how does the BBC fulfil it's remit as a PBS broadcaster?

 How does the BBC fulfil its remit as a PBS broadcaster?

1 - Analyzing LNWH - Power and profit

What is interesting about the home page, is its choice to advertise additional reading material 'advice' blogs more prominently than it does the actual podcast itself.  Representing 'Woman's Hour' as a genuine place for its evident target audience to garner advice. 

Having a variety of topics listed could potentially pull in new listeners, or consumers of Woman's Hour content because there is 'something for everyone' as so to speak.

 The flashy high saturated colours are an immediate draw-in for the eyes. Reflective of the attempted 'upbeat' and 'quirky' aesthetic that the podcast tries to represent itself with.

The reasoning behind the episodes of LNWH being chopped into 10-15 minute versions of the full radio show is probably done for a multitude of reasons:

• The removal of ad-breaks that were potentially in the initial broadcast.
• Attempts to pander to an audience that has a very low attention span, so including on the 'highlights' of an episode with the best, or decided most interesting parts keeps listeners invested.
• Someone is more likely to listen to more if the content is in bite-sized chunks. Seeing '15:05' is a lot less jarring of a commitment to make than '1:35:00'.
• If something live was responded to harshly or with negative critique, the editors of the audio clips can retroactively remove anything they so wish, so further listeners won't have complaints of what they're listening to.

2 - How do the BBC meet the needs of a diverse audience

'inform, educate and entertain'

As a Public Broadcasting Service, or PBS. - The BBC's media content is already paid for via tv licensing fees. Meaning that their shows don't need to hit any quota of success in terms of profitability. What they do need to do, is create a large quantity of niche content (Like LNHW for example) that panders to diverse audiences.  They are the Britsh Broadcasting Company, they've an obligation to offer people of all walks of life some form of content. Although I'd argue a lot of it feels artificial and forced, that's beside the point.

Audience prompts

• The target audience for this show is for an older demographic due to the themes, even to the extent it asks if you're above 16, and the hosts offer a disclaimer at the start of their episode in voice form over the upcoming themes.

• I'd argue it targets 16-30-year-old females, that are inclined to conspiracy theories, the intrigue of serial killers, etc. 

• The preferred reading I imagine is that you're entertained by the murder story (despite it being only 3 years old) and the topics at hand. But the opposed reading may be that you're disgusted by what you hear, and don't think it is kosher for something so recent to be made into drama for entertainment purposes. Can you tell which opinion I'm of?

• Something as specific and niche as discussing non-fictional murders would never be possible on a broadcasting format as it is via podcasting. Which searches for a smaller but more dedicated online fandom. 

• The show delves into toxic masculinity, relationships and so forth. With a ridiculous amount of virtue signalling to the fault of the hosts.

Industry prompts

• The show is distributed weekly upon the BBC sounds website, with all its circulation seemingly being insular. You need to be exclusively on their website to listen as opposed to other podcasts that have a broader amount of listening locations.

• The popularity of the internet and streaming services has had a positive knock-on effect on Podcasts. That act as a more modern version of radio, and pander to niche topics, so usually keep more invested fandoms due to this. Shows like the 'Bad People' podcast take full advantage of this.

• As mentioned before, if this show is licensed purely by the BBC, the chances are it doesn't need to make any quota of money, as its by-in-large already been pre-paid for. 

• This show is arguably hard to regulate, as I merely needed to tick a box to say I was above 16, and I was accessing content surrounding suicide, the murder of young women, etc, without any real means to stop me if I was below that age. The only thing really stopping children from accessing this is the fact that it probably isn't the most stimulating thing for them to listen to when there are so many other options of media to consume.