³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ

When I was younger, my parents would force me and my little brother to sit in absolute silence the moment The Archers theme tune came on. Regardless of location, be it in the car or at the dinner table, we’d listen as Kathy and Sid discussed the corn harvest, or Helen bemoaned the rats in her attic.

Fast forward 20 years, and The Archers has been running an astoundingly long 60 years (nearly 10 years longer than Coronation Street, and close to 35 years longer than EastEnders) and, like these other soaps, it has most definitely managed to keep up with the times. With a dedicated base of listeners, the programme has a strong presence on the web.

Fans on sites like Archers Addicts discuss every aspect of the show and its characters on well-populated message boards, even writing lengthy and detailed obituaries for well-loved characters. These sites, like their TV soap contemporaries, feature amongst other things photos and descriptions of the cast and locations. The official Archers website has a very detailed interactive map of Ambridge, with drawings and descriptions of key buildings and areas.

Of course, there are many who don't want to step over this line - my parents have been given a great many books about The Archers, which they won't even open in fear of seeing the face of a cast member and "ruining it". They studiously avoid maps of the made-up village of Ambridge and mock-ups of locations because they already have visions of these places in their heads.

However, this doesn't mean they don't like to talk about The Archers with their friends. This is where social media steps in, as well as blog commentary. As with all soap operas as true to life as The Archers, many fans feel a personal affinity to characters and what happens to them, and plotlines are hotly debated.

A promise by ex-controllor of Radio 4 Mark Damazer in 2010 that an upcoming plot twist would happen that would "shake Ambridge to the core" started a debate which engulfed every social media website I visit: all my friends were posting links to speculative blog posts on Facebook, and my Twitter feed was filled with commentary both before, during and after each programme. When Ambridge finally witnessed the "shocking" event - the extremely controversial death of long-running fan-favourite Nigel Pargetter - there was so loud an outcry that I had mental images of Archers fans across the country spontaneously combusting at their computers.

And this is where the internet comes into its own. When The Archers first drifted onto the airwaves as a regular programme in 1951, listening to the programme was no doubt a very passive and personal experience. My grandparents, listening to the death of Grace Archer in 1960, couldn't have done much more than discuss the shocking event with friends over cups of tea. Nowadays, tens of thousands of distressed Archers fans are able to take to the internet to air their views. What's more, the production teams that make programmes are reaching out to them, and listening. Those upset at the death of Nigel were able to read an explanation about the decision to kill him off by ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Director of Audio & Music Tim Davie, and to send in their thoughts.

This new and still-developing connection between audiences of programmes and those who make them is interesting to consider. At the very least, it allows audiences an opportunity to voice their concerns: in some cases, it even gives them access to the thought processes behind programme-making, and in return allows programme-makers to listen to audience feedback. It will certainly be interesting to see how discussion about Britain's best-loved radio soap continues to develop across ever-changing social media platforms.

As an aside, I'm pleased to be able to tell you that the WebWise animations even feature the voice of Archers super-villain Jonathan Keeble, aka Evil Owen. Here's a link to the video about social networking - rather good, isn't it? I look forward to reading your response to it on Twitter...