• 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

Bongino tapped for FBI Deputy Director

DavidEduardo said:
The top "journalist" at Univision was recently dismissed because he insisted in injecting opinion in news stories.
Click to expand...

If that happened in my place, I'd fire him too. I don't like it when anchors feel the need to comment on recorded stories. But they're being taught to show emotion. It appeals to the female demographic. Removing the adjectives delivers a lot of old men. Sorry about that, but that's what the research says.

Back to Bongino, you should hear the kinds of adjectives he uses on his radio show. He has passion for his subject. That's why people listen. They don't want another vanilla talk show host who tells them to have a nice day.
DavidEduardo said:
Yes, but describing him in a news story using a polarizing term is not good journalism. He is a "dedicated conservative" or a "militant conservative" but using that particular word we are discussing is not good journalism.
Click to expand...

You find it polarizing. What did you say to me about different strokes? The kind of good journalism you're looking for doesn't exist anymore.

You say Reuters is good journalism, but I see a lot of adjectives in Reuters.

Mark Roberts said:
Media have changed, outlets have changed, business models are changing. Everyone now carries around a camera and a microphone. Survival of an educational program requires adaptation.
Click to expand...

Exactly. DE loves to quote all the research studies, but maybe he's not reading the ones about news and how its's used. I do, and they all encourage newspeople to use active language, not passive language.
 
Mark Roberts said:
If I get irritated enough at the misguided attempt to redefine the term "firebrand" to have political connotations, I may one-up all of you in the credentials game.
Click to expand...
Any term that is interpreted, such as in this example, positively by some and negatively with others, is polarizing.
Mark Roberts said:
They can't. Media have changed, outlets have changed, business models are changing. Everyone now carries around a camera and a microphone. Survival of an educational program requires adaptation. At Mizzou, news-editorial (print), magazine (also print), and broadcast students and many faculty were once in defined, siloed sequences. There were a few courses everyone had to take, but the majority were sequence-specific. Not any more. The keyword is now "convergence". The print and broadcast newsrooms are in the process of being merged, if they haven't been already. Students do podcasts, blogs, etc. And so on.
Click to expand...
But the distinction between opinion and fact is still clear. Certain words are opinion-based, and journalism forbids them. Most podcasts and the like are opinion and commentary, not news shows; anything goes there.
 
TheBigA said:
If that happened in my place, I'd fire him too. I don't like it when anchors feel the need to comment on recorded stories. But they're being taught to show emotion. It appeals to the female demographic. Removing the adjectives delivers a lot of old men. Sorry about that, but that's what the research says.
Click to expand...
Not among Hispanics in the sales demos. Women wanted clear and easy to understand news without fluff, sidebars and opinions. Younger men wanted "stories I care about" which often meant "sports, sports and crime".
TheBigA said:
Back to Bongino, you should hear the kinds of adjectives he uses on his radio show. He has passion for his subject. That's why people listen. They don't want another vanilla talk show host who tells them to have a nice day.
Click to expand...
Yes, his show is all opinion, not a newscast. I'm talking about polarizing terms in news stories.
TheBigA said:
You find it polarizing. What did you say to me about different strokes? The kind of good journalism you're looking for doesn't exist anymore.

You say Reuters is good journalism, but I see a lot of adjectives in Reuters.
Click to expand...
I see few with ambiguous meanings, even in coverage of the Middle East where Reuters definitely has a perspective different that most Americans.
TheBigA said:
Exactly. DE loves to quote all the research studies, but maybe he's not reading the ones about news and how its's used. I do, and they all encourage newspeople to use active language, not passive language.
Click to expand...
"Active" does not mean "polarized". This is where we distinguish between an "active fire" and a "blazing fire". "Blazing" is active and pictorial. "Active" is somewhat passive and not very descriptive.
 
TheBigA said:
Exactly. DE loves to quote all the research studies, but maybe he's not reading the ones about news and how its's used. I do, and they all encourage newspeople to use active language, not passive language.
Click to expand...
For broadcast, that's been true for decades.

It can be taken too far. A longtime friend from my journalism days just posted on Facebook the worst lede he ever heard, which was on our campus station in 1978 (and I think I was the news director at the time, but I don't remember the exact timeline, nor do I remember hearing it):

If you woke up this morning, thank God, because Pope John Paul didn't.
Click to expand...

Well, that's certainly not passive. It also assumes that you didn't have to be awake to hear the lede.
 
DavidEduardo said:
"Active" does not mean "polarized". This is where we distinguish between an "active fire" and a "blazing fire". "Blazing" is active and pictorial. "Active" is somewhat passive and not very descriptive.
Click to expand...

You're the one who called the word "polarizing." Because YOU consider it polarizing, you're rushing to judgement. Based on your journalism training. Yet all of OUR definitions are antiquated. Do you get the picture? When you define something one way, that definition creates the bias. Once again, in Bongino's head, he would be proud to be called a firebrand by anyone. So would Rush. On some days, so would I. I think it's a positive word.

If you want to talk about "polarizing," just the name Bongino does that. He is not someone in the middle. You either love him or hate him. His boss is the same way. The polls show that even after a few short weeks. They're carrying out radical change. It's radical because it's never been done before. They're doing what their supporters say they want.
 
Doctor_Technical said:
Um... any chance we can get back to discussing radio and the mechanics of how a popular mid-day host and podcaster will be replace in just three weeks? Lance, I see you have a story saying his last day will be March 14. Any other details?
Click to expand...

From his tweets, I gather he gave his bosses at Cumulus a heads up when he was being interviewed. He's been hinting this in social media for at least a week. So I'd bet they started working on replacement already. This has actually been in the rumor mill for a while.

The way this works in syndication, the stations sign contracts for a show and a name. So the show will continue to be called Bongino for a few months with fill in hosts. Just like when Rush and Bohannon died. I wouldn't be surprised if they switch to repeats very soon. Then fill-ins, with a likely launch of a new show by the summer. Typically the affiliates have an out clause that allows them to drop the show in 90 days if the host changes. Then the company has to re-sign the affiliates again to a new show with the new host.
 
Last edited:
Doctor_Technical said:
Sure hope none of my client stations have an issue tomorrow at 10am CT. Should be an epic podcast from Danny BagOfDonuts (iykyk).
Click to expand...

It'll be interesting to hear what he says, if anything. He's built a very lucrative fan base with the podcast. His fans are fans of him, not Cumulus. The press release says he signed his current contract in 2023. That generally means his first out is in 2026. I don't know how much of the podcast he controls. He could have host rights for the podcast and not for the radio show. If so that may explain why he built a new studio. I see the podcast predates the radio show so they may have different deals, with podcast being distribution only,

radioinsight.com

Cumulus/Westwood One To Move Dan Bongino Into Rush Limbaugh Timeslot

Update 7:30pm: As we first reported this morning (see below), Cumulus Media and Westwood One have announced that Dan Bongino
radioinsight.com radioinsight.com

Bongino’s podcast has risen to the top of the charts; in 2020, the podcast was downloaded more than 117 million times. In the weeks following the election in November, it ranked either #1 or #2 among ALL podcasts on Apple.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
www.ap.org

AP Stylebook | The Associated Press

www.ap.org www.ap.org

store.stylebooks.com

AP Stylebook, 57th Edition

The spiral-bound Associated Press Stylebook, 57th Edition, includes new chapters on artificial intelligence and criminal justice, plus a detailed checklist for self-editing. Specialized chapters cover sports, business, punctuation, religion, data journali
store.stylebooks.com store.stylebooks.com

www.barnesandnoble.com

The Associated Press Stylebook: 2024-2026|Paperback

Master the style guidelines of newswriting, editing and common usage with this indispensable guide perfect for professional writers and students everywhere. The style of the Associated Press is the gold standard for news writing. With The Associated Press Stylebook in...
www.barnesandnoble.com www.barnesandnoble.com



Well there's the AP style book if one is interested why articles are worded the way they are.

But back to Bongino it will be interesting to see who Westwood One has in mind to replace his radio show while he is in the White House. Yes we expected something like this in even numbered years when someone gets appointed or runs for office. Recently, we had Pete Hegseth and Tulsi Gabbard who were Fox News Pundits get cabinet positions recently and another Pundit took their place once they got approval by the Senate to be in the White House.
 
Y2kTheNewOldies said:
But back to Bongino it will be interesting to see who Westwood One has in mind to replace his radio show while he is in the White House. Yes we expected something like this in even numbered years when someone gets appointed or runs for office.
Click to expand...
I definitely did not see describing him as what he is causing such a furor. But it will mostly be a plug and play solution; they’re not lacking for a camp of people who will march in lockstep to the talk radio orthodoxy.
 
Man, this is hard to take! Listening Bongino now, sniffling and sobbing about leaving the show. "I don't know how I'll get through the next few weeks," he just said.

I think affiliates would do well to consider Markley, VavCamp and Robbins as a replacement ... sooner rather than later!
 
wadio said:
Man, this is hard to take! Listening Bongino now, sniffling and sobbing about leaving the show. "I don't know how I'll get through the next few weeks," he just said.
Click to expand...
Wait until he takes the new job. He'll find out quickly that being deputy director of the FBI is far different from being a talk-show host whose primary goal is to rile up his audience. His new audience is going to be a lot tougher than the one he has now. That's true even if his objective is to tear things apart rather than to accomplish a productive mission. Even if Patel is there to protect him, he's going to be viewed, in an organization that can be quite insular at times, as an outsider.

If he lasts a year, I'll be surprised.
 
Mark Roberts said:
Wait until he takes the new job. He'll find out quickly that being deputy director of the FBI is far different from being a talk-show host whose primary goal is to rile up his audience. His new audience is going to be a lot tougher than the one he has now. That's true even if his objective is to tear things apart rather than to accomplish a productive mission. Even if Patel is there to protect him, he's going to be viewed, in an organization that can be quite insular at times, as an outsider.
Click to expand...
The mass firings ring any bells?
Mark Roberts said:
If he lasts a year, I'll be surprised.
Click to expand...
Like a bad penny, he won’t go away
 


Back
Top Bottom