By and large, at the point at which people are able no longer able to understand what is being said.
Wow. Such high standards. Let's hope you don't get a job in teaching or teaching assessment any time soon then.
For a prestigious/high-profile vocal role such as a BBC One/Two announcer, I would expect a good standard of pronunciation. There's a wide variety of regional accents across BBC One/Two Network/NI/Scotland/Wales today - and it generally works well. Though there have been some recent additions which need to inject more charisma and writing skill - and sound a little less like they're reading a script. Oh and a good standard of pronunciation does not mean RP.
However, "And now the BBC News at Ten, wif Sophie Raworf" and "now, 'Keeping Faif'" - not to mention those various national lottery examples - don't cut it for me.
I'm a bit baffled by this. If you look in any pronounciation dictionary (e.g. Routledge or Wells) you will see plenty of th-fronting described in a wide range of UK regional accents.
Imagine my shock. Dictionary and BBC phonics tool acknowledging the existence of regional accents.
So what about, say, Lucy Worsley's or Jonathan Ross's rhotaicism? Is that unacceptable on air?
We're talking about accents - not speech impediments. And no, I wouldn't expect a speech impediment such as Jonathan's to prevent him presenting on radio and TV. Obviously, neither individual has done too badly.
But nice attempt at putting me into an awkward spot. I'm pushing for a good standard of pronunciation - not actively discriminating against those with genuine speech impediments.
As highlighted above, this debate centres around the role of the BBC TV announcer - where there ought to be much more emphasis on the quality of pronunciation, clarity and delivery. Scripting ability is also important - and I must say, there has been a notable drop in quality there in recent years. Some painfully bland stuff being churned out - with some notable exceptions.
Last edited by MMcG198 on 18 August 2018 6:43pm