Knoji reviews products and up-and-coming brands we think you'll love. In certain cases, we may receive a commission from brands mentioned in our guides. Learn more.

In responding to the BBC’s strategy review, I provided answers to several questions which I now feel moved to share publicly. After all, this is OUR service and we should share our views on everything relating to it not only with them but with each other. I strongly encourage everyone who feels strongly about the BBC’s proposal to close certain of their services to take time out to complete the survey which can be found at this address: https://consultations.external.bbc.co.uk/departments/bbc/bbc-strategy-review/consultation/consult_view. You can answer as many or as few questions as you like. If you care about the services you pay for, this is the best way to express your views. So, without further ado, here is my take on the questions that matter to me.

The BBC's strategic principles

The Director-General has proposed five high level principles which would set the future direction of the BBC. These are:

• putting quality first, including five areas of editorial focus for all BBC services • doing fewer things better – including stopping activities in some areas • guaranteeing access for all licence fee payers to BBC services • making the licence fee work harder – being efficient and offering better value for money • setting new boundaries The Trust agrees that the BBC should have a set of published principles and, when these are agreed, we will ensure that the BBC is held to account for achieving them.

Some of the proposed principles are in response to challenges the Trust has set the BBC – such as focussing on high quality programmes and considering whether the current range of services is too large. We endorse these five principles, although we have not agreed to specific proposals in each area.

Do you think these are the right principles?

Whilst I understand that like any broadcaster or business you have to manage your funds carefully, I strongly disagree with your plans to get rid of 2 excellent stations on the grounds that they have a comparatively tiny listenership. As a license payer who listens to and enjoys programmes on both stations, I feel that you are going against your principle of making my license fee work harder and offer value for money. I (and I know that I speak for thousands) have little interest in Radio 1 and 2, and if/ when I lose my favorite programmes on 6 Music and Asian Network, the BBC will no longer offer me music programmes that I can enjoy or identify with. I should also point out that as a struggling independent musician you would be getting rid of 2 extremely valuable platforms for my non-commercial music.

Should the BBC have any other strategic principles?

I play no part in running the BBC - I don't know what your budget allocations are, how much you collect in licence fees, or what other revenue streams you get from oversees licensing, etc. I can only speak as an outsider looking in with regards to how you manage your funds and what strategies you put in place. But since you ask, it seems ludicrous that you pay salaries of up to £18 million to the likes of Jonathan Ross and then wonder what cuts you should make. I'm aware that Ross took a pay cut, but he's not the only one who commands an eye-watering salary. I should also point out that I’m a fan of the Jonathan Ross Show and of his film reviews – I think he’s something of a British institution like the BBC itself. But that does not justify the money you see fit to pay him and other high profile BBC personalities. Is it really appropriate for a public service paid for by the People to spend such a large percentage of its income on just a few of its people and then decide to axe 2 stations paid for and loved by its licence payers? To me this presents itself as a gross mismanagement of priorities.

Proposed principle: Putting Quality First

We know that you have very high expectations of BBC programmes and services. We also know that most BBC programmes and services meet audience expectations, but that some do not. The Trust will always push the BBC to do better in this respect and we're keen to know what you think.

Which BBC output do you think could be higher quality?

I can't comment on the quality of BBC services I don't watch or listen to - my reasons for not paying them much attention are down to personal preference, not issues with quality. As for my favourite programmes on 6 Music and Asian Network - Tom Robinson Introducing, Guy Garvey's Finest Hour, Pathaan's Musical Rickshaw and Bobby Friction - I have no complaints whatsoever. These programmes are engaging, fun and a brilliant showcase for music I wouldn't have otherwise come across. I would be devastated to loose any of them.

Offering you something special

The Trust believes that the BBC needs to do more than offer high quality programmes and services. We know that your expectations of the BBC are that it offers something special to you – something distinctive and better than other broadcasters. For example, the BBC should offer you thoroughly independent and impartial news, it should introduce you to new talent in drama and comedy, and its radio stations should play pop music that other radio stations don’t.

The Trust knows that you think the BBC could do more to be original and different in some areas.

Which areas should the BBC make more distinctive from other broadcasters and media?

In the spirit of the late great John Peel, the BBC should continue to give underground, alternative and new music a platform - for artists and listeners alike. Radio is awash with tired, commercial music with little or no imagination. There are one or two commercial stations which give unsigned acts a chance to get their music aired, but the style of music mimics what is already in the charts. The only other program I can think of (apart from the ones which are in danger of being axed) that plays refreshingly different sounds is Charley Gillett's World of Music on BBC World Service.

The Five Editorial Priorities

The Director-General's proposed editorial priorities are:

• The best journalism in the world • Inspiring knowledge, music and culture • Ambitious UK drama and comedy • Outstanding children’s content

• Events that bring communities and the nation together

These priorities are praise-worthy and meet with international expectations of a world class service. All apply to the very services you intend to get rid of.

Proposed principle: Doing fewer things and doing them better

The Trust believes that BBC must offer the highest quality programming. We have previously told the Director-General that we think that the pursuit of higher quality may mean doing less overall.

The Director-General has proposed a number of areas where the BBC could reduce or stop activities altogether. The suggestions are to:

• Close Radio 6 Music and focusing the BBC’s pop music output on Radio 1 and Radio 2 • Close Asian Network as a national service and aiming to serve Asian audiences better in other ways on other BBC services • Change BBC local radio stations, by investing more in breakfast, morning and drivetime shows, but share content across local stations at other times of the day • Close the BBC’s teen zone, BBC Switch • Close the teenage learning offer Blast!

• Make the BBC’s website smaller, with fewer sections. (We do not yet have the details of what will be cut)

We welcome your views on these areas.

I cannot stress enough how strongly I object to plans to close Radio 6 Music and Asian Network. You say that you plan to focus your "pop music output" on Radio 1 and 2, and this is exactly where my objections lie. The music output on the doomed stations is predominantly not "pop". There is clearly no place for it on Radio 1 and 2, and I cannot see how this will change.

As for closing BBC Switch and Blast, while I know much less about these areas of the service it seems a bad choice.

Your proposed cuts directly contravene your editorial priorities: to present "Inspiring knowledge, music and culture"; "Outstanding children’s content" and "Events that bring communities and the nation together".

Proposed principle: Guaranteeing access to BBC services

The growth of digital technologies and platforms has led to greater choice and convenience for many people in terms of how they receive and consume TV and radio programmes.

Many of the BBC’s TV, radio and online services are now delivered to you in several ways. For example, many BBC radio services are available on AM, FM and DAB radio, digital television and online devices. However, the Trust recognises that some BBC services are still unavailable on the main platforms, such as FM or DAB, in parts of the UK. The Trust believes that there is a fine balance to be struck here – between giving you the chance to receive BBC services in all the ways and devices you may have and making sure that the BBC doesn’t spend too much on delivering BBC content to you, rather than on the content itself.

If you have particular views on how you expect BBC services to be available to you, please let us know.

It occurs to me that part of BBC 6 music's problem is accessibility. I don't own a digital radio (I listen to the station through my television) and I imagine the same can be said for the majority of the population. Technology is a wonderful thing, but it is unrealistic to assume that everyone is up to speed with it - I'm certain many people who may have enjoyed 6 Music never even knew the station existed.

Proposed principle: Setting new boundaries for the BBC

The Trust has asked the Director-General to consider where the BBC could be clearer about the limits to its activities as we know there is considerable demand for this from other broadcasters and media companies and the BBC has a responsibility to consider its competitive impact on others.

The Director-General has set out a list of proposed limits to BBC activity. These are: • Reducing the BBC offer in pop music radio by closing 6 Music • Closing niche services for teenagers: BBC Switch and Blast! • Reducing BBC expenditure on programmes bought from abroad - for example, American films and dramas • Limiting BBC expenditure on sports rights • Not offering any more localised services than the BBC already does – for example, new services for individual towns or cities • Making the BBC website more focussed on particular areas. The Trust has carried out work in some of these areas already and we support some aspects to these limits: making the BBC’s website focussed and distinctive and setting limits to the BBC's local media offer. In many other areas, we recognise there are trade-offs. For example, buying a US drama can mean that viewers are offered a high quality programme at lower cost than would be possible with a new British programme.

The Trust has not taken decisions in any of these areas and we will consider each one very carefully before doing so.

Do you think that the BBC should limit its activities in these areas?

Once again, the focus of my objection is on your decision to close 6 Music. I find it laughable that part of your justification for this is based on your "responsibility to consider its competitive impact on others". If you're genuinely concerned about competitive impact, close either Radio 1 or 2, or merge those stations. If anything you're offering is redundant, it's the excessive output of commercial pop music already available across a huge variety of commercial radio stations. Once again you incorrectly refer to 6 Music as a "pop music" station. Pop music is in the minority of 6 Music's output. I can't help thinking that the decision to close the station has come from a group of people completely out of touch with music definitions and with very little idea of what 6 Music actually has to offer. It certainly isn't treading on any other broadcaster's toes, because there is nothing else like it on the radio.

My suspicions are further raised by the fact that the decision was laughably championed by Tory MP Ed Vaizey who had never actually listened to 6 Music. After spending the weekend listening to the station he had so eagerly signed a death warrant for he made a spectacular u-turn and stated "I am now an avid listener to 6 Music".

To conclude, it appears that the BBC is acting rashly and looking for the easiest route to saving money. God forbid that they look to reducing bloated salaries or cutting back on their commercial music output, which is the only area which genuinely encroaches on competitor broadcasters’ territory. Throughout the survey, I couldn’t help but notice how much emphasis is being placed on the notion that the BBC’s overall “pop music” output should be reduced. Surely the first port of call for this is either BBC Radio 1 or 2? Have the decision makers ever actually listened to 6 Music, and do they know the difference between “pop” music and the more niche, alternative genres played by 6 Music DJs? Based on their spurious and flimsy arguments for closing the service, it would appear that they haven’t.

To all artists great and small who have enjoyed airplay on either BBC 6 Music or BBC Asian Network, you have a duty to support their future and speak out against the Director General’s proposals if you haven’t already done so. No matter how much or little impact you think that airplay had, you can rest assured that it presented your music to new listeners who would not otherwise have come across your music. Are we really going to stand for having these incredibly precious services taken away from us to make way for yet more chart material? I for one am NOT.

You can do your bit by signing the petition at this address: http://www.petition.fm/petitions/6musicasiannet/1000/, completing the above survey at the address given in the first paragraph and writing your own letter of complaint to the BBC trust using this address: trust.enquiries@bbc.co.uk.