I believe the correct definition is clear and concise. Without tonal hyperbole.
They present the news, not as radio personalities or 'jocks'.
-
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
Do annoying/self-absorbed DJs cause tune out?
- Thread starter tall_guy1
- Start date
They present the news, not as radio personalities or 'jocks'.
Huh? What other "News" Radio is there?
Most of the remaining AM news/talk stations have devolved into extreme political crazy talk.
NPR delivers a high quality product. Hard to believe, but some Radio users can actually think and reason...
I think you misunderstood my NPR comment, but I wasn’t as precise as I should have been. I meant they handle news in a different, calmer, more reasoned way than commercial stations.
Newsradio stations still exist, but granted they are few and far between. KOMO Seattle, WBBM Chicago, KNX Los Angeles, WINS New York City, WBZ Boston, KCBS San Francisco. Plenty more with news “blocks” in AM and PM drive.
Newsradio stations still exist, but granted they are few and far between. KOMO Seattle, WBBM Chicago, KNX Los Angeles, WINS New York City, WBZ Boston, KCBS San Francisco. Plenty more with news “blocks” in AM and PM drive.
Last edited:
True its Journalism skills.
I know what you mean though more technically NPR and affiliates are the AC of News/talk radio.
Yes. What I was trying to say but mangled it.
Chuck Geiger would have been fun to listen to in the 1990's. However Some of Cousin Brucies airchecks would be too self absorbed to me though But then again its a sampling issue on my end. I would have to been born in the 1930's listening to Ccusin Brucie at his peak in the 1960's.
I tend to find CHR jocks really annoying, their presentation is just too "I can still act like I'm a teenager when I'm 35." If you get what I am saying. Just always trying to act "cool" when you can tell it is somewhat forced. Small town jocks can sometimes be annoying too. I mean I know it isn't a major or midsize market, but some of them need to really up their game.
A jock who could deliver a 40 share was a big star back in the day. Do the math, though, and it meant 60 percent of the audience was listening to someone else.
There is no universally appealing approach.
There is no universally appealing approach.
Well that is somewhat deceiving. Because that 60 percent was spread out over many stations. The logic here is the biggest percentage can bill the highest.
I wasn’t thinking about billing. I was addressing the initial question about “annoying” jock styles and pointing out that there is no universally appealing approach. The most well-regarded talents in the medium couldn’t get everyone, or even a majority, to listen.
Gotcha. There are two main ways radio stations win. One of course is ratings. The other is billing. But, wait...the two go hand in hand in most markets. I understand some high rated stations don't bill well, but in the end they do. (And I understand smaller markets are a somewhat different animal). Talents in radio are few and far between these days, it is basically the music that is played to create ratings. Radio stations in 2022 will need to create the best music mix to reach customers and probably let go of the idea the personalities make any difference. (Some exceptions with major talent). The days of major radio talent are behind us on music stations, but all-talk is obviously different.
Last edited:
When Scott Ferrall's show first started on CBS Sports Radio, I heard his first night on the air. He said his voice was that way naturally, it may have been due to some illness he had when young -- I don't remember the story completely, but I remember him saying it was the way he naturally spoke. FWIW.
I met Scott years ago, at I believe it was the NAB Radio show. Scott had just started on a new sports-talk radio network doing nights. His voice had a bit of gravel in conversation, but not unlike most radio personalities, he adds the extra nuance to set himself apart.
I have to tell you, congratulations, RD finally got talk in the industry as a group of “us” Nashville radio friends from various facets and stations and corporations ownership and all got together this weekend. This was literally the talk of all of ten minutes about the listeners/insiders who complain that stations suck because the very life of them have been destroyed are now complaining that they don’t like many people on the air because they are annoying or not up to their standards, so they listen to other sources. As one of those who actually tries to figure out the road ahead and how to win diminishing return known as radio, the fact that people would spend time discussing who is annoying is encouraging because people are LISTENING. I often have taken up for the annoying Dave Ramsey that easily gets trashed on here. A few that don’t like Ramsey are a small group of haters in a sea of happy believers. That is what TV and radio is based upon. No one will score 100 points by everyone. Same for the voices at NPR. Look, NPR is designed to continue on a winning formula of voices that “feel emotionally attached to the betterment of a specific group of core beliefs“ that listeners relate and feel. How many of you have ever noticed that many people, when discussing certain political, social or environmental issues, literally mimic “that” voice and mannerism heard on NPR? Like the beliefs or not, this is proof of success in the NPR product. When YOU are even familiar with voices on the radio, whether you are even removing the station from your favorite presets, radio is doing it‘s job. Selling ads. When there are NO more voices and it is lifeless, then radio is done. Radio cannot profitably compete with multiple sources on their potential listeners cell/computer/in their car where don’t have to deal with fading/staticky signals or listen to subpar people on the air. Even if the source they are listening too never says a word.
And that is exemplified by the males who criticize all-Christmas programming on stations that are, for the most part, 100% targeting adult females all year long anyway.
A number one station in a major market generally has around a 5 share, give or take, and cumes less than 20% of the adult demos. And that is enough to make excellent money if well managed.
Radios have a tuning knob or button or voice command, whether integrated into a broader device or as a stand alone. I don't get the criticism of stations or talents that are working but are not designed to appeal to the person who is highly critical of their opinions.
Here's an article about the mics and processing that gives NPR its distinctive sound. Why Does NPR Have Such a Specific Sound?
Hey Tibbs! Sounds like it was quite the conversation. Had I been there, I would have said: "We program to the people who listen, not to those who don't." By choosing other sources, they have given up their rights. They're just more complaining grandpas who resent no longer being in the game.
We are now two generations removed from the era of the dominant DJ. That's important to understand. The dominant DJs began to disappear because the audience had other options. That started over 30 years ago. Maybe even longer. Those who began in the 70s and 80s had heritage, and that helped them to survive. But now they're either retiring or worse. The DJs who've come along since operate without the big advantage the earlier DJs had, which was scarcity of media. DJs today are now competing, as you know, with the artists they once presented. The artists can now go directly to their fans with social media and their own platforms. They can also attract advertisers to their podcasts, the way radio stations do. Those artists can do all of this without the DJs. When that's the context, what can a single radio station do to compete with the artists it plays every day?
Correct, there's the distinctive mic, which was once part of the company logo. But it's also in the way they TELL the story. That is something they teach their affiliates in their ongoing journalism training seminars. The style of telling a story in sound. That was first explained in a book written almost 40 years ago:
Telling the Story: The National Public Radio Guide to Radio Journalism: Npr (National Public Radio), National Public Radio (U. S.) Education Services Dept, National Public Radio (U. S.) Station Services Dept, Josephson, Larry: 9780840328618: Amazon.c
Telling the Story: The National Public Radio Guide to Radio Journalism [Npr (National Public Radio), National Public Radio (U. S.) Education Services Dept, National Public Radio (U. S.) Station Services Dept, Josephson, Larry] on Amazon.com. *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. Telling the...
www.amazon.com
Thanks for posting. I remember several years ago when I first began listening to NPR and noticed their stations had a distinctive "sound" regardless which city I was in. I tried to do an internet search for what they had in their audio chain at seemingly every station, but came up with nothing back then.
- Status