# urbex on radio 4



## oldscrote (Oct 9, 2011)

Caught this on radio 4 this afternoon.Worth a listen.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b015mvs4/Picturing_Britain_Series_2_Beyond_the_Security_Fence/


----------



## UEP-Wales (Oct 9, 2011)

Just listened to that after being told by family about it. Would have loved to see a video style one mind but yes, worth a listen if you have a free 15mins!


----------



## Munchh (Oct 10, 2011)

The interviewee is a member on here.

Clue: He likes spending time in the Ukraine. 

Kept your radio stardom a bit quiet mate.


----------



## Priority 7 (Oct 10, 2011)

Nice interview and I worked out who this was after a second person spoke


----------



## UrbanX (Oct 10, 2011)

Ha ha! I had kept it quiet, I didn't get to hear it before it went out, so didn't know how they'd play it! I'll prob do a full report of the explore (with a crew!) later this week!


----------



## Priority 7 (Oct 10, 2011)

Nice job Urban, wasn't until they said suffolk and confirmed Em was in the car that I worked it out Li  ... came across really well and sounded more sensible than most news outlets make urbexers out to be.


----------



## UrbanX (Oct 10, 2011)

10 points to P7 for working out it was Em and I! 
Cheers, they asked some hard questions. I know a lot of people think 'no publicity is good publicity' for urbex, so took a risk. I was actually impressed they came on an explore when they could have staged the whole thing if they wanted to. 
Lol only took 28DL 10 min to call me a 'knob' and a 'looser' [sic.]


----------



## Foxylady (Oct 10, 2011)

That was great! 
Well done, Lee. Good to hear such a sympathetic reporter too. Excellent stuff.


----------



## Priority 7 (Oct 10, 2011)

Unbelievable or at least it would be if we weren't on about 28DL. See the problem is urban you went and told Radio 4 how we do it, carefully and considerately. I suspect some don't like being held to such a high standard or indeed use a torch (So don't be surprised to see that abuse wane as more of them fall through holes they don't see  )


----------



## UEP-Wales (Oct 10, 2011)

Not sure if anybody here is a member of 28DL but its also mentioned on there and not getting a good response.

Personally I think it's a great thing that press are listening to Urban Explorers and UrbanX, well done for it. I noticed last week that alot of people seem to think that we all break into buildings to do this and it's a shame that a couple of explorers do actually do this and remove things from buildings. 

You put a good light on us so thank you. If anybody hasn't listened yet, turn the TV off and click the link!


----------



## BassBooster (Oct 10, 2011)

That was a very interesting interview. Thanks for the link.


----------



## Derelict-UK (Oct 10, 2011)

The media ALWAYS get a bad reception on 28, even if it was a good article, any press is bad press when it comes to 28days.

I on the other hand quite like the media and sometimes they do come out with some good stuff. 

If more people took them along when they request it instead of abusing their requests all the time, then maybe they wouldn't get all jumped up on us.

Did you take them to RAF upper Heyford? the interviewer said you had permission and you mentioned it was on military grounds (but you also mentioned roof access and that bit threw me!).


It was an interesting listen, especially a bit unexpected on my drive to ASDA!!

I heard a quote that a police officer has asked me before too...

(on the radio it was in reply to the 'pealing paint porn')

"So do you have a girlfriend then"?

LOL


----------



## UrbanX (Oct 10, 2011)

Lol, yep the BBC were actually willing to send the presenter on an explore, when they could have easily done it in a studio. But they did insist it was all above board. Even after I had written permission it took several hundred emails (and three months) of negotiations with their legal team before they agreed! They were so so cautious! 
It wasn't upper heyford, I can pm you location. Ironically it was somewhere I was nearly busted recently before getting permission!


----------



## oldscrote (Oct 10, 2011)

Had a suspicion it was you Urban X when you mentioned an ear injury and my infallible memory lead me to this.

http://www.derelictplaces.co.uk/main/showthread.php?t=3448&highlight=urbex+injuries&page=8

I enjoyed the programme a good fair account and I await the report with interest.


----------



## Priority 7 (Oct 10, 2011)

oldscrote said:


> Had a suspicion it was you Urban X when you mentioned an ear injury and my infallible memory lead me to this.
> 
> http://www.derelictplaces.co.uk/main/showthread.php?t=3448&highlight=urbex+injuries&page=8
> 
> I enjoyed the programme, a good fair account and I await the report with interest.



Yea oldscrote that was the final key for me, suffolk, Li, Em and a bad attempt to clean your ears out...the puzzle was complete  the site is the only mystery


----------



## UEP-Wales (Oct 10, 2011)

Derelict-UK said:


> The media ALWAYS get a bad reception on 28, even if it was a good article, any press is bad press when it comes to 28days.
> 
> I on the other hand quite like the media and sometimes they do come out with some good stuff.
> 
> If more people took them along when they request it instead of abusing their requests all the time, then maybe they wouldn't get all jumped up on us.



I wouldn't have a problem with press coming along, would be quite fun actually to get them out on an explore! Personally I think the more the decent explorers are in the press showing that we do good things and only go there to take pictures rather than steal or damage things, the better.

Can I ask how you go about getting permission to go to these places though? Would I be correct by saying if I got hold of land owner details under the freedom of information act from land registry and then contacted them?

Sounds like a stupid question but not too sure as all permission visits I have done has always been somebody onsite when I've gone there.

Thanks


----------



## UrbanX (Oct 10, 2011)

Urbex-SW said:


> I wouldn't have a problem with press coming along, would be quite fun actually to get them out on an explore! Personally I think the more the decent explorers are in the press showing that we do good things and only go there to take pictures rather than steal or damage things, the better.
> 
> Can I ask how you go about getting permission to go to these places though? Would I be correct by saying if I got hold of land owner details under the freedom of information act from land registry and then contacted them?
> 
> ...



Yep, it was just that! I actually managed to get an email address, I was astonished they replied within 20 mins, saying mo problem! It's not a great site, don't get to excited! I'll do a report later in the week


----------



## UEP-Wales (Oct 10, 2011)

Fantastic stuff! There's a few places that I've had my eye on but wasn't sure about the permission side of things for most of them so great to know land registry is the way to go!

Looking forward to the report!


----------



## PaulPowers (Oct 10, 2011)

Sorry about 28dl 
I asked if this was the same one with you on :no:


----------



## Munchh (Oct 10, 2011)

The whole 'this forum, that forum' argument is an exercise in futility. Better to focus on the exploration and leave the politics alone.

With a cynical eye the 28DL thread does read a little like a back door way of having a dig at DP and/or it's members but to be perfectly frank, who gives a shit.

I am a member of both forums, in fact several others too. We all do varying degrees of the same thing, no one owns it.

I thought the overall interview was positive for exploration. The fact that it may not have been to everyone's taste is irrelevant.


----------



## UEP-Wales (Oct 10, 2011)

Munchh said:


> Better to focus on the exploration and leave the politics alone.



Well said! I did put my views across on there though 

I hate politics with a passion and see it way to often in my other line of business. Have to be honest though, it can be funny at times!


----------



## Munchh (Oct 10, 2011)

Urbex-SW said:


> Well said! I did put my views across on there though
> 
> I hate politics with a passion and see it way to often in my other line of business. Have to be honest though, it can be funny at times!



Fortunately there are good people in majority numbers across the forums all trying to pull in the same direction. The odd few idiot commentators should simply be ignored.


----------



## krela (Oct 10, 2011)

> With a cynical eye the 28DL thread does read a little like a back door way of having a dig at DP and/or it's members but to be perfectly frank, who gives a shit.



And this thread isn't having a very obvious dig at them? lol. Enough of the forum bashing please, it serves no purpose.


----------



## PaulPowers (Oct 10, 2011)

krela said:


> And this thread isn't having a very obvious dig at them? lol. Enough of the forum bashing please, it serves no purpose.



^this^

DP and 28DL are totally different sites


----------



## audi-adam (Oct 11, 2011)

PaulPowers said:


> DP and 28DL are totally different sites





Still a bit silly , nature of people i suppose


----------



## Cuban B. (Oct 11, 2011)

I think the bad points of speaking to the media nearly always outweigh the good points when it comes to urbex.


----------



## alex76 (Oct 11, 2011)

my bag of shit computer wont play it Grrrrr like its got the arse with my photoshop too double grrrrr time to get rid of this shit heap


----------



## UEP-Wales (Oct 11, 2011)

Cuban B. said:


> I think the bad points of speaking to the media nearly always outweigh the good points when it comes to urbex.



Would you mind explaining your reasons for saying this as I don't really see a bad point unless your going there to break in or something


----------



## The Archivist (Oct 11, 2011)

Cuban B. said:


> I think the bad points of speaking to the media nearly always outweigh the good points when it comes to urbex.



That depends entirely on who you speak to. The key before deciding whether to talk to the media (as it should be when deciding which media to browse/read/listen to/watch) is discretion. 

If you talk to a sensationalist or 'low-brow' paper or broadcaster, you can expect poorly-researched material that jumps to conclusions without asking the right questions. A more balanced paper or broadcaster will tend to actually research their material and take the time to get things right. There are some exceptions, but for the most part in my experience, that's how it is. 

Personally I think for a 15 minute spot this does pretty well. It's not easy to portray a mainly visual hobby through sound alone.


----------



## krela (Oct 11, 2011)

The Archivist said:


> That depends entirely on who you speak to. The key before deciding whether to talk to the media (as it should be when deciding which media to browse/read/listen to/watch) is discretion.
> 
> If you talk to a sensationalist or 'low-brow' paper or broadcaster, you can expect poorly-researched material that jumps to conclusions without asking the right questions. A more balanced paper or broadcaster will tend to actually research their material and take the time to get things right. There are some exceptions, but for the most part in my experience, that's how it is.
> 
> Personally I think for a 15 minute spot this does pretty well. It's not easy to portray a mainly visual hobby through sound alone.



It's always a good idea to ask for some previous work of the journalist before you speak to them too... it gives you an idea of the angles they use etc.

It is always a risk though, and there will always be people out there who will call you an attention seeking glory hunter.


----------



## UEP-Wales (Oct 11, 2011)

The Archivist said:


> That depends entirely on who you speak to. The key before deciding whether to talk to the media (as it should be when deciding which media to browse/read/listen to/watch) is discretion.
> 
> If you talk to a sensationalist or 'low-brow' paper or broadcaster, you can expect poorly-researched material that jumps to conclusions without asking the right questions. A more balanced paper or broadcaster will tend to actually research their material and take the time to get things right. There are some exceptions, but for the most part in my experience, that's how it is.
> 
> Personally I think for a 15 minute spot this does pretty well. It's not easy to portray a mainly visual hobby through sound alone.





krela said:


> It's always a good idea to ask for some previous work of the journalist before you speak to them too... it gives you an idea of the angles they use etc.
> 
> It is always a risk though, and there will always be people out there who will call you an attention seeking glory hunter.



Thanks both for the advice, not that I am planning on having any dealings with the media any time soon but you never know I suppose


----------



## Cuban B. (Oct 11, 2011)

Urbex-SW said:


> Would you mind explaining your reasons for saying this as I don't really see a bad point unless your going there to break in or something



Well the good points could be:
Showing urbex in a good light;
Raising the profile of sites that should be secured or maintained;
Letting other people find out about the local history of buildings in their area.

The bad points could be:
Encouraging a lot more people to get involved in urbex;
Alerting vandals and pikeys to certain derelict buildings;
Causing sites to get tightened up.

So I think the bad points usually outweigh the good.


----------



## UrbanX (Oct 11, 2011)

*Explore with the BBC*

Hi, 

Well, Em_UX and I were going to do a full report on our explore, which the BBC happened to attend. However as a thread has already been started by a sharp eared urbexer, I’ll tag some commentary on the end here to explain how it happened. 

I receive on average between two and five “contact from your website” emails a day. Most of them are silly:_ “How do I break in to X” _etc. I always reply to every single one, as silly as they are - every day. However in June I received one that looked the same, but was different. The difference was that the email address ended in *@bbc.co.uk *

I was intrigued: as we had two or three general email exchanges about urbex, I was invited to have an interview with an executive producer at Broadcasting House in London: I talked to them for an hour, non-stop. They had clearly done their research, and were extremely clued up on urbex in general. 

They stopped me after an hour and said “We absolutely love the way you talk about urbex. We’d be like you to be the sole subject of a radio show about urbex photography. 

Err… 

I asked for some time to think about it. 

I know there’s a massive school of thought that urbex doesn’t need any publicity. I have even subscribed to it for years. I started to think seriously about it. Specifically I thought of how a public awareness had shaped other ‘out there’ hobbies, like Parkour: 5 years ago you’d have thought an asbo was jumping on you bin, now you’d appreciate the artful side. 







I had a play on Google, not like I normally do, but with more simplistic terms that I’d expect someone new to the hobby would use. Two of the first results that came up were appalling. One features screen grabs of some ‘urbexers’ eBay accounts with objects taken from buildings, alongside screen grabs of the reports featuring the objects themselves. Another offered _“A forum for UK urban explorers who also enjoy breaking up crap stuff”. _No really. 

I reluctantly decided to say yes. I didn't want these people to come close to representing what we do as a hobby.

The BBC rewarded me by adding a massive element of authenticity to the documentary. They could record an interview with me at their warm studios in London, and add the sounds in later. But no, they agreed to come on an explore with me, in deepest darkest Suffolk. The only stipulation was that we must have permission. Not something I’m used to doing, but I managed to source an email address and fired off an email outlining what we wanted to do. To my surprise the reply came 20 mins later, granting full permission. 





_“Peeling paint is better than porn” _

The next three month was a torrent of several hundred emails, mainly involving the BBC legal department, along the lines of me not getting the Beeb’s best producer and presenter locked up. I spoke to Virusman26, who has posted some amazing reports on here, who done a BBC ’inside out’ episode a few years back to ask his advice, and how they portrayed what he actually said. It is also the second series of the programme, so I listened to the first series, to see how they portrayed the subjects. 






So the big day came, and due to the unique way the BBC is funded I had to pick them up and give them a lift. Inevitably I got lost on the way (it was Suffolk). What I didn’t realise is they were recording from the moment I picked them up, and I was surprised this was included in the final piece. We arrived at the site and done a couple of pre-prepared questions. 






We carried on round, although after a couple of buildings, they decided we should return to the first one for a sit down interview. “Just sit on the floor Adil” the producer barked, it’ll be more relaxed” But he was not happy at that “I’ve got 3 days in London in these jeans” I managed to find him an old PC tower to sit on, and pulled myself up a barrel. We done probably an hour interview about urbex, some nice easy anecdote, some harder questions on ethics (all of which were included!). Unfortunately throughout the interview my barrel was slowly deflating, this must have been about 20 mins as I’m not completely on the floor. 






The site wasn’t actually that great, and it was stiflingly hot, so we called it a day and all set off. Somewhat relieved it was all over Em and I were casually chatting in the front of the car, when Em winked at me and looked down, and I knew that she’d seen the producer flick the mic back on, so we shut up. 






We then had to put our 100% trust in the BBC to edit it. We wouldn’t get to hear it, or authorise anything until it went live. They recorded us for around 4 hours, and had to get it to just 15 mins. I spent more than 15 mins “Umming and arghing” and swearing, so just hoped they’d use my wittiest charming self. In the end it was somewhere in the middle. I'm glad they included bit's like me replacing the board etc. 

I know there’s still a large proportion that will hate me for agreeing to do it, maybe even think I should have let them go with the 'smashers', but theres no way I'm going to apologise, or defend my decision.

EDIT: I caught the Lorraine Kelly show 2 days later by err..accident (ahem) and can confirm Adil was still wearing the same clothes, whilst reviewing the papers


----------



## UEP-Wales (Oct 11, 2011)

A fantastic post and to be honest, you shouldn't apologise for taking them out with you or even talking to them. Yes I suppose it's a risk but at the same time, if people understood what we do, maybe less people will have guard dogs on their arms, security chasing them down and things like that.

Again, well done for doing this ( a little defending on the other forum from me ) and it really was a good listen.


----------



## Em_Ux (Oct 12, 2011)

Normally when UrbanX asks me out on an explore I say yes straight away but this time was different.
I kept changing my mind for weeks & only said yes a few days before the explore.
We both did the research & decided to go for it.

It was something I would never normally do & really took me out of my comfort zone! 

Thanks to UrbanX for asking me along.

A few shots I took on the day.





















I think UrbanX answered the questions well & I seeing how quickly the questions kept coming my mind would of gone blank & I wouldn't of known what to say!

Thanks for all the supportive replies from Em who doesn't say much!


----------



## Norfolkbloke (Oct 12, 2011)

Great stuff, really enjoyed that!

Just what was needed while I'm lying here, recovering from an inpinged nerve in my back!!!!

NB


----------



## BenCooper (Oct 12, 2011)

Cuban B. said:


> I think the bad points of speaking to the media nearly always outweigh the good points when it comes to urbex.



Couldn't agree more. The main reason I do occasionally talk to the media is for damage control - you can get a feel for whether they're going to run the story anyway, and if I can skew it so there's less talk about vandalism, "breaking in", "urban Thrillseekers" and all the usual cliches, then that might be a good thing.

In general, coverage is bad - it makes the police pay attention, it gets local papers talking about it, it gets MPs and councillors with an eye on elections jumping on the bandwagon. The more we can operate under the radar the better.


----------



## PaulPowers (Oct 12, 2011)

BenCooper said:


> In general, coverage is bad - it makes the police pay attention, it gets local papers talking about it, it gets MPs and councillors with an eye on elections jumping on the bandwagon. The more we can operate under the radar the better.



Don't get me started, I was recently told that I should be happy a website stole my images as it gives me coverage... There is a reason you don't see my face in pics I don't want bloody coverage!

they didn't find it funny when the official warning about copyright infringment turned up


----------



## Lightbuoy (Oct 12, 2011)

Well done UX 

In me own humble opinion, I think that you've done absolutely no harm at all. In a way -"Urban Exploration" means different things to different people, and with the obvious Trespassing issue as a given (though not applicable in the case of where you visited), fair play for you to go "on record". I don't believe for one minute that you've taken part in this for your own glory etc, but merely to get across to the less well versed peeps out there, to show that true "Urban Explorers" do not break & enter, are not metal theives, chavs etc. etc., and visit places perhaps for the main reasons to record & document, or simply out of curiosity, or for a change of scenery / environment?

A well put together Interview me thinks


----------

