Hosted by Alan Kabel. Radio-info says WBEE has picked it up. Same idea as their AC show created a few months ago.
-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Entercom's new syndicated country evening show
- Thread starter ThePickleReport
- Start date
J
JustPastBuffalo
Guest
So much for "live and local" radio, eh? Radio just doesn't get it. First AC, now Country. Another step in the wrong direction, especially with Country, whose listeners who seem to identify with the personality of the music and the local personalities who play it. Imagine where Clay Moden would be if this had happened ten years ago. Working for CBS, he was WYRK's rising star at night and further proved his worth when he moved to morning drive. Entercom can only hope its Country show is better than the AC show it's syndicating.
Okay so fill me in. Whose is losing their job at WBEE if the station is airing a syndicated evening show?
Next, they'll wonder why the morning show numbers are "sagging"...
Megan carter was doing 7-mid on WBEE after Weslea went to middays. In january she has also started doing middays (10am-3pm) on WPXY as well. Megan will still be on PXY. If I had rto take a guess it would be that WBEE knew about the synicated show coming and just had Megan keep both shifts til the launch of the show.
B
bobn
Guest
Actually, I think Megan has been voicetracking nights on WBEE for months...and you experts did not know.
Hmmm...so much for your core arguement that "live and local" is the only way to go. By the way, how do you explain Howard Stern or Rush Limbaugh. Neither were ever local. Both are huge successes.
Voice tracking can 'suck' but doesn't always. Why aren't you against pre-recorded sit coms on tv? Or the Daily show is pre-recorded and edited for broadcast at 11 PM? Does that 'suck?'
Voice tracking is just a way of pre-recording content. Multi-market or syndicated programming could (I'm not saying it always is) be better with guests or talent or bits.
In this case, you did not even know WBEE wasn't live, and the new show is live, but not local...perhaps it's the next Howard or Rush or some country equivalent.
You all love WYSL, but most of his programming is syndicated?
I know, don't apply logic here, it gets in the way of your core arguement that if we could just go back to the 70's, radio would be great, gas prices would be reasonable, we wouldn't be in an unjust war, the economy would be....oh wait...that doesn't fly either.
Okay, resume senseless complaining and whining...
Hmmm...so much for your core arguement that "live and local" is the only way to go. By the way, how do you explain Howard Stern or Rush Limbaugh. Neither were ever local. Both are huge successes.
Voice tracking can 'suck' but doesn't always. Why aren't you against pre-recorded sit coms on tv? Or the Daily show is pre-recorded and edited for broadcast at 11 PM? Does that 'suck?'
Voice tracking is just a way of pre-recording content. Multi-market or syndicated programming could (I'm not saying it always is) be better with guests or talent or bits.
In this case, you did not even know WBEE wasn't live, and the new show is live, but not local...perhaps it's the next Howard or Rush or some country equivalent.
You all love WYSL, but most of his programming is syndicated?
I know, don't apply logic here, it gets in the way of your core arguement that if we could just go back to the 70's, radio would be great, gas prices would be reasonable, we wouldn't be in an unjust war, the economy would be....oh wait...that doesn't fly either.
Okay, resume senseless complaining and whining...
Back to the '70s
Thanks for the corporate POV, bobn. It's that kind of "forward thinking" that brought us consolidation, diminished service to smaller markets, diminished listening time in larger markets, diminished returns on investments, and an entire generation for whom radio is irrelevant.
I hope you get to retire before the rest of the chickens come home to roost.
One thing I can assure you of is that radio was much more fun for both the talent and the listeners back in the '70s, and I don't remember any owners going broke unless they were completely clueless and had no business in radio in the first place.
PS - As for the ass-umption that most of the posters didn't know whether 'BEE was VT'd in the evening or not, it may have more to do with their listening taste than lack of knowledge. 'BEE in Rochester or 'YRK in Buffalo could put polka music on at noon every day and I'd never notice.
PPS - When was Howard Stern a "huge success" in Rochester or Buffalo? Would Rush be a "huge success" if there was credible alternative local programming here?
Thanks for the corporate POV, bobn. It's that kind of "forward thinking" that brought us consolidation, diminished service to smaller markets, diminished listening time in larger markets, diminished returns on investments, and an entire generation for whom radio is irrelevant.
I hope you get to retire before the rest of the chickens come home to roost.
One thing I can assure you of is that radio was much more fun for both the talent and the listeners back in the '70s, and I don't remember any owners going broke unless they were completely clueless and had no business in radio in the first place.
PS - As for the ass-umption that most of the posters didn't know whether 'BEE was VT'd in the evening or not, it may have more to do with their listening taste than lack of knowledge. 'BEE in Rochester or 'YRK in Buffalo could put polka music on at noon every day and I'd never notice.
PPS - When was Howard Stern a "huge success" in Rochester or Buffalo? Would Rush be a "huge success" if there was credible alternative local programming here?
B
bobn
Guest
Why do you not address my points?
Don't know about Howard here, but in lots of markets he was number one and crushed the local guy. Apparently he did not here-point taken.
My point is that syndication, and alternatives to local programs have been around for years, and some work and some don't, based upon the quality of the show. WXXI AM has an AM syndicated show that does better ratings than Bob Smith's show. Does that the Bob Smith thing stupid. No, it provides a valuable service, as does the Morning National program.
Your point, over and over, is that "consolidation killed radio." Well, it also killed most other industries, is about to "kill" the airlines. Or is it going to save the airlines cause they are all going under due to the high cost of fuel, and the internet 'low fare' problem. Next year, you guys will be lamenting the consolidation in the airlines when right now, before consolidation, air travel is a mess.
See my point...you don't like big radio, so all syndication and voice tracking must be those "dumb suits" ruining the world.
You want to whine about 'big radio' cause you don't have a job in it. I present a valid point (voice tracking is the same as pre-recording a tv show) and you call me names and assume I'm a corporate guy.
I don't work in radio, I just listen....and have an interest.
And if you guys really want to 'discuss' radio, then listen to WBEE and then comment on the 'quality' of the national programming....or don't.
But stop pretending that you are having a real discussion when you just 'name call' anyone who disagrees.
For a while, I thought this board was valuable, now I see, that you guys are just "wanna be's"...or "never weres."
Bye
Don't know about Howard here, but in lots of markets he was number one and crushed the local guy. Apparently he did not here-point taken.
My point is that syndication, and alternatives to local programs have been around for years, and some work and some don't, based upon the quality of the show. WXXI AM has an AM syndicated show that does better ratings than Bob Smith's show. Does that the Bob Smith thing stupid. No, it provides a valuable service, as does the Morning National program.
Your point, over and over, is that "consolidation killed radio." Well, it also killed most other industries, is about to "kill" the airlines. Or is it going to save the airlines cause they are all going under due to the high cost of fuel, and the internet 'low fare' problem. Next year, you guys will be lamenting the consolidation in the airlines when right now, before consolidation, air travel is a mess.
See my point...you don't like big radio, so all syndication and voice tracking must be those "dumb suits" ruining the world.
You want to whine about 'big radio' cause you don't have a job in it. I present a valid point (voice tracking is the same as pre-recording a tv show) and you call me names and assume I'm a corporate guy.
I don't work in radio, I just listen....and have an interest.
And if you guys really want to 'discuss' radio, then listen to WBEE and then comment on the 'quality' of the national programming....or don't.
But stop pretending that you are having a real discussion when you just 'name call' anyone who disagrees.
For a while, I thought this board was valuable, now I see, that you guys are just "wanna be's"...or "never weres."
Bye
Bobn-not for me to defend Sir Roxalot, he’s seems very capable of handling that himself.
But, I think you should know that there are a variety of posters on this board, many still employed successfully in the industry. Those that I’m aware of include an owner, a former general manager, people on the air, a program director or two, salespeople and some retirees.
For you to suggest that these people are “wanna be’s” or “never weres” is just simply wrong.
The fact is radio today is not what it once was.
Stations are running more commercials than they were in the past, there’s more cookie-cutter programming resulting in more sameness from city to city, more music repetition, more recorded production pieces resulting in less input from the air personalities and less creativity in the programming in general. In short, there are very few compelling reasons to listen.
So few that radio has pretty much lost it’s next generation of listeners.
These are not just ideas cooked up by those still in the business or the posters on this board. Talk to some listeners and I think you’ll find some similar thoughts expressed.
In closing, let me ask you-what names did Sir Roxalot called you?
But, I think you should know that there are a variety of posters on this board, many still employed successfully in the industry. Those that I’m aware of include an owner, a former general manager, people on the air, a program director or two, salespeople and some retirees.
For you to suggest that these people are “wanna be’s” or “never weres” is just simply wrong.
The fact is radio today is not what it once was.
Stations are running more commercials than they were in the past, there’s more cookie-cutter programming resulting in more sameness from city to city, more music repetition, more recorded production pieces resulting in less input from the air personalities and less creativity in the programming in general. In short, there are very few compelling reasons to listen.
So few that radio has pretty much lost it’s next generation of listeners.
These are not just ideas cooked up by those still in the business or the posters on this board. Talk to some listeners and I think you’ll find some similar thoughts expressed.
In closing, let me ask you-what names did Sir Roxalot called you?
J
JustPastBuffalo
Guest
Actually, I think Megan has been voicetracking nights on WBEE for months...and you experts did not know. Hmmm...so much for your core arguement that "live and local" is the only way to go. By the way, how do you explain Howard Stern or Rush Limbaugh. Neither were ever local. Both are huge successes.
Wease beat Stern consistently in Rochester. Nuff said there. Limbaugh has been beaten and can be beaten when a local competitor with a strong signal, good talent and a commitment to local news take him on. Rob Dobson came close years ago on WGR before Rich's unexplainedly pulled the plug on him.
Voice tracking can 'suck' but doesn't always. Why aren't you against pre-recorded sit coms on tv? Or the Daily show is pre-recorded and edited for broadcast at 11 PM? Does that 'suck?'
This is a radio discussion. TV is a totally diffrent context, the difference which should be obvious, beginning with the way TV is used or consumed and somewhere down the line, how it's programmed.
Voice tracking is just a way of pre-recording content. Multi-market or syndicated programming could (I'm not saying it always is) be better with guests or talent or bits.
Bob Kingsley's country countdown is a great show. Casey's AT-40 was a great show in its time. Countdown shows are entirely different than syndicated or satellite fed daily music shows "...Not saying it always is..." key phrase. As to VT'ing. Some jocks are better at VT'ing than others. Some systems accomodate VT'ing better than others... and more significantly, some PD's allow their jocks to "do a show" whether it's VT'd or live... oh yeah, and 1some heritage stations, whether they're Country, AC or Classic Rock, draw listeners because (a) they've been in the format for years, (b) or they're the only game in town. Sound familiar?
In this case, you did not even know WBEE wasn't live, and the new show is live, but not local...perhaps it's the next Howard or Rush or some country equivalent.
Ibid. See 1. Some of us aren't zero'd in on WBEE but hear it as a P2 or even a P3 user would hear it. Let's see if the "imported" show does as well as the "live in the hard drive" local show. Bet it won't.
You all love WYSL, but most of his programming is syndicated?
Yeah, WYSL runs sat programming, some of it utterly contrary to my personal preference or political persuasion, but that programming runs seamlessly and it's augmented by local news and features.
WYSL also runs considerable locally originated programming.
Savage and his station(s) get frequent props and an occasion pass from many on this board because the man's been fighting the good fight for a long time, knows how to program, seems to be making a good living and he's not Entercom, Clear Channel or CBS, but a local guy who started an AM daytimer, put two FM's on the air, and upgraded his AM to fulltime with a competitive signal. And he's no dummy.
Not bad, eh?
Wease beat Stern consistently in Rochester. Nuff said there. Limbaugh has been beaten and can be beaten when a local competitor with a strong signal, good talent and a commitment to local news take him on. Rob Dobson came close years ago on WGR before Rich's unexplainedly pulled the plug on him.
Voice tracking can 'suck' but doesn't always. Why aren't you against pre-recorded sit coms on tv? Or the Daily show is pre-recorded and edited for broadcast at 11 PM? Does that 'suck?'
This is a radio discussion. TV is a totally diffrent context, the difference which should be obvious, beginning with the way TV is used or consumed and somewhere down the line, how it's programmed.
Voice tracking is just a way of pre-recording content. Multi-market or syndicated programming could (I'm not saying it always is) be better with guests or talent or bits.
Bob Kingsley's country countdown is a great show. Casey's AT-40 was a great show in its time. Countdown shows are entirely different than syndicated or satellite fed daily music shows "...Not saying it always is..." key phrase. As to VT'ing. Some jocks are better at VT'ing than others. Some systems accomodate VT'ing better than others... and more significantly, some PD's allow their jocks to "do a show" whether it's VT'd or live... oh yeah, and 1some heritage stations, whether they're Country, AC or Classic Rock, draw listeners because (a) they've been in the format for years, (b) or they're the only game in town. Sound familiar?
In this case, you did not even know WBEE wasn't live, and the new show is live, but not local...perhaps it's the next Howard or Rush or some country equivalent.
Ibid. See 1. Some of us aren't zero'd in on WBEE but hear it as a P2 or even a P3 user would hear it. Let's see if the "imported" show does as well as the "live in the hard drive" local show. Bet it won't.
You all love WYSL, but most of his programming is syndicated?
Yeah, WYSL runs sat programming, some of it utterly contrary to my personal preference or political persuasion, but that programming runs seamlessly and it's augmented by local news and features.
WYSL also runs considerable locally originated programming.
Savage and his station(s) get frequent props and an occasion pass from many on this board because the man's been fighting the good fight for a long time, knows how to program, seems to be making a good living and he's not Entercom, Clear Channel or CBS, but a local guy who started an AM daytimer, put two FM's on the air, and upgraded his AM to fulltime with a competitive signal. And he's no dummy.
Not bad, eh?
Name Calling?
Thanks to my fellow posters, I guess I don't have to say much other than radio and TV are two very different animals.
TV requires dozens of people - both talent and techies - to follow carefully planned moves on carefully planned sets. Scripts are carefully written and re-written, and often tested in front of focus groups before they're shot. The cost of TV studio time, distribution, and promotion dwarfs local radio.
Radio? A little less complicated. A microphone, an air personality, and a chance to entertain are all the elements.
I've watched corporate suits and consultants intentionally devalue the contributions of air talent by restricting their opportunity to entertain and connect with an audience. Few people overcame restrictive formats, liner cards, and intimidation to succeed over a long period of time. Talented people were replaced by syndication - especially after corporations were allowed to create de facto monopolies that eliminated competition. Guys like Jack Armstrong bounced from station to station to station - dragging families with them around the country. THAT'S dedication to their craft.
As far as us "wanna be's"...or "never weres" are concerned, most of us wouldn't be using aliases if we didn't have something to lose. Many of us are survivors. A few are legitimate local stars. Some have left the business, mostly because the opportunities are so few, and the pay is so low. Perhaps we're not as astute, however, as someone who doesn't "work in radio", but "just listens"....and has "an interest".
I don't have to make a case for '"dumb suits", ruining the world.' Their stock prices, declining revenues, and ratings returns illustrate the results of their actions far better than I can.
As for "name calling"... ????? Gee, I'm sorry if I said something that you took as a personal attack. I thought that I was discussing your ideas, not you as a person.
Thanks to my fellow posters, I guess I don't have to say much other than radio and TV are two very different animals.
TV requires dozens of people - both talent and techies - to follow carefully planned moves on carefully planned sets. Scripts are carefully written and re-written, and often tested in front of focus groups before they're shot. The cost of TV studio time, distribution, and promotion dwarfs local radio.
Radio? A little less complicated. A microphone, an air personality, and a chance to entertain are all the elements.
I've watched corporate suits and consultants intentionally devalue the contributions of air talent by restricting their opportunity to entertain and connect with an audience. Few people overcame restrictive formats, liner cards, and intimidation to succeed over a long period of time. Talented people were replaced by syndication - especially after corporations were allowed to create de facto monopolies that eliminated competition. Guys like Jack Armstrong bounced from station to station to station - dragging families with them around the country. THAT'S dedication to their craft.
As far as us "wanna be's"...or "never weres" are concerned, most of us wouldn't be using aliases if we didn't have something to lose. Many of us are survivors. A few are legitimate local stars. Some have left the business, mostly because the opportunities are so few, and the pay is so low. Perhaps we're not as astute, however, as someone who doesn't "work in radio", but "just listens"....and has "an interest".
I don't have to make a case for '"dumb suits", ruining the world.' Their stock prices, declining revenues, and ratings returns illustrate the results of their actions far better than I can.
As for "name calling"... ????? Gee, I'm sorry if I said something that you took as a personal attack. I thought that I was discussing your ideas, not you as a person.
Gotta agree with everything SirRoxalot says.
Stern, Rush, etc. are doing talk radio and are well known national personalities. There always has been a place for national radio shows: Arthur Godfrey, Don McNeill, Larry King and up to the current bunch. But then, and now, when it comes to music radio, local works best. By and large, music radio today is BORING. For what little personality is allowed by the suits, you might as well Voicetrack 24/7 and have the secretary answer the phone when you run a contest. Sorry, uninteresting.
Pretty soon everyone will own an Ipod type device and one of those Ipod transmitter devices. Then everyone can listen to their own music collection in the car or at home by merely tuning in to a vacant FM frequency and turning on the mini xmtr. No commercials, no songs you don't like. I have no favorite local personalities, so I won't be missing anything. If radio was still local and personality based, they could still compete. It wouldn't surprise me if in the not distant future Talk/Spoken Word programming is what radio will be mostly about.
Stern, Rush, etc. are doing talk radio and are well known national personalities. There always has been a place for national radio shows: Arthur Godfrey, Don McNeill, Larry King and up to the current bunch. But then, and now, when it comes to music radio, local works best. By and large, music radio today is BORING. For what little personality is allowed by the suits, you might as well Voicetrack 24/7 and have the secretary answer the phone when you run a contest. Sorry, uninteresting.
Pretty soon everyone will own an Ipod type device and one of those Ipod transmitter devices. Then everyone can listen to their own music collection in the car or at home by merely tuning in to a vacant FM frequency and turning on the mini xmtr. No commercials, no songs you don't like. I have no favorite local personalities, so I won't be missing anything. If radio was still local and personality based, they could still compete. It wouldn't surprise me if in the not distant future Talk/Spoken Word programming is what radio will be mostly about.
A
alw
Guest
"It wouldn't surprise me if in the not distant future Talk/Spoken Word programming is what radio will be mostly about. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I like the concept......count me in!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I like the concept......count me in!
It wouldn't surprise me if in the not distant future Talk/Spoken Word programming is what radio will be mostly about.
Maybe sooner than expected.
Inside Radio said:Support grows to block radio royalties. Nearly half of the House of Representatives has signed onto a resolution that denounces doing away with radio's long-standing exemption from performance royalties. In recent weeks 40 additional members have signed the resolution. Since last October 201 lawmakers have signed onto the resolution.
Maybe sooner than expected.
L
lchase
Guest
Yikes. That can't end well.Radknowski said:It wouldn't surprise me if in the not distant future Talk/Spoken Word programming is what radio will be mostly about.
Inside Radio said:Support grows to block radio royalties. Nearly half of the House of Representatives has signed onto a resolution that denounces doing away with radio's long-standing exemption from performance royalties. In recent weeks 40 additional members have signed the resolution. Since last October 201 lawmakers have signed onto the resolution.
Maybe sooner than expected.
Royalties Confusion
I'm confused. According to the quote from our resident painter:
Support grows to block radio royalties. Nearly half of the House of Representatives has signed onto a resolution that denounces doing away with radio's long-standing exemption from performance royalties. In recent weeks 40 additional members have signed the resolution. Since last October 201 lawmakers have signed onto the resolution.
So, I interpret this to mean that the House of Representatives is supporting radio's exemption from paying performance royalties - or keeping the "status quo" of NOT paying royalties. The resolution denounces doing away with the exemption - i.e. supports keeping the exemption.
How is this bad for radio?
I'm confused. According to the quote from our resident painter:
Support grows to block radio royalties. Nearly half of the House of Representatives has signed onto a resolution that denounces doing away with radio's long-standing exemption from performance royalties. In recent weeks 40 additional members have signed the resolution. Since last October 201 lawmakers have signed onto the resolution.
So, I interpret this to mean that the House of Representatives is supporting radio's exemption from paying performance royalties - or keeping the "status quo" of NOT paying royalties. The resolution denounces doing away with the exemption - i.e. supports keeping the exemption.
How is this bad for radio?
Doh! My first time on the board in a few weeks. You are correct SR. My bad. Damn paint thinner.
O
OttoM
Guest
Radknowski said:It wouldn't surprise me if in the not distant future Talk/Spoken Word programming is what radio will be mostly about.
Inside Radio said:Support grows to block radio royalties. Nearly half of the House of Representatives has signed onto a resolution that denounces doing away with radio's long-standing exemption from performance royalties. In recent weeks 40 additional members have signed the resolution. Since last October 201 lawmakers have signed onto the resolution.
Maybe sooner than expected.
I think you've been smelling the thinner a little too long today, Mike. This story says there's support for a resolution that says DON'T charge radio performance royalties - in other words, keep things as they are.
More info here: http://www.betanews.com/article/US_...gainst_Radio_Performance_Royalties/1194028595
In terms of moving to talk/spoken word... I guess it largely depends on how that's played as to whether it will catch my ear.
As a listener (and only that), I can certainly do without shows with the premise of "I, the host, am completely right and all of you who disagree with me are idiots." I find endless streams of "Oh, you're so right, kiss kiss kiss (where's my Chap Stick?)" to be as boring as a 20 song rotation of pop hits. That's true whether the host is live and local or national and syndicated.
Give me a diversity of well informed opinions and considered discourse, and you have me. Give me polarization, and see how fast I can spin the dial...
Yeah, I know, in my dreams, buy my own station, etc...
As a listener (and only that), I can certainly do without shows with the premise of "I, the host, am completely right and all of you who disagree with me are idiots." I find endless streams of "Oh, you're so right, kiss kiss kiss (where's my Chap Stick?)" to be as boring as a 20 song rotation of pop hits. That's true whether the host is live and local or national and syndicated.
Give me a diversity of well informed opinions and considered discourse, and you have me. Give me polarization, and see how fast I can spin the dial...
Yeah, I know, in my dreams, buy my own station, etc...
As Uncle Oskie would say, "A waste is a terrible thing to mind." I'll be care moreful to pay attention to details... and to put caps on containers emiting toxic fumes.I think you've been smelling the thinner a little too long today, Mike.
- Status
- This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.