Re: The type of move that makes me go for a different career (as if I didn't need any prodding!)
IIRC (from "RadioDaze"), wasn't Mike Ivers the morning man during the very, very early days of WMMS? Somewhere around '68 perhaps?
> > This is shameful. According to insiders at Oak Tree,
> Ivers,
> > who has some medical challenges, was told in no uncertain
> > terms a couple of years ago, that he was being switched to
> a
> > "part-time hourly wage" so that Clear Channel could
> legally
> > cancel his health benefits. Ivers, a fine, workmanlike
> jock
> > and very knowledgeable music director, was always a bit
> > testy with co-workers and listeners. After the
> "part-time"
> > switch, he sounded like a beaten man. His work on air got
>
> > even more mechanical and his attempts at sounding happy
> and
> > bright sounded even less sincere than before. Now this.
> It
> > is sickening.
> > All of you young people reading this: Prepare another
> > career to ease into around the age of 45, because
> regardless
> > of years of service, track record, or work ethic, you will
>
> > be tossed out like yesterday's garbage.
>
> Hey, CC's KIIS-FM in LA-LA-land dumped Rick Dees for Ryan
> Seacrest last year. And this was DESPITE 1) Rick being at
> KIIS for 22 years, and 2) Rick getting solid ratings in AMD.
> He was just too old. And it's set a very DISTURBING tone.
>
> I've known about Mike being shafted into part-time status
> for some time. If people ask my why I'm gearing for a career
> in library sciences now, here's the answer. The world of
> radio (and posting on this site) is nothing more than a
> hobby now. Working for CC would anhiliate any sense of
> enthuasium for me.
>
> (BTW, Mike, if you can read this, if I were able to program
> a station, I'd get you on-board. And you would be treated
> properly...

>
> > Look, Chuck is a good guy and a good fit for MJI. But to
> > have a jock on one station in midday, and then the same
> jock
> > on another station in afternoon drive further blurs the
> > lines between the brands and allows Clear Channel to
> > de-emphasise the contributions of the air personality to
> the
> > specific appeal of the radio station. It also muddys up
> any
> > ratings incentive package for the jock, since many
> listeners
> > will confuse the stations. Naturally, this does not
> matter
> > to ownership who wins regardless, bit I know for a fact
> that
> > it has completely demoralized the programmers and talent
> who
> > no longer have a clear way to measure individual
> performance
> > and justify their jobs.
> >
> > It is truly sad when two of the top-rated, most profitable
>
> > stations in the city are reduced to having the same person
>
> > doing two different, prime shifts like mid day and
> afternoon
> > drive. This is pure small-minded, small-market crap.
> > Maybe they should just follow through completely, and
> reduce
> > the entire building to 4 on-air hosts, and have each one
> > voice-track for 4 or 5 shows for four or five of their
> > Cleveland stations.
>
> It's done with traffic reporting operations. Just think: at
> Metro, there's a "Elizabeth Rhodes," a "Libby Roads," and a
> "Linda Dawson." All are the same person; I don't know who
> she really is.
>
> Likewise, there's a "Mike Gallagher" who, last I checked,
> was a weekender at WMVX/106.5. But at Metro, he's "Mike
> Stephens," "Mike Bailey," "Mike Kessler," (no relation to
> Karen, I hope!) and "Don Vernom."
>
> I'm pretty confident that "Meltzer, Metheny, Dewey, Cheatem
> & Howe" at 6200 Oaktree are thinking along these lines. Bank
> on it.
>
> > If these giant, massivly profitable
> > stations need to squeeze nickles that badly, something is
> > seriously wrong with either their business model, their
> > morality or both.
>
> I keep thinking that there's some even darker reason, but
> I'll concur with you on the existing two points. Something's
> rotten in the state of Denmark.
>
> - nate81
>