open a door, 10 people push past in either direction; people walk straight at anyone coming in the opposite direction and barge past rather than stepping out of the way. Common courtesy is rarely, if ever, met with any thanks and there's a distinct surliness among too many undergrads and even post grads. Maybe we were all like that 25 years ago too - but I distinctly feel that there's a lack of respect not just for elders, but for each other among my young student contemporaries on campus today.

Anyway, 'old git' rant over.

Finally, I'm enjoying the US race for the White House, and recommend Justin Webb's blog. It's amazing how the world's one remaining superpower has such a weird and convoluted election process which ensures the current incumbent is a lame dog for at least a year or more of their presidency - who's even vaguely interested in Bush now, when Hilary and Barack, Mike and Mitt and all the others are wheeler-dealering around various cold bits of Uncle Sam's back yard?

I picked up my Hilary 2009 badge in Washington DC last year and I'm still with Hil. Following the disastrous lurch to the right the US has experienced with 'Dubya', I'm really hoping the Democrats get in this time. I think they have the best chance of this with Clinton, since I'm worried about Obama's inexperience and also worried that if he get the Democrat ticket, he'll prove unelectable at a national level where I'm not sure that ultra-conservative middle America is actually ready for a black president. A woman in the White House is a big step: a black man may prove a step too far and let in the Republicans. that would be a travesty.

My 'dream ticket' would be Clinton for President and Obama learning his trade as VP. Trouble is, the only truly statesman-like Democrat at the moment is Al Gore - and he shows no signs of entering the fray.

Don't panic.....they're not so different after all

Last night I had the pleasure of facilitating part of a BBC 'Yoof' event in Southampton. A group of 16-21 year olds came together and, as well as touring the Corporation's HQ in the South and having a play on a BBC Technology Bus, fed back their views on TV, radio and the internet, sharing their feelings about everything from sport and drama to whether Radio 1 is getting better or worse.

We were all geared up for a generation stating they never watch TV; that they get their news via the internet and spend all their time on Facebook and YouTube. While a couple had uploaded content to YouTube, and most had profiles on the Facebook or Bebo (or both!), the way they accessed their media was reassuringly familiar to those of us aged 40+ in the room.

Most loved the BBC's dramas and used BBC for their news. Very many still watched TV with their parents and nearly all woke up to the dulcet(?!) tones of Chris Moyles. They still watched TV according to the published schedules. Almost none had downloaded podcasts and not a single one had downloaded content to a mobile phone.

No doubt they'll all be adopting new ways of accessing and interacting with the media in the future, but for now, Generation Y is nothing like as geeky as the magicians of social media would have us believe.

I blame it all on Anne Robinson

This week marks the start of a new way of working for me. More than 22 years after graduating, I'm starting on an MA in International Relations at Brunel University.

On Monday, I spent several hours with my tutor and some of my new colleagues. Those I've met so far are from China, the US, Iraq and the Caribbean - a suitably international mix in a very ethnically diverse university. Yesterday, the pro vice chancellor informed us that the university's 15,000-strong student body encompassed 112 nationalities.

As I worked my way through a seemingly endless round of queues to enrol as a student and get all my necessary permissions and paraphernalia yesterday, I talked to students from Iran, Turkey, China, Nigeria, Ghana, the US and Finland. Barring about three others spotted on the horizon, all had something in common - they're so young.

The majority of people enrolling yesterday were post-grads, but most had come straight from completing their undergraduate studies - so were mid-20s at the oldest. And there was a fair sprinkling of fresh-faced late teens embarking on their undergraduate careers - something I did a generation ago back in 1982......it's simply so last century.

So there's me: 43 years old and 22 years out of academic rigour. It's going to be a tough transition from my normal world of corporate comms and journalism to the gilded plateau where theory outweighs application.

So why am I doing it? Blame Anne Robinson, blame the BBC - I might even blame my kids.

I've always thought I was reasonably bright, but a woolly thinker. However, I've always had a head for facts and a pragmatic means of linking information. This led to me shouting a lot at TV quiz shows and ultimately to appearing on and indeed winning Anne Robinson's BBC quiz - the Weakest Link.

And that's where I peaked...and that's probably where I should have left things. But I didn't. Three drivers marked my next moves: first, to write seriously about stuff I enjoy; second, to indulge my TV-wannabeness and third, to find an outlet for my schoolboyesque fascination with the Space Race.

One and three started to come together - but it took two to provide a temporary purpose. I decided to start researching historical narrative pieces on some of the key anniversaries of the space programme, with the view of getting some pieces published and earning a little bit of money. I've had some small successes but not enough to put all the corporate comms stuff on hold. But this time last year, driver number two took over.

I applied for Mastermind and was selected as a contender for the 2007 series. That meant structuring my research on a particular topic - SP Koralev in my case, for two minutes in the famous black leather chair. The result of my labours will be on TV next week and, I'm sure, mark the end of my life on TV.

The show was recorded in March and its conclusion meant I no longer had compelling reason to read and study the history and politics of the cold war that had so absorbed me for the previous few months.

But it got me thinking that maybe I could expand my very narrow focus and put what little knowledge I have and the lot of interest behind it to good use. So, I came along to a Brunel open day, spent three hours chatting to tutors about everything from Khruschev's drinking habits to the Baltimore Orioles. That led to submitting an application form which, to my surprise, led to an offer.

Now, that offer is real, and I spent the early part of this morning reading an introduction to the competing theories of International Relations. It's a long time since I've dealt in theories, and it's really going to be a stretch this term to absorb what's a new field for me and to structure my own thoughts coherently around it. And, unlike most of my colleagues on the course, I'm doing it part time, while still attempting to work for up to 30 hours a week.

The new way of working - at least 'til Christmas - sees me in college on a Monday and Friday with most work squeezed into Tues-Thurs. It also sees a reading hour in the morning and evening every day - discipline that doesn't come naturally.

I have to say I'm daunted but excited too. Where it will lead to...well, I'm leaving that open. But I still reckon Anne Robinson has a lot to answer for.

When the media becomes the story

I'm a member of the Regional Audience Council for the BBC in the South of England. It's an interesting forum to be involved with: we get together six times a year and discuss programmes - generally regionally-produced output - and issues facing the BBC such as on-demand broadcasting, the Licence and Charter, the analogue to digital switchover and the like.

Being on the Council also means I get a copy of Ariel each week. It's the BBC's in-house newspaper, often referred to as 'Pravda' by Corporation insiders, and it's always interesting to get another perspective on the nation's 'state' broadcaster.

Unsurprisingly, the publication's full of the BBC's response to the dodgily-edited 'Queen' programme trailer, and the revelations that Beeb employees have covered up for a lack of viewer or listener involvement by getting members of the production team or their mates to pose as callers to live (or in some cases recorded but played-out-as-live) shows.

As shown in how it has been the leading item on most BBC news bulletins - at least until the Godsend to news that was the floods - the BBC has indulged in some mightily meritorious hand-wringing and has turned itself from a corporation caught out at some minor dubious practice into a rather self-righteous driver for zero tolerance in anything that might mislead the licence-paying public.

The BBC has gone too far in banning all competitions from TV and radio - who does that help? Certainly not the viewers or listeners who now have less reason or opportunity to engage with the Corporation.

The reaction I've had from people I've talked to about the BBC's over-reaction to some poor editorial judgement has generally been along the lines of my friend Claire's reaction: 'For God's sake, they should just get over themselves and move on.'

I'm with Nick Webb from BBC Wales Sport who wrote to Ariel saying: "Any other major organisation would have dealt with these problems quietly and internally. Surely the (Director General's) own handling of the issues has done more damage than the original mistakes. Has Mark Thompson been taking publicity lessons from Gerald Ratner?'

I definitely think that Thompson should have taken on board that old adage: when you're in a hole, the last thing to do is keep digging.

My perception of his actions has been to pass the buck from the BBC to RDF - when surely the BBC as commissioners of RDF's work holds the ultimate responsibility - and to blame junior staff in an environment where there's clearly insufficient governance in place and insufficient honesty in the culture to either prevent poor editorial judgement or deal with the consequences of audience indifference in an adult way.

In bending over backwards to 'engage' with its audiences in an interactive and PC-manner, Auntie Beeb appears to have shoved its management head squarely up its own behind.

Katie Hopkins: honesty the best policy?

Sometimes wearing your stone-cold heart on your sleeve does you no favours. Apprentice shrew Katie hard-nosed Hopkins has apparently been given the push by her employers, The Met Office.

According to a BBC report, Hopkins has failed her probationary period with Britain's weather information service - and the report alludes to the fact that she may have been telling porkies about her salary too.

Hopkins considered being a bitch to be a business virtue - but in a business world where open and honest communication is a prized - though rarely realised - virtue, her Thatcherite, greed-is-goodness seems to have tripped her up big time.

She's had her day in the sun, and going 'kiss n tell' to the News of the World will, I hope, hasten her fall from C list to F list...and, I trust, F-off list.

This week: what I like/what I don't

I wrote to Tre Azam and have offered to clean up his website for him.....but he hasn't got back to me - despite me being an utter media whore.

I was at Grand Designs Live on Sunday and was interviewed on camera for Friction TV - I don't know if my piece is up there, but it's the second time in just a few weeks that someone has come up to me and stuck a camera in my face wanting my opinion. Weirdly it hasn't happened in the previous 43 years of my life, so maybe I'm growing into the face of 'Mr Joe Average'.

Anyway, Grand Designs was a significant disappointment - little to reflect the aspirational, green-tinged delight that is the Channel 4 show, and much more of hundreds of retailers trying to flog very similar looking showers, wood flooring and garden sculptures. Thanks to Nicki at WWF for the tickets - but I'm glad I didn't have to pay.

I don't like the London 2012 Olympics blog czars much either. On their own blog, responding to the launch of the event branding they say:

London 2012 team Says: 7th Jun 07, 7:11
Update: We have received many comments that reflect the tenor of negative comments found elsewhere on the web and often containing offensive language that, for obvious reasons, we cannot publish. Rather than act as an echo chamber we have published a selection here that say something a little different.

They've then printed 18 comments and seemingly closed the debate. I've shared my views - they've been censored. They weren't offensive and were as pertinent as any that have got through the censors. What annoys me hugely is that this is a publicly-funded organisation stamping on open, public debate. Isn't that totally against the spirit of a blog? Isn't it a manipulation of the media?

I do like the BBC this week and spent a couple of hours in Southampton last night locked in a passionate debate about output ranging from Springwatch to Panorama. A few years ago I started facilitating workshops as the BBC was going through a major change programme. Out of that, I got involved in Public Accountability and have ended up on the Regional Audience Council for the South of England. While i think our impact is very limited, it's good to get a chance to debate programmes we have a passionate reaction to with the people who make and broadcast them.

I came out of last night's meeting energised and far more aware of the impact of programming on other viewers and listeners. There's an awful lot wrong with the BBC, but far more right - and I applaud them for their policy of engaging with stakeholders - a nice counterpoint to London 2012 which seems very much on the defensive.

All about playing the game

Last week I interviewed Judith Leary-Joyce, whose new book, Inspirational Manager is published by Prentice Hall Business here this month. She talked a lot about the key to being a truly inspiring manager as being the ability to build and sustain great relationships.

So contrast that with the BBC's hit business show - the Apprentice which offered a fascinating semi-final last night.

Now Alan Sugar is not my idea of an Inspirational Manager. He barks and bullies and makes sure everyone knows he's always the boss. I'd hate to be apprenticed to someone whose only idea of the 'right way' is his way.

Last night's round of interviews for the candidates also showed how unprepared they are for management - one, Tre, came out as a loner and a bit of fantasist. What struck me most is how he has clearly been a favoured son, and has been brought up to believe in his own hype. One chap was nice but dull ans there's another real 'Tim nice but dim' through to the final in Simon - definitely a poor finalist from a poor selection of candidates.

The more interesting candidates were Kristina and Katie - definitely the two powers in the competition. Kristina's dogged, bright and clearly ambitious. She's a player with a hard streak - but is positively soft and fluffy when compared to Katie Hopkins who was Sugar's first choice as a finalist - but then stepped down when it finally struck her that winning the competition would mean uprooting to the lovely suburban landscape that is Brentwood. Clearly Katie had no plans to be an Essex girl.

Hopkins is the antithesis of Leary-Joyce's vision of an inspirational manager. Katie's a great relationship builder as long as those relationships are on her terms and will meet her end-game.

We've probably all had the kind of boss who'll climb over anyone's back to ensure they get to the top - and Katie coupled that duplicity with an ability to manage upwards by turning on the charm and the flirtatiousness whenever the situation demanded.

I'm not surprised that Katie is ex-army - she's part of that breed who works hard plays hard and ruthlessly removes any barriers to 'project Katie'.

The thing that amazed me most is that she's a mother to two young daughters - reading the kind of profile she provided in the Met Office's magazine last year pages 8 & 9, and watching her through the 10 weeks of tasks, family simply didn't feature.

And I don't think her family had much to do with her decision to pull out of the final. I don't think she ever had any intention of working for Sugar. Katie was in the game to win: she's been there all along to promote 'project Katie'. I'm sure she'll be successful in that, and we're witnessing the birth of another C list business celebrity a la Ruth Badger and Saira Khan.

What we're not seeing in the birth of a great manager - would you want to work for Katie Hopkins....or for that matter, have her report to you?

The Apprentice is great entertainment, but it's as much about business and management as Alan Sugar is about football - there's a connection, but it's becoming ever more tenuous.

Orbiting close to power

Some days just turn out unexpectedly.

About a week ago I took a call from someone in Development at the BBC asking me if I'd help them walk through a couple of quiz show concepts. It was to be a lunchtime's work, playing the games and feeding back in my role as an interested former quiz contender and 'critical friend' of the BBC.

So I turned up at Television Centre yesterday to be met by a researcher. We spent the next hour walking through two prime-time concepts, both of which seemed to be in their final stages of development. There was another 'critical friend' with me, a couple of BBC people, and a guy who'd previously pitched quiz ideas to the Beeb. We were told we were going to have a run through of both shows for real, and that some people from the Development team would be looking on and taking notes.

So, as we hit 1pm I was a tad gobsmacked when BBC Creative Director, Alan Yentob, BBC1 Controller Peter Fncham and TV Entertainment Controller Elaine Bedell strolled into the room, accompanied by several other recognisable faces from the Corporation's top management team.

I know we were only playing for fun - and a small fee for our services - but it certainly added an edge to the play!

I can't say anything much about the proposed shows - one's better than the other, or at least closer to a final product. One could slot into Saturday night quite easily, while I'd see the other filling a Weakest Link/Egg Heads slot.

It was interesting to see the top BBC people at work - even if it was only out of the corner of my eye, and frustrating to be ushered out quite quickly after the run-throughs were finished as I'd have loved to be a part of that particular post-match discussion.

In fact, I think that was the only weakness of the session. While we had a chance to chat about the shows with the research team, the management missed the opportunity to take our input on board as bog-standard BBC viewers and, indeed as players of the games.

So, for an hour and a quarter, my orbit intersected with the BBC's decision makers. But then, as is ever the case, we continued on our own quite separate paths.

It does make me want to come up with my own concept though - much better than being a contestant!