Roe & Roeper - Afternoons On WLS

[DToTheJ]

In exactly one month, Chicago Sun-Times columnist and noted movie critic Richard Roeper will return to his radio roots and join Roe Conn on the afternoon drive show on WLS-AM. According to the Sun-Times' Stefano Esposito, starting April 12, the 2-6 PM show will be rebranded "The Roe Conn Show with Richard Roeper." How's that for an awkward title? Why not just call it "Roe & Roeper"? :

Full story:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/2098400,CST-NWS-roeper12.article

[soapbox]

"The Roe Conn Show with Richard Roeper." I haven't heard of a radio show with such a convoluted title since "The Tom Joyner Show with Isaac Hayes," on Kiss-FM in New York, in which the late singer - who had previously hosted the Kiss morning show - was limited to doing local breaks during the syndicated Joyner program, in what some media observers considered "babysitting the Tom Joyner show." Again... awkward!

[/soapbox]

 

[Rusty Muck]

Here in Cleveland, there once was "The Brian and Joe Radio Show on the Buzzard Morning Zoo" on WMMS-FM back in the mid-90s.

In all other instances they've been on-air, the show has been officially titled "The Brian and Joe Radio Show" - but this time, it was on a station that had a legacy "morning zoo" handle and didn't want to give it up. This lasted less than two years.

 

[DanStrassberg]

In exactly one month, Chicago Sun-Times columnist and noted movie critic Richard Roeper will return to his radio roots and join Roe Conn on the afternoon drive show on WLS-AM. According to the Sun-Times' Stefano Esposito, starting April 12, the 2-6 PM show will be rebranded "The Roe Conn Show with Richard Roeper." How's that for an awkward title? Why not just call it "Roe & Roeper"? :

By radio convention, the two syllable name should go first and the names are nouns, not adjectives; there is no "show," "program," or "broadcast" in the program name--simply the names of the two hosts joined by and. In other words, the proper form would be "Roeper and Roe." We are so used to hearing program names in that style, anything else would sound awkward. Roeper and Conn might also be acceptable but it doesn't roll of the tongue like Roeper and Roe, which just sounds right.

 

[TheFonz]

In exactly one month, Chicago Sun-Times columnist and noted movie critic Richard Roeper will return to his radio roots and join Roe Conn on the afternoon drive show on WLS-AM. According to the Sun-Times' Stefano Esposito, starting April 12, the 2-6 PM show will be rebranded "The Roe Conn Show with Richard Roeper." How's that for an awkward title? Why not just call it "Roe & Roeper"? :

Full story:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/2098400,CST-NWS-roeper12.article

[soapbox]

"The Roe Conn Show with Richard Roeper." I haven't heard of a radio show with such a convoluted title since "The Tom Joyner Show with Isaac Hayes," on Kiss-FM in New York, in which the late singer - who had previously hosted the Kiss morning show - was limited to doing local breaks during the syndicated Joyner program, in what some media observers considered "babysitting the Tom Joyner show." Again... awkward!

[/soapbox]

I would think that they would want to keep Roe's name prominent in the show's title. And that's how it should be. Even back in the days of Roe & Garry I always thought that Roe was about 60% of the show. I don't know if Roeper can become another Garry, but I sure hope that the show drops some of the boring guests that they've been bringing on in the last couple of years. People tune in to listen to the host (or hosts).