• 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

NEW AFTERNOON DRIVE on WCPT

S

SHIFTY 1

After remotes and many calls from CHI, surprised at WCPT switch from Hartman and Goldman after 4 p.m. Joins trend from down the dial in host changes in the time slot :eek:
 
Norman Goldman won't mention by name, but sounds very p...sed that WCPT dropped hour 1 of his show. Contiuous plug to buy his app and podcast to hear the show opens second hour before "senior analyst time"
 
As a fan of having platforms for multiple political views, I basically like Goldman. But Santos is an upgrade.

For my tastes, Goldman comes off as something of a "whiner". I'm also not a fan of disrespecting those with whom you disagree. So for me, Goldman's repeated name-calling, etc. is a little hard to take. Santos also brings a little more energy to the table.

Randi Rhodes would've been a bigger upgrade, but apparently she's been deemed "too hot to handle" or otherwise persona non grata with WCPT management.

I also have some of the same complaints with Stephanie Miller as I do with Goldman. Why the character assassinations? Why the injection of "bathroom humor" into legitimate politcal debate? For a person with a background in comedy, I find her profoundly unfunny.

By contrast....whether you agree with them or not....Bill Press, Ed Schultz, Thom Hartmann, and now Santos tend to (but not always) present a more reasoned debate.
 
radioman148 said:
Agree with you on the rest, but not Ed Schultz. He's an angry man most of the time.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if it's anger or schtick....or maybe a little of both. Let me put it this way....he's known not to be well liked by everyone he's worked with. I'll leave it at that.

Basically, I like Ed. I don't always agree with him, but I don't mind him getting fired up. What I do object to is when he stoops to name-calling or occasionally (certainly not always) omitting information when building his case or laying out a scenario.

IMHO, there's also no shortage of anger on the right. I don't mind that either....as long as the point being made is grounded in fact.
 
Right about Goldman going over the top ranting to throw the South out of the U.S, Tex-A-s.republicons........ Hosts all day conveniently forget wars are ongoing from Bush to O with devastated families rarely talked about :eek:
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom