-
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
Coast to Coast is a horrible show
- Thread starter TTalkradio1
- Start date
jmtillery said:
Latest ratings show C2C #1 in its time period in NYC On WOR. WABC blew it.
radiogroupie said:
I don't mind that it's not a political show. I just think it needs to be improved.
B
Bob1370
Guest
"Glenn Beck's show doesn't not have on conspiracy theorists, and the guests aren't crazy."
Every show has a maximum crazy quotient beyond which it becomes totally unsalable even to the gold swindlers and colon-blow formulators. Coast to Coast exhausts the crazy quotient through the guest and topic list. Beck does it all by himself with his bipolar rants, leaving no room for any guests he has to take it any further over the top.
What both programs demonstrate is a theory that the way to make noise and succeed in talk radio is by becoming the audio equivalent of a bad car accident. It's noisy, bloody and ugly but the people who perpetrate it figure you won't be able to take your ears away.
It's wearing out, folks...
Every show has a maximum crazy quotient beyond which it becomes totally unsalable even to the gold swindlers and colon-blow formulators. Coast to Coast exhausts the crazy quotient through the guest and topic list. Beck does it all by himself with his bipolar rants, leaving no room for any guests he has to take it any further over the top.
What both programs demonstrate is a theory that the way to make noise and succeed in talk radio is by becoming the audio equivalent of a bad car accident. It's noisy, bloody and ugly but the people who perpetrate it figure you won't be able to take your ears away.
It's wearing out, folks...
TTalkradio1 said:
I agree it can be improved on. Get rid of the announcer. Voice is irritating. Some new imaging inros/outros would be nice. Also the way the host talks all over the intro to songs or the guest rambling on over the bumper music singer singing. Very irritating and bush league. Other than that I think Noory is great. The rest of the weekend host suck. Even Art Bell sounds out of it most of the time he's on.
UfO, Aliens, Kidnappings is ok to talk about maybe once every two weeks, not every other night. Give us more authors AND in depth.
Bob1370 said:
I think that you are just saying that, because you dislike Beck's politics.
TTalkradio1 said:
Some of us have no ability to separate our observations from our opinions.
Some of us are very good at being objective in making observations.
Some of us can not READ objectively!
Now. Treading where angels fear to tread: TTalkradio1.... Maybe your post would have created further conversation of value if instead of trouncing all over the intentions and mindset of Bob1370, maybe you could have asked some open ended questions that would have promoted meaningful conversation.
There are probably some wise and thoughtful people who are lurkers who only read these threads, but are a bit hesitant to participate only to get slammed.
I would like to demonstrate to you by posting a question or two that you might have asked Bob1370 that would have helped Bob1370 to see that he was not being very conversational and leaving trails for further conversation when he figuratively "slammed GB up against the wall". That will be hard for me to do because I have absolutely NO appreciation for the Beck style. But maybe this would been a starter:
And if that question were asked of me, the answer would be: "I am something of a political Centrist so I do not agree with some of the political thinking of GB. I am something of a civilist when it comes to people interfacing with each other. I consider the verbiage, the conversation, the audio output of GB to be socially way beyond RUDE."
The constitution provides for the freedom to express your ideas, your thoughts, your speech. I'm not sure you can read into the constitution any right to be rude and uncivilized. When you express political thought that I disagree with, we can still both be in pursuit of life, liberty and happiness. When you are RUDE and UNCIVILIZED you may have deprived me of my right to pursue happiness.
No matter what someone does on the internet or talk radio, they can't stop you from pursuing happiness.Goat Rodeo Cowboy said:
If someone decides to stop pursuing happiness based on what someone on the internet or talk radio says, then that's their choice.
One can pursue happiness by being directly blunt about what one thinks, or by asking vague, open-ended questions for which there are no solutions. Then one can stick around for the replies and continue the conversations, or one can move on to other pursuits. The choices available choices are still available choices, unless there's some physical duress involved.
One man's/culture's "rudeness and uncivility" is another man's/culture's "regular way of talking."
Goat Rodeo Cowboy said:
We're talking about Beck's show being similar to Coast to Coast, and I said it wasn't. Now, you're claiming that Beck's show violates your constitutional rights, while at the same time claiming to be a political centrist? The First Amendment deals with political speech, not whether or not words make you feel good. I find Beck to be civil.
TTalkradio1 said:
Slow down. Gather in your tail feathers. Read carefully. I DID NOT say that Beck violates my constitutional rights. I said the constitution DOES NOT encourage or prohibit rudeness. It does not address civility vs. rudeness.
You can walk down the street with the firearm of your choice strapped to your waist or thrown over you shoulder, you can carry whatever religious books around that suit your taste and practice whatever the religion calls for, you can shout your lungs out as you walk down the street supporting whatever abrasive politics you like, and you can cloak yourself in the constitution and yell at everybody you meet: Buzz Off.
Those are your rights.
But if you are going to walk down the street every day behaving that way, don't come knocking on my door asking if I will send my son off to fight your wars to protect you priviledge of being rude to me on a daily basis.
It has just dawned on me that part of our problem is some of us are talking about Glenn Becks radio show and some of us are talking about Glenn Becks television broadcast. I don't receive the radio show. The few times I have heard it, it was pretty tame, pretty limp.
I do stumble into the TV broadcast. The GB TV program makes Coast to Coast seem tame and innocent by comparison. Emeril Legasse on the Food Network has made "kick it up a notch" a part of our American daily vocabulary. Rush "kicked the political conversation up a notch" almost two decades ago. Hannity came along a decade later and felt compelled to "kick the political conversation up YET ANOTHER notch". Beck looked at the scene apparently and said: "I can do that.... and I can do it better.... more successfully."
Some of us laughed about Rush. Some of us grumbled about Hannity. Beck leaves some of us looking for an appropriate oral erruption for the occasion. He indeed is free to do what he does. And I am free to cross the street and walk down the other side if I seem him coming my way.
I don't feel that way about Coast to Coast. They are civil. They are sane.... most of the time.
Goat Rodeo Cowboy said:
Coast to Coast has on Alex Jones all the time. It's not sane. I only said it needed to be improved, because it's not a good show now.
C2C is on WOR because they simply could no longer afford to pay Joey Reynolds the kind of money he was getting for an all-night show--New York notwithstanding. The age of the live all night show is coming to an end with C2C being the last vestige of what once was (next to AM Drive) the best time to DX or just listen to really creative, interesting, and entertaining radio.
Remember The Milk Man's Matinee? Remember Gene Shepherd when he was on all night in the early days? Even Charlie Greer doing live Dennison's commercials on WABC.
We could move outside NYC and remember Larry Glick on WBZ, Dick Haddad's All Night Diner on WDRC, or John Lyon on WMAL in Washington.
And everywhere it was The Larry King Show on Mutual.
Remember The Milk Man's Matinee? Remember Gene Shepherd when he was on all night in the early days? Even Charlie Greer doing live Dennison's commercials on WABC.
We could move outside NYC and remember Larry Glick on WBZ, Dick Haddad's All Night Diner on WDRC, or John Lyon on WMAL in Washington.
And everywhere it was The Larry King Show on Mutual.
scott5 said:
George Noory announced it last week. I doubt he would lie about something like that that is so easily verified.
Goat Rodeo Cowboy said:
In all fairness, you did say
Goat Rodeo Cowboy said:
which makes it appear as if you think Glenn Beck doing whatever on the radio "may have deprived you of your right...." Shows on the radio were the topic, not someone parading down your street and knocking on your door day after day.
Of course, perhaps speaking more directly and less obtusely might have clarified that position. I don't think anyone would have taken that as "uncivil or rude." Then you wouldn't have to say "Slow down. Gather your tail feathers" as if their interpretation was the sole reason for your miscommunication. That was kind of "uncivil and rude."
quadraphonic said:
I accept your observations about my participation in this conversation as valid observations.
There were no radio shows in existence at the time the Constitution was framed and fleshed out. I thought it was reasonable "picture in the mind" to compare a modern day radio shows with some activity that could have happened during the Colonial era. I like to contrast today's newspapers or even Internet Blogs to the leaflets and pamphleteering of old. To hold up beside a modern day talk show or cable-network presentation and compare it to something that could have been taking place in 1790, I chose the picture of someone going down the street, knocking on doors, and giving an earful to those who would open the door a listening.
You may find that a useless exercise, a stretching of reality. I am fond of saying: If we could bring back all the men who contributed to the formation of our Constitution, give them six months or a year to travel our country and absorb our current day values and culture, and then say to them: If you had it to do over again, would these experiences of recent months cause you to choose any words or phrases differently for the Constitution?
Of course, that is something of a parlor game. We can't bring them back (Maybe some of the loyalist to the Coast to Coast broadcast would say we could ;D ) so we can only guess what their reaction might be if it were possible.
But we can have the process of playing that parlor game.... if we choose to. In this day of Toyota Lean Production schemes, spreadsheets, quarterly budgets, produce-now-or-be-gone mentality, we let our minds become little Erector-set robots that find it strange for someone to suggest: "Let's play what-if!"
I got invited to leave high-school by the school superintendent years ago when I played what-if with him and asked why we were not using California farming developments in the Ozarks written about in a premier farm magazine. So you are far from being the first to challenge my penchant for exploring "what if?" And you probably won't be the last one to take issue with my challenges to "think outside the box".
That was clearer.
- Status