eBooks, however, have changed both the status and the economics of self-publishing. But it is also changing the reader’s relationship to the book itself. With an eBook, you can’t tell at a glance whether it’s a slim volume or a tome on the scale of Gone With the Wind. You can’t slip a finger into the end of the chapter and think, “I’ll just finish the chapter before I go to sleep”, or flip through the rest of the book and estimate how long it’s going to last you.

The speaker on the radio said that one thing the eBook was doing was reversing the trend concerning short stories. Short stories have been way out of fashion for a good long time, and almost impossible to get published. But the eBook, it was claimed, is changing all that. eBooks may just be causing the renaissance of the short story.

Curious, then, and sad, to hear that the Beeb is now planning to axe short stories from its Radio4 programming. These little 15-minute gems have been part of Radio 4 for as long as I can remember, and have been the reason I have gone out and bought books on a number of occasions. I know the Beeb seems ever more inclined to give us non-stop current affairs, but I think they will lose listeners if they do.

Workplace bullying of the clergy has become “rife”, according to the union Unite which says priests are being picked on by bishops and parishioners.

The union has set up a hotline where the clergy can report abuse, and says it deals with up to 150 cases a year.

“Bishops have got a lot nastier”, says the Reverend Gerry Barlow, chair of the faith workers branch of Unite. Unite says the bullying frequently comes from superiors within the church who may be under financial pressure.

“A bullying case can go on for a long time”, says Terry Young, a former minister who runs the helpline. “They’re picked on for everything they do wrong, so in the end the person runs around terrified. You see these people unsupported, driven into depression and a nervous breakdown.”

The Church is home to some truly great people whose lives are a testament to genuine love and self-sacrifice. But I also know for sure that there is a shameful degree of severe and mind-bendingly awful bullying within the Church, not just from Church superiors but from others within the structure too. I’m not surprised there are clergy who leave depressed and broken.

More useful thoughts and questions on the topic from David Keen at St. Aidan to Abbey Manor.

She lists the current regular contributors to Thought for the day, which break down something like this:

Anglican – 9,   Christian (non specific denomination) 6,  Jewish 3,  Roman Catholic 3,  Christian Evangelical 3,  Methodist 2,  Muslim 2,  hindu    1,  Church of Scotland 1,  Baptist 1,  Sikh 1,  Buddhist 1

Or, you could read the figures as Christian – 25, other religions 8

Obviously this doesn’t include one-off presentations such as the one by the Atheist Bus promoter.

Among the under-represented groups, one of the smartest Baptists in the country is Dr Simon Perry. He should get an invitation.

My own thought is this: whenever I hear thought for the day (which isn’t every day by any means)  I am less interested in what religion the person represents, and more interested in whether their thought is interesting. My favourites are Lionel Blue, Jonathan Sacks, David Wilkinson and John Bell (two of whom have a different religion to mine, and the other two a different Christian denomination).  They consistently come up with something that I remember several hours later – or even the next day.

What do you think,  readers? Is it reasonable to have more Anglicans on the basis that more people who claim to be religious are Anglicans? Should speakers simply be chosen on the basis of how interesting they are to listen to, or on a representation of the prominence of their religion? SHould Thought for the Day remain religious/theistic, or should it branch out to include non-religious thought systems such as Atheism or secular humanism?

I would like to see better religious broadcasting, but I would envisage that as being more red-blooded coverage of actual religion. Ironing out the creases to a please-everyone offend-no-one is partly why religious broadcasting falls so often into tedium. Real live religion is far more interesting than its Radio presentation.

The first few times I presented on the BBC I got plenty of response – positive and negative – and was worried and upset about the negative. My editor, though, was ecstatic. “Excellent!” she said, with a broad smile. “If some people love it and some people hate it you’ve said something worth hearing. If no-one hates it it’s too bland to bother putting on the airwaves.”

If we’re going to have religion on the radio (and I think we should) then let’s have it with its teeth left in.

But, alas, it seems that there has been serious difficulty in raising a congregation  (unusually so for Songs of Praise, which, despite its cardigan-and-slippers image, is usually packed to the rafters.) 

I'm not altogether surprised, since any and every event in Cambridge struggles against a proliferation of events to raise an audience. There is just SO MUCH going on here, and only so many people to go round. On any given day or evening in this fine city, should you be looking to go to something, you would find two or three events to choose from that would appeal to you.

All the same, if you are shouting distance from Cambridge and free at any of the times below, you can just show up and sing. Being conducted by Jonh Rutter would be an experience. I am making an educated guess that the  sound recordings need people who can sing like nightingales but prefer to slob about in their pyjamas, whereas if you are a stylish person with tin ears, you should choose the visual recordings. Go on, I dare you.

Great St Mary's is just off the Market Square in the centre of Cambridge.

I understand that in the general run of things, impartiality is a good thing, and that listening to people who disagree with you is important. But I also think that there are times when you shouldn't be impartial. And I think this is one of them. What do you think?

Edit: Well, he bombed.  I'm still turning over in my mind where you draw a line in allowing public space to extremists.  I believe in free speech, but I'm also thinking about how swiftly the far right took power in various European countries in the 20th century, how much bloodshed ensued, and how difficult they were to shift. If we allow extremists to speak, we also need to state loud and clear that we don't agree. Three cheers for those who spoke up last night. And in particular for the brilliant Bonnie Greer – once again demonstrating that it's often the panelist who is not a politician who seems to be most switched on to the issues.