In response to my complaint to the BBC objecting to them leaking my identity to all and sundry, I have received the following email from the journalist concerned:
I have not told Simon (First name terms, eh?) anything he didn't already know. Even my radio piece said that your contribution was a result of your voice being disguised. Listeners could therefore assume that you disguised your own voice. (Bit of an assumption, I would have thought.)
Simon came to me (What, in a vision of loveliness???) wondering if it was indeed my voice, having played around with his new software. (Careful you don't go blind, Simon.) I simply said no, it was yours, disguised by yourself. That's not giving anyone a piece of any jigsaw, that's merely reiterating what should have been very obvious from the start. (Eh?)
The fact that he thought the voice was mine means that his clever piece of decoding software (Audacity - free on the net if anyone wants it. And it doesn't, in fact, 'de-code' anything, it merely enables you to reverse effects using your own assumptions.) had in fact led him further from the truth than closer to it. (Do what?)
Call me paranoid, but given that 'Simon' is a bit of a 'rent-a-gob' round at BBC Radio Kent, it wouldn't surprise me if this had all been a set-up in the first place. Which is what I had assumed from the very outset.