One of the hard jobs on this team, and one I don't have to worry about too much, is organising the running order for the programme.
The editor-of-the day (Amanda today) has to arrange our coverage of stories in a logical order with regard to the importance of the stories and the way different kinds of reports will sound when they run from one to another.
Too many interviews in a row will be indigestible. Too many difficult issues will tire the listener. Too many fluffy items will annoy them. We think.
That's one of the real skills for an editor - imagining the effect of the running order.
Even in a digital age we don't have instant feedback on what the audience is doing. Would it be useful or just too scary if we did?
"523 people have just switched off in Trenton, New Jersey! Quick, get a celebrity on the phone to talk about poverty and stop this interview about North Korean nukes!"
Instead the editor has to use her professional skill and judgement to make a programme order that she guesses will carry a listener along, sometimes challenging, sometimes provoking, sometimes reassuring.
Some days it's obvious how things should work. Those are usually days when there are one or two big stories and they fall into a natural pattern.
But on other days (and this is one of them so far) there are lots of interesting stories but none particularly stands out.
Then it's a creative process to make the running order fit nicely.
And as I'm sure Amanda would tell you, that's only the beginning.
Events, technical problems, guests that go missing and taxis that get stuck in traffic can turn a neatly crafted running order into a jigsaw puzzle with some important pieces missing down the back of the sofa.