I see that a couple of freeview channels have undergone a chummy rebranding lately. And quite rightly - who's going to be interested in watching a channel called 'UKTV'? It hardly leaps up at you out of the listings. Far better to call it something blokey, like 'Dave'. Something better suited to endless repeats of QI and Top Gear. And something called 'The Fiver' has manifested itself on our channel list of late. M'lovely wife informs me that it previously went by the unappealing monicker of '5 Plus', or suchlike.

Well, why stop at the cheapo freeview channels? The BBC stations (remember when channels were called 'stations'? Wasn't that better? 'Station' implies something solid, somewhere you actually stop. An earmark of a superior social position. 'Channel' just seems to suggest a conduit for ephemeral waft, a pathway for meaningless drivel such as that spouted by spirit mediums) are rebranded these days in all but name, what with ONE's synchronised hippos and THREE's flowers and milkshakes. 'One' actually works pretty well for a station that still insists on styling itself as the nation's trusted informer and quality entertainer of choice, but to give your channels a number of lesser import equates to an admission of inferiority. Why not consider something more fitting? I've done a bit of blue sky thnking, and I reckon BBC2 could really dig out the niche audience it needs by calling itself 'Polenta'. Similarly, BBC3 needs to ditch the meaningless numerical reference and go by a name that's going to reel in the youth dem - I suggest 'Flange', or perhaps 'Cockpot'. By contrast, meaningless numerical references are what get BBC4 viewers hot, so from now on it'll be known as '239876928', although I'm flexible on the exact ordering of the digits.