-
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
Can a Talk host be unbiased anymore on a national show?
- Thread starter brian65
- Start date
A host can try to be party-neutral, but (s)he'll eventually say something that angers some group affiliated with one of the parties.
Imagine being a local host in Dallas (the home of the Komen foundation) and trying to have an intelligent discussion on Komen for the Cure's kerfufel with Planned Parenthood.
Some out there would accuse liberal bias just for bringing it up because Komen should have the right to withhold money from anyone they choose. Others would parse words of the host and say that they didn't ask tough enough questions of the Komen foundation spokesperson.
Now amplify that for a larger more diverse national audience.
Imagine being a local host in Dallas (the home of the Komen foundation) and trying to have an intelligent discussion on Komen for the Cure's kerfufel with Planned Parenthood.
Some out there would accuse liberal bias just for bringing it up because Komen should have the right to withhold money from anyone they choose. Others would parse words of the host and say that they didn't ask tough enough questions of the Komen foundation spokesperson.
Now amplify that for a larger more diverse national audience.
The MOST interesting hosts were always the ones who engaged in lively and entertaining debate, but were REASONABLE, in much the same way MOST people are: They have some liberal views and some conservative views. THAT is how most people are. Do you really know that many people who are so extremely one way that they never deviate from their rigid all-consuming ideology? I don't.
Unfortunately, these days, talk programmers and most hosts are gutless. They feel that if they don't cater to an extreme ideology, vs. simply being reasonable yet entertaining, then they are incapable of holding an audience. Then again, many of them are probably right, in that they do not possess the talent to hold an audience's attention, so they use ideology as a crutch.
Hannity is a perfect example. He's a total drip, but people will listen because he tells them what they want to hear, regardless of whether it's true or predictably repeated every day.
Unfortunately, these days, talk programmers and most hosts are gutless. They feel that if they don't cater to an extreme ideology, vs. simply being reasonable yet entertaining, then they are incapable of holding an audience. Then again, many of them are probably right, in that they do not possess the talent to hold an audience's attention, so they use ideology as a crutch.
Hannity is a perfect example. He's a total drip, but people will listen because he tells them what they want to hear, regardless of whether it's true or predictably repeated every day.
Amen. Hannity is the worst.
It occurred to me today that the only way to introduce conservative ideas into congress would be for the current batch of republicans to just step aside, let the democrats rule, and then just wait until some of them realize the need for conservatism, claim it as their own 'new idea' and make it happen.
I'm serious.
It occurred to me today that the only way to introduce conservative ideas into congress would be for the current batch of republicans to just step aside, let the democrats rule, and then just wait until some of them realize the need for conservatism, claim it as their own 'new idea' and make it happen.
I'm serious.
Want unbiased? Watch C-SPAN (so you're saying Hitler was really a nice guy? Well, thank you for your call).
Great question.
It's all about what the listeners want. When I first started I had no intention for my show to ever discuss political topics. I thought I was simply going to answer medical questions and give advice. Well my first day on air, calls came in asking "How do I feel about what Obama wants to do with healthcare??" or "What do you think is going to happen to Medicare??"
True my first station was KDWN, a conservative station, but it appears my listeners are just as concerned, if not more, about the political changes occurring to our healthcare system than what causes nipple discharge.
Who knew??
It's all about what the listeners want. When I first started I had no intention for my show to ever discuss political topics. I thought I was simply going to answer medical questions and give advice. Well my first day on air, calls came in asking "How do I feel about what Obama wants to do with healthcare??" or "What do you think is going to happen to Medicare??"
True my first station was KDWN, a conservative station, but it appears my listeners are just as concerned, if not more, about the political changes occurring to our healthcare system than what causes nipple discharge.
Who knew??
J
JimmyJames
Guest
Corporate radio broadcasters would not allow a balanced host on the air in most cases. As you can see from these boards, and most of the lobbying and posts from people like Savage and Bill (I Need 118 CPs) Wolfenbarger, any sort of balance in politics or any restrictions on their desire to control the airwaves enmasse with satellite programs and simplistic playlists is met with resistance. Limbaugh and their ilk promote the rape and pillage of a public resource for companies like CC, so no, you won't see any fairness coming from the "local" broadcasters who think God himself gave them the right to own it all - protected by dey massas in the GOP.
No national host should be unbiased.
Nor should they be.
Back in the old PRN days, hosts like Paul Gonzales were as neutral as they could be, but you usually knew how Paul stood. He had a good midday following, as did Joel Vincent in early evenings.
Now, if you want to discuss being even handed, that is something that not only should be needed, but is sorely missing. Hannity, Levin, even Rush can't do that.
O'Reilley was very fair, as is Miller. But that's pretty much it.
Nor should they be.
Back in the old PRN days, hosts like Paul Gonzales were as neutral as they could be, but you usually knew how Paul stood. He had a good midday following, as did Joel Vincent in early evenings.
Now, if you want to discuss being even handed, that is something that not only should be needed, but is sorely missing. Hannity, Levin, even Rush can't do that.
O'Reilley was very fair, as is Miller. But that's pretty much it.
D
del_griffith
Guest
Joel Vincent. That's an old Sun Radio/People's Radio Network Name from the past. Always enjoyed his show. He never seemed all that political. But when people who were on the edge called in and dangled over the cliff he simply replied "Wow". Always liked that.
ETA: I understand he used the name Howard Hewes on the air when doing music shows in Tampa. I used to work with another guy who used Howard Hewes in Ohio who also had some Tampa experience.
ETA: I understand he used the name Howard Hewes on the air when doing music shows in Tampa. I used to work with another guy who used Howard Hewes in Ohio who also had some Tampa experience.
McConnell is still one of my favorites from WLW days; interesting to hear a different type of caller on WGN, many who are more liberal than the WLW callers.
On a political show? I don't think so. The discussions there are indicative of society at large, very polarized.
A national show that does discuss some political issues and is very balanced I think is Moneytalk with Bob Brinker. While certianly geared towards money the show does discuss many general news and political topics and doesn't seem to have a hard bias.
Dennis Miller doesn't seemed too biased on his show even though Salem produces it.
General national radio talk shows seem to be a thing of the past. Honestly, the last one I remember was Deborah Norville's short lived show in the early 90's.
Michael Jackson (not the deceased singer) who had a 1980's talk show personified balance as did Bruce Williams with Talknet, but that show, too, leaned towards a financial discussion.
A national show that does discuss some political issues and is very balanced I think is Moneytalk with Bob Brinker. While certianly geared towards money the show does discuss many general news and political topics and doesn't seem to have a hard bias.
Dennis Miller doesn't seemed too biased on his show even though Salem produces it.
General national radio talk shows seem to be a thing of the past. Honestly, the last one I remember was Deborah Norville's short lived show in the early 90's.
Michael Jackson (not the deceased singer) who had a 1980's talk show personified balance as did Bruce Williams with Talknet, but that show, too, leaned towards a financial discussion.
Clark Howard ROCKS.
ROCKS.
The first time you hear him, you're thinkin' this is the nerdiest thing you've ever heard.
Then you get hooked.
Every...single...time I hear him, he gives me "an 'Aha!' moment," a factoid I use and/or implement.
ROCKS.
The first time you hear him, you're thinkin' this is the nerdiest thing you've ever heard.
Then you get hooked.
Every...single...time I hear him, he gives me "an 'Aha!' moment," a factoid I use and/or implement.
So you think Sports-Talk Radio can produce "unbiased"? Ever hear of an angry clown named Keith Oberman?borderblaster said:
Short answer, NO. But they don't necessarily have to be "unbiased". Bias is ok if it drives the point, and as long as the host is honest about his convictions.
Sean Hannity wears his Reaganesque Republican logo on his heart for all to see, but, like him or not, he treats his on-air detractors with dignity and respect. Ever watch Hannity tangle with FOX regulars Bob Beckel or Juan Williams? They mix it up as brutally as anyone else in the medium, but always say goodnight as friends. His radio call-ins get the same respect.
Sean Hannity wears his Reaganesque Republican logo on his heart for all to see, but, like him or not, he treats his on-air detractors with dignity and respect. Ever watch Hannity tangle with FOX regulars Bob Beckel or Juan Williams? They mix it up as brutally as anyone else in the medium, but always say goodnight as friends. His radio call-ins get the same respect.
borderblaster said:
I know it really wasn't supposed to be a political show but I always enjoyed Gary Burbank on WLW. While
his show was comedic with his cast of characters, and Gary professed to be a Democrat, he had a way
of putting things that- agree or not, you didn't feel alienated. his roasting of Marge Schott in the day was
absolutely hilarious and Earl Pitts was just unique.
WLW has not been the same since Gary's retirement.
jfrancispastirchak said:
Hannity's problem isn't his partisan-ism it's his presentation ... he's BORING! The guy has a head full of lists that he spouts endlessly. On TV you can watch him tick the items off on his fingers. It's as entertaining as reading the phone book!
What makes for an interesting talk show is original, well articulated ideas. Unfortunately those are in short supply among the top syndicated talk shows.
- Status