This is a copy of my weekly blog which I write for work and is published on the council's intranet.  The views I express in this log are my own, professional, views as the Head of Communications but do not necessarily reflect those of the authority itself.

[Takes deep breath – long very non-plain English sentence coming up]

I’m led to believe that, once James Rogers had decided to (very kindly of course) offer me the job I had applied for at the council in 2007, the conversation with Councillor Andrew Carter, to inform him of my recruitment went something like:

James: “Councillor, we have hired someone to be our new communications manager for the press and media team.”

Cllr Carter: “Good, this is excellent news.”

James: “Yes, he’s well qualified and has the skills we need to do the job and I’m confident he’ll be able to help us get to where we want to be.”

Cllr Carter: “It sounds like you’ve got the right person.”

James: “Yes, I might add that he’s dashingly handsome and a rather jolly nice bloke too – but there’s a problem.”

Cllr Carter: “Oh No!  What problem?  Don’t tell me that he’s demanding £80,000 a year and for us to have him driven to the office each day?”

James: “Yes, he is, but there’s a bigger issue.  He’s called Andrew Carter.”

Cllr Carter: “Oh bugger.  He’ll have to change it to Andy if he wants the job.”

Right, OK, I admit that I might have done a little bit of teensy-weensy embellishing with that story, but the basic gist is roughly accurate.

As you can imagine, having the same name as the leader of the council has some distinct advantages as well as disadvantages.

I remember a few months back when I booked a room for a meeting.  Rather naughtily I didn’t challenge the person who was taking the booking when they wrote my name down as Andrew Carter!

However, I do get ‘mistaken’ for Cllr Carter quite a lot – people confuse us for each other despite our obvious differences in status and age!

Perhaps one of the strangest cases of ‘mistaken identity’ happened last week when I answered a call from a reporter.  It went like this:

[My phone rings]

Me: “Hello, communications, Andy speaking.”

Caller: ‘Gosh I’m surprised you answer your own phone.  Anyway, hello Andrew, my name is XXXX and I’m calling from XXXX.”

Me: “Hello.  What can I do to help?”

Caller: “You’ve been quoted in the paper talking about high speed rail and I wondered if I could come and interview you about it please?”

Me: “Umm, I’m sorry, but you must be mistaken, I’ve not been quoted in the paper.”

Caller: “Yes you have!!  I saw your name in the Yorkshire Evening Post – let me read it to you” [proceeds to read ‘my’ quote].

Me: “No, that’s not me.  I’m Andy Carter from the communications team.  The man you are talking about is Andrew Carter the leader of the council.”

Caller: “Oh, I see.  I did think it was odd that the leader of the council was in charge of communications and answered his own phone.”

Me: [sighs in desperation]

Right, onto other business.

Thanks for all your feedback from last week's log in which I once again lambasted the media for serious lack of effort and what I saw as further falling standards.

Here are some of the comments you sent me:

Deborah in the chief executive's office says: “On the BBC this morning, the newsreader, when commenting on a serious issue said ‘this is getting curiouser and curiouser.’  Great!  Auntie Beeb are now quoting Alice in Wonderland phrases consisting of made-up words in relation to serious kidnappings.  We are only a short step away from newsreaders saying ‘OMG’ (or, to quote Blackadder, ‘Hey Nonny Nonny’).”

Andy from the business transformation team sent this: “This week I am moved to respond, based on your comment regarding the failure of journalists to do more than 'Google reference' their work. I think that this seems to be part of a wider malaise in general broadcast media. It seems that stories have to fit easily into pre-defined narrative arcs if they stand any chance of being presented to the public - it seems we can't be trusted to form our own opinions if presented with balanced arguments, far better to package an opinion as fact.”
 
And as far as a potential council radio station is concerned, David in property maintenance at Seacroft emails: “What a great idea, a local government radio station could we call it ‘Smooth City Radio’ or ‘5 Star Radio’ based on what CPA rating we get.  Only trouble is the name would be constantly changing as the audit commission move the goal posts.”

And Josh, from south Leeds youth hub messaged to say: “Rather than create an isolated LCC radio station (let’s face it – who’s going to listen, and how exciting is it going to be?), why don’t you do it jointly with the local community?”

I’m shocked Josh – are you suggesting the joint Andy and Andrew Carter show on “Smooth City Five Star Leeds Radio” every weekday morning wouldn’t attract more listeners than BBC 3 does viewers?

Shame on you!