• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Best Vitriol-Free Talk Shows and Hosts

UpstateNYBill said:
What does Verbal Advantage has to do with stochastic terrorism? I didn't know better vocabulary had a political bent. It's not like that one company that sold food rations on Wallbanger's or Groucho Marx on laughing gas's shows.
Click to expand...

It has to do with the fact that people who listen to right-wing talk are the target market for a product claiming to improve your vocabulary, and who resent those who, like Hartmann, use "$5 words." Hartmann apparently believes those who listen to him can handle big words.

People who listen to right-wing radio also are likely to be those who complain about teachers' salaries, resent those with educations, were upset if their kids get "too much" homework or if school interferes with family activities to "build memories, didn't care how good their kids math or verbal skills are but only wanted them to get good grades. (I'm using the past tense here because people who listen to right-wing radio are mostly too old to have kids in school any more.)
 
johnbasalla said:
Dennis Prager does not talk down to his audience, and clearly does not believe that they are dumb.
Click to expand...

I think it's safe to assume that no host thinks his or her audience is dumb. Not even the ones who have dumb audiences.
 
Don C said:
I think it's safe to assume that no host thinks his or her audience is dumb. Not even the ones who have dumb audiences.
Click to expand...

Maybe not dumb but not nearly as smart as he. Therefore, the unwashed require his guidance to make correct decisions.

Then again, I have known some hosts who secretly harbor contempt for listeners, pandering to them while considering them dumb. If you don't know any personally, rent "A Face in the Crowd."
 
MattParker said:
Don C said:
I think it's safe to assume that no host thinks his or her audience is dumb. Not even the ones who have dumb audiences.
Click to expand...

Maybe not dumb but not nearly as smart as he. Therefore, the unwashed require his guidance to make correct decisions.

Then again, I have known some hosts who secretly harbor contempt for listeners, pandering to them while considering them dumb. If you don't know any personally, rent "A Face in the Crowd."
Click to expand...
You knew Lonesome Rhodes? :eek: :eek:
 
MattParker said:
Stochastic: Involving conjecture, guessing, speculation without evidence or proof.
Terrorism: Use of violence OR INTIMIDATION to achieve some goal.
This is why Verbal Advantage runs spots in right-wing talk shows.
Stochastic terrorism is wing-nuts make stuff up to scare or discredit those who don't agree with them.
Click to expand...
Hmm, conjecture, guessing and speculation. Like the SPECULATION that any particular host is the cause of the actions of another for instance? Of course there is the INTIMIDATION of stating that those individuals therefore insight violence and are therefore comparable to Osama Bin Laden... which was precisely my point about Thom Hartmann. I most certainly do appreciate you making my point for me. In essence, by calling someone a stochastic terrorist and then drawing the parallel to the mastermind behind the worst terror attack in U.S. history, Hartmann was engaging in the very same action that he accused another of doing.

You just have to love the childish attitude: "well, I only called them a name because they called us a name first!" The left and the right both need a tall glass of shut-the-Hell-up.
 
...the long-running vitriol-free Steve King & Johnnie Putman program is still on WGN Chicago. It might still be stuck in the Chicago overnight hours, mainly because Steve prefers that time frame (so as to stay out of the interpersonal dust-ups and office politics of the daytime world inside Tribune Tower), but the show hits the West Coast at 9:00 P.M. on WGN's Internet stream...
 
The funny part is that people don't view information radio like Ramsey as talk radio. There are lots of ways to do talk without politics. I think programmers need to challenge themselves to think of all the ways they can continue to do local talk without pollitics. That's where they'll find the future of talk. Because the one trick pony is over. The conservative talk show is not the ratings panacea it used to be. Yet stations are still convinced they need to be strictly focused on that one approach in order to succeed.
 
Re: Aim higher.

Holland Cooke said:
Oh it'll always be there.
But it's 5-share stuff.
Click to expand...

Isn't pretty much everything 5 share anymore? Segmented markets and all?

There's always room for something new, even if political talk were as strong as ever.
 
Re: In THREE PAGES of posts, nobody said...?

Holland Cooke said:
DAVE RAMSEY.

Rock star.
Click to expand...

I like Ramsey. I facilitate his FPU course. I live by his principles.

He can get if not in vitriolic mud pretty close when he goes off on his rants. There are days when I wish he would dispense his advice to the train wrecks that call his show or when his empathy comes across for someone who just had a negative life event. That is good radio. The rants as far as I'm concerned can disappear.

And yes, Clark save me money too.
 
...I still wish Barry Farber was on daily syndicated or network radio. On the day of the Oklahoma City bombing, Farber and Tom Leykis were the only two I heard, and Farber the only conservative, who refused to join in on the speculation of how President Clinton could have been so lax on national security as to allow "Arab terrorists" into the country to bomb the Murrah Building. (Leykis, although actually a centrist by his own admission, was being promoted as a "liberal" at the time.) Farber repeatedly stated he would not criticise his Commander-in-Chief at a time like that. Of course, the next day it turned out to have been a couple of our homegrown terrorists instead of theirs, and Farber was the only conservitalker who didn't have to wipe that egg from his face. Barry Farber has consistently refused to jump into the contest of who can get the nastiest, and even though my conclusions are frequently opposite from his, I have never once heard him question the citizenship of anybody who disagrees with him...
 
Ultimajock said:
...I still wish Barry Farber was on daily syndicated or network radio. On the day of the Oklahoma City bombing, Farber and Tom Leykis were the only two I heard, and Farber the only conservative, who refused to join in on the speculation of how President Clinton could have been so lax on national security as to allow "Arab terrorists" into the country to bomb the Murrah Building. (Leykis, although actually a centrist by his own admission, was being promoted as a "liberal" at the time.) Farber repeatedly stated he would not criticise his Commander-in-Chief at a time like that. Of course, the next day it turned out to have been a couple of our homegrown terrorists instead of theirs, and Farber was the only conservitalker who didn't have to wipe that egg from his face. Barry Farber has consistently refused to jump into the contest of who can get the nastiest, and even though my conclusions are frequently opposite from his, I have never once heard him question the citizenship of anybody who disagrees with him...
Click to expand...

Barry is a gentleman to the nth degree.

My only problem with him was the promoting of the Christopher Ruddy stuff. But he was never incendiary and always let a voice that disagree with positions have their say. I believe he had a caller from Gainsville or Ocala during the Daynet days that Barry would often seek out that was an intelligent liberal. It was fun to hear to well read and well spoken people discuss their differences. Barry never talked down to a caller unless the caller was an out and out fool.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom