THE N.F.U. AND BROADCASTING [To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.]
Sia,—In a reference to a recent series of talks broadcast by the Editor of the Countryman, Sir W. Beach Thomas states in your current issue :— "The National Farmers' Union, which did not like his point of view, thereupon passed a resolution containing the clause that no me should speak-en -the wireless about farming who had not 'given some evidence of ability to cultivate land at a profit ! ' Did ever 0, responsible body forget its sense of humour quite so completely ? A further suggestion was that all talks on agriculture should be first submitted to the N.F.U. ! "
The terms of the resolution adopted by the Council of the Union in respect to the Talks in question were fully set out In the March issue of our official organ and in a leaderette in the same issue we amplified the views of the Council on the subject. The following extract from the article sufficiently indicates our point of view :—
"Whatever may be the opinion of the 'ordinary listener' in regard, to the programmes arranged for his entertainment by the various stations of the B.B.C., it will be generally conceded that the 'talks ' are given by individuals who have a practical knowledge of their several subjects. Talks, for example, by men like Sir Oliver Lodge, Sir IL Walford Davies, or Captain Eckersley have commended themselves to the wireless public because everyone recognises these men as authorities on the particular matters on which they have spoken. It is a thousand pities, therefore, that the B.B.C. should have failed to exercise their normal powers of
discrimination when they recently came to select a speaker to discuss the future of farming."
At the risk of. being convicted of lack of sense of humour, I confess I still fail to see why, if the educational work of the B.B.C. in other spheres is entrusted to experts possessing first-hand knowledge of their subjects, the same sound prin- ciple should not be followed in the case of talks on agriculture. There are plenty of capable men available without deputing the task to men who lack even the qualification of being able to quote expert opinion in support of their amiable theories.
My main object in writing to you is to contradict most emphatically the allegation that we suggested to the B.B.C. that "all talks on agriculture should be first submitted to the N.F.U." No such suggestion was ever made by this office, either on the telephone or in the course of correspon- dence. When complaints reached this office from different parts of the country in regard to the inaccurate statements made in the talks in question, we telephoned to the B.B.C. asking if we might be given an opportunity of perusing the MS. of these talks in order to verify the statements made by correspondents and others. That is the only" suggestion which we made on the subject.
I would respectfully, suggest to Sir W. Beach Thomas that he will secure more reliable information in regard to the views and policy of the N.F'.U. from this office than from irrespon. sible sources.—I am, Sir, &e., 45 Bedford Square, London, W .C.1,
Previous page
