Radio Times new look

That's just not true. The BBC ONE schedule changes every few weeks; the BBC TWO schedule varies a lot, timings and content of children's programmes in particular varies according to whether the schools are on holiday or not; political programming varies a lot as do the sports events.

The BBC1 schedule though just alternates between the same handful of programmes which are exactly the same, whilst BBC2's is pretty fixed and nowadays there is little difference between the schedules in term time and out of term time.

I don't really think the issue here is so much the actual listings, but more that the expanded listings were a unique selling point of Radio Times, and now it's lost it's USP people don't feel they're getting what they pay for.

I really don't mind the new look. I'd still rather fork out for the Radio Times over the cheaper - "IS SEAN DEAD?" -soap dominated rivals.

That truly is a shameful thing to say! You can't expect everyone to remember the daytime schedule without some kind of listings mag or EPG. Fair play, some programmes are pretty standard, like This Morning, Bargain Hunt and Countdown etc, but viewers sometimes like to know what the programmes will be about to choose whether to watch or not. Excellent idea by one of the above usual suspect who suggests reducing the size of the pictures to accommodate daytime listings. Or just get rid of the extra Choices page - who can honestly say that they have actually read a double page of choices anyway?? Another reason for wanting the original daytime listings back is that it is much easier to see what is on at the same time on different channels by scanning across the page rather than down a vertical column as it is now.

OK then, TVnut15, without looking at any daytime listings using your skill and powers of memory and recall, what is on next Tuesday on BBC2 at 1.50pm?

I agree. Plus, having a job and a general dislike of tat-collecting and chav-baiting shows, having a reduced section for daytime listings doesn't bother me at all.

Personally, I'd rather have more space given over to preview features than a replication of what's available for free on the EPG.

I agree with JCB and Spencer for Hire. What sets RT apart from the cheaper magazines (and the EPG) are the fantastic exclusive features - over the past month these have included numerous ones on Doctor Who as well as an (exclusive, I think) interview with Damon Albarn and a feature on the Glastonbury Festival.

(This is my first post after having read this forum for years - please be gentle with me!)

The lack of usefulness of the new style listings will be realised at Christmas. When major Christmas Day programming is reduced to the side panel.

What will RT do next? I doubt many stereotypical RT readers watch much Five, so maybe those listings should be reduced to a tiny box?!

Me. Who can honestly say they're interested in reading the synopsis of Cash In the Attic & The Alan Titchmarsh Show?

I'm not saying the new RT design is perfect, but I'm glad some people recognise the thinking behind it. The Editor would not have just had a brainwave one morning and ordered substantial changes - they would, I'm sure, have been properly thought out and reseached.

A few things to consider...

*TV listings are freely available from the internet and 7 Day EPGs. The success of a premium cost listings magazine is in the added value. That added value offered by RT comes from the (excellent) feature pages, the previews and the overall depth of programme information.

*The average RT reader watches LESS television than the typical viewer and buys RT to help them choose the TV worth watching - hence the focus on previews and choices. Daytime tv details probably don't matter much to the typical RT reader.

*RT regards its competition as the 7 Day TV guides in the quality newspapers and the Daily Mail - not TVTimes, What's On TV and the like which are aimed at completely different readerships. (C2DE women who may be buying a guide purely to avoid buying a newspaper and who only want to read about soaps and celebs.)

Personally I think a better solution could be found for daytime within a 2 page spread but RT remains an excellent magazine and the only TV magazine I'd ever consider buying. As a literate, educated person who's a discerning viewer it's the only TV mag I can identify with.

I can't disagree with any of that, but some things that put me off the new look are:

* CBBC morning listings are now non-existant, which is very poor indeed
* Weekend sporting coverage now has far less space
* It is far harder to check across channels for any given time

I must be honest that I've grown used to the change, and haven't stopped purchasing the magazine, as you said, there's no real alternative. It's just the "We're right, you're wrong" attitude of the editorial team that rankled with me.

Actually I suspect it might be less of an issue at Christmas as any major Christmas Day programming during the day is more than likely to get a feature slot to compensate for it.

The point about the CBBC listings is fair as a point of principal - I don't like this either and it can do CBBC no favours- but some other tv guides and papers do the same.

But from RT's point of view, how many children use RT to pick their viewing? And RT does offer Children's Choices and info which may be of interest to parents about the best children's programmes.

(Having said all that I used to read John Craven's Back Pages in my younger days! And somehow always imagined that Biddy Baxter personally wrote the Blue Peter billings!)