Ruth Ann Dailey on KDKA

[Radio_Realist]

Re: So Many Possibilities...

I do not disagree with your assumption that anyone hired to do local talk must have enough of a voice to meet or exceed the minimum standards. I don't think that just any old newspaper columnist or other such person could step in and do a good talk show. On the other hand, KDKA only has to find one such person, maybe two.

There are more than a few local writers who are doing rather well on the live speaking circuit. They have a good enough voice to handle speaking to large groups like Kiwanis or Rotaries, or at corporate meetings. And, they handle live Q&A sessions. Such talent isn't all that far removed from doing a radio talk show, especially if the host is paired with a good, experienced producer/call screener.

I also won't dispute that if one looks outside of the traditional radio talent pool to find cheap talent, one will find cheap talent that's only worth a cheap salary. On the other hand, a diligent search for people with raw talent and the willingness to groom them for a switch to an alternate medium could produce excellent results. For example, when the local Christian station put a preacher on the air as a talk show host, he did quite well for a while.

Another possible source for good talk host talent might be trial lawyers. I've known more than a few trial lawyers who worked in amateur theatre to hone their skills at role-playing. These individuals can think on their feet, have good sounding voices, and their experience at examining and cross-examining witnesses isn't terrible different from dealing with talk show callers.

Bottom line, I totally agree with you that they shouldn't put anyone on the air who doesn't sound good and who doesn't have the minimum skills needed to handle a radio talk show. Where I disagree is the contention that just because some host recruited from outside of the radio industry haven't been very good, that proves that no host recruited from outside of the radio industry can be very good.

> > Speaking purely theoretically, I'd be inclined to agree.
> But
> > speaking specifically about KDKA, I think they'd have far
> > more success with local host who know the local culture
> and
> > where the local bodies are buried even if those hosts were
> a
> > little lacking in on-air poise and polish. I don't think
> > that a "generic" talk show host, no matter how skilled or
> > experienced in general terms, will succeed in Pittsburgh
> as
> > well as KDKA needs them to succeed if that hired gun from
> > out of town doesn't know Pittsburgh inside and out.
> >
> > With really good, generic hosts from other markets who
> know
> > basic talk show broadcasting, but who aren't steeped in
> > local lore, KDKA has no competitive advantage over WPTT
> > other than a strong signal. Granted, that 50,000 watt
> > blowtorch is nothing to sneeze at. But with 104.7
> presenting
> > such a strong but nationally focused competition, KDKA
> needs
> > to attack the weakness of WPGB's strength. And the
> weakness
> > of 104.7's strength is the lack of local focus in the
> > content.
> >
>
>
> I think the biggest problem with local talk over the past 10
> years everywhere is that in an effort to be CHEAP, and for
> no other reason, the trend towards "ultra-local" hosts such
> as writers has led to a wave of shows done by interesting
> people who sound awful on the radio. Thus, only hard-core
> people who really care about the subject material will
> listen, (or old people who have nothing else to do)becuse
> the sound of the show isn't entertaining in itself.
> Limbaugh, Hannity and the other big-time hosts sound like
> entertainers regardless of what they're discussing. Why do
> you think Ellis Cannon is such a runaway hit? He understands
> pacing and packaging the show. Back in KD's old days, Roy
> Fox had that sound.
>
> That's why former jocks such as Quinn and Glenn Beck (who
> was an FM morning guy in Hartford most of his career) tend
> to put together really entertaining shows, they understand
> the medium.
>
> And there are planty of these guys on local stations, I've
> heard them on stations like WLW in Cincinnati, WBT in
> Charlotte, WTVN in Columbus, WFLA in Tampa. All are the
> leading news-talkers in markets smaller than Pittsburgh, and
> all are better sounding radio stations than KDKA.
>

 

[Part-timer]

Re: So Many Possibilities...

> Bottom line, I totally agree with you that they shouldn't
> put anyone on the air who doesn't sound good and who doesn't
> have the minimum skills needed to handle a radio talk show.
> Where I disagree is the contention that just because some
> host recruited from outside of the radio industry haven't
> been very good, that proves that no host recruited from
> outside of the radio industry can be very good.
>


Didn't say that. What I said was that the primary, and usually sole reason for hiring non-radio hosts is cost; many of these peple are not full-time employees and have other income, so they are doing these shows for $25K and no benefits(Maybe not in Pittsburgh because of the high number of union shops, but it's very common elsewhere).

And even someone who is an accomplished public speaker doesn't necessarily mean they will do a good radio show. A good talk show gets to the point right away, understands that every 7-8 minute segment is a self-contained bit, gets in and out of breaks with presence and a puchline, and inderstands the production value of the show. Non-radio people rarely have any sense of that, and that criticism also usually extends to athletes who become sports talk hosts. Some of those guys have shows for 20 years and never grasp that part. Does it matter to the majority of the audience? Maybe not, but in the end it's often tha almost intangible difference between the big winners and the also-rans, and KD needs to find BIG winners to balance their VERY BIG budget.<P ID="signature">______________
"With God as my witness, I could have sworn turkeys could fly."</P>

 

[GrizzledVet]

Re: So Many Possibilities...

Good radio comes from good fundamentals...it's not solely voice, intelligence or localism. It's understanding the medium, it's unique relationship with its users, and the tremendous opportunities it provides to leverage it's power.

Fundamentals. Period. Part-timer, you did a good job of explaining many that are important. Fox was indeed a master as were most KD people in those days -- including Cigna at night.

 

[MadAirchecker]

Re: So Many Possibilities...

> Good radio comes from good fundamentals...it's not solely
> voice, intelligence or localism. It's understanding the
> medium, it's unique relationship with its users, and the
> tremendous opportunities it provides to leverage it's power.
>
>
> Fundamentals. Period. Part-timer, you did a good job of
> explaining many that are important. Fox was indeed a master
> as were most KD people in those days -- including Cigna at
> night.
>

You are again correct. Too many people who come to talk radio with no background in broadcasting have no sense of pace and timing. It's easy to get caught up in a conversation with a caller and lose sight of the fact that the call is just an element in the overall show. Newcomers tend to speak too quickly and keep callers on the line too long. It's possible to make a mistake the other way, too -- I've never liked the idea of giving each caller one comment or question, automatically potting them down, then unloading them. Most need that treatment, but some deserve to hang around a little longer because they're intelligent or outrageous or whatever. How can you have a good argument with someone if they're gone after their first comment? Someone who understands radio knows when to give a caller a little more time for the overall good of the show.

 

[Radio_Realist]

Re: So Many Possibilities...

You guys are totally correct about the importance of good, solid radio fundamentals. However, as important as those things are, they aren't exactly rocket science. While most of the people in the categories I've suggested as candidates for being turned into talk show hosts might not know all those fundamentals already, it shouldn't be that difficult for them to learn them quickly, especially if they are paired with a good producer/screener.

I can't believe that someone who managed to handle law school and passing the Bar exam couldn't quickly pick up those fundamentals you refer to, especially if the station management made a point of teaching them to him.

> Good radio comes from good fundamentals...it's not solely
> voice, intelligence or localism. It's understanding the
> medium, it's unique relationship with its users, and the
> tremendous opportunities it provides to leverage it's power.
>
>
> Fundamentals. Period. Part-timer, you did a good job of
> explaining many that are important. Fox was indeed a master
> as were most KD people in those days -- including Cigna at
> night.
>

 

[MadAirchecker]

Re: So Many Possibilities...

> You guys are totally correct about the importance of good,
> solid radio fundamentals. However, as important as those
> things are, they aren't exactly rocket science. While most
> of the people in the categories I've suggested as candidates
> for being turned into talk show hosts might not know all
> those fundamentals already, it shouldn't be that difficult
> for them to learn them quickly, especially if they are
> paired with a good producer/screener.
>
> I can't believe that someone who managed to handle law
> school and passing the Bar exam couldn't quickly pick up
> those fundamentals you refer to, especially if the station
> management made a point of teaching them to him.


Nope. There's a knack to it and you'd better have some natural ability in that direction. It's peformance. You can be smart enough to graduate from medical school. That doesn't mean you could effectively do stand-up comedy just because you're given good material and some basic fundamentals.

 

[GrizzledVet]

Re: So Many Possibilities...

> I can't believe that someone who managed to handle law
> school and passing the Bar exam couldn't quickly pick up
> those fundamentals you refer to, especially if the station
> management made a point of teaching them to him.

What a statement to make! I don't think you intend this, RR (and I will not jump on you personally here), but what you have said above could be construed as total disrespect for the medium and the skills associated with it.

People cannot (necessarilly) be taught how to be a good radio broadcaster just as much as people cannot be taught to be a good painter (even those who know their colors and art history), a good actor (even those who have a great command of the language), a great preacher (even if one is devout and a liturgical scholar), or a great salesperson (even if he or she has read all of Zig's books <g>). You are comparing skills with knowledge and implying that skills -- especially skills of the arts -- are easily taught or at least a natural extension for anyone who has any degree of aptitude in a complex subject (i.e., law). This simply is not true and is a great disservice to performers and artists everywhere. And I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you did not mean it.

You *must* consider that there are "naturals" for the medium as well as those who have raw talent that can be honed and perfected. But PLEASE...the number of bright, talented, amiable people who look good on paper but can also UNDERSTAND AND EXECUTE SOUND RADIO FUNDAMENTALS is a much smaller number and the ability to do so has more to do with natural talent and art than anything a formal education (while important) delivers.

Please...respect those who know how to get behind a control board, microphone and even a VT system and make radio WORK...it is a true craft and not one that everyone can learn or have the aptitude for.

 

[Radio_Realist]

Re: So Many Possibilities...

ARRRRGGGHHHH!!!!!!

I'm not talking about taking just any old person off the street and giving them an instant crash course in broadcasting. But I do not believe that someone who has a wealth of experience in verbal communication in several different media and who has learned how to learn new skills could not quickly learn the nuances of hosting a radio talk show, especially with the assistance of a skilled and experienced producer/call screener to shepard him through his first few shows.

Sure, it's performance. So is addressing a jury, or examining a hostile witness. And though those types of performance aren't identical, lessons learned in one can be applied to the other. As for things like timing, etc., one would assume that the new talk host wouldn't be simply thrown to the wolves. The producer would be using hand signals, notes, and discussions during commercial breaks to lead the neophyte on the correct path.

After all, I'm talking about conducting a talent search to find one or two really outstanding candidates, not simply making a phone call to the Post-Gazette or the Bar Association to "send over anyone who's not busy". I'm sure that after a good, proactive search, a round of well conducted auditions, and careful consideration, they should be able to find one person in the entire city of Pittsburgh who knows the town really, really well, and who can handle running a local talk show.

Are all of you saying that there isn't even one such person living in this region?

> > You guys are totally correct about the importance of good,
>
> > solid radio fundamentals. However, as important as those
> > things are, they aren't exactly rocket science. While most
>
> > of the people in the categories I've suggested as
> candidates
> > for being turned into talk show hosts might not know all
> > those fundamentals already, it shouldn't be that difficult
>
> > for them to learn them quickly, especially if they are
> > paired with a good producer/screener.
> >
> > I can't believe that someone who managed to handle law
> > school and passing the Bar exam couldn't quickly pick up
> > those fundamentals you refer to, especially if the station
>
> > management made a point of teaching them to him.
>
>
> Nope. There's a knack to it and you'd better have some
> natural ability in that direction. It's peformance. You can
> be smart enough to graduate from medical school. That
> doesn't mean you could effectively do stand-up comedy just
> because you're given good material and some basic
> fundamentals.
>

 

[MadAirchecker]

Re: So Many Possibilities...

> As for things like timing, etc., one
> would assume that the new talk host wouldn't be simply
> thrown to the wolves. The producer would be using hand
> signals, notes, and discussions during commercial breaks to
> lead the neophyte on the correct path.
>

Talk producers are often minimum-wage employees fresh out of college, working at the type of radio station they would never listen to. It's almost always an entry-level position, not something like an adjunct PD. Even if they do care or understand the format, they're too busy with their own tasks to constantly monitor what's on the air and make judgments about it.

 

[Radio_Realist]

ARRRRGGGHH!!!!!!!!!

But just because experienced talk show hosts are almost always paired up with entry-level flunkies as producer/screeners, that's no reason why a broadcaster couldn't break the mold and pair a talented but inexperienced host with an experienced producer/screener.

What is with all you gusy who currently work in radio? Can none of you imagine ever trying something a little different? Are you all convinced that there is only one way to do anything, the way it has always been done?

Here's the thing. KDKA is losing listeners to two different things. Some of their listeners are switching to WPGB, and those who aren't switching are dying of old age. Even though they're clinging to the #1 slot by the tips of their fingernails, those fingernails aren't going to hold forever.

So, they have two choices. Do the same old things they've been doing, or do something different. If this forum were around 35 years ago, and I suggested putting a writer who did freelance work for Sports Illustrated on both radio and television, all of you would say that would never work, because those people have irritating voices and they say things like "Hmm, Ha!" and "Okel Dokey".

> > As for things like timing, etc., one
> > would assume that the new talk host wouldn't be simply
> > thrown to the wolves. The producer would be using hand
> > signals, notes, and discussions during commercial breaks
> to
> > lead the neophyte on the correct path.
> >
>
> Talk producers are often minimum-wage employees fresh out of
> college, working at the type of radio station they would
> never listen to. It's almost always an entry-level position,
> not something like an adjunct PD. Even if they do care or
> understand the format, they're too busy with their own tasks
> to constantly monitor what's on the air and make judgments
> about it.
>

 

[MadAirchecker]

Re: ARRRRGGGHH!!!!!!!!!

This is so far off the original point, you might need a compass to get back. You suggested that just about anyone with superior intelligence could learn the basics of doing a radio show because it's not rocket science. It was suggested by others that some people who are wonderful speakers or fiercely opinionated can't necessarily do radio, which is an art form unto itself.

Myron Cope was obviously a huge success. We get that. Myron also had an uncommon flair for radio and knew how to use the medium effectively. Former Pittsburgh Councilwoman Michelle Madoff was a celebrated big mouth with outlandish opinions, yet she bombed on radio when KDKA gave her a show. She still wasn't any good when they sent Mike Pintek in as a co-host to rescue her. Cope was a colorful guy; colorful barkeeper Froggy Morris was terrible when he was made part of a sports show. Bob Walk was a natural when he went from playing baseball to the booth without any broadcasting experience. John Wehner, who made a similar transition this year, has been terrible.

You shouldn't exclude anyone automatically because of their background and experience (or lack thereof). You just need to recognize that doing radio well is an art that not everyone can master.

 

[Part-timer]

Re: So Many Possibilities...

> I can't believe that someone who managed to handle law
> school and passing the Bar exam couldn't quickly pick up
> those fundamentals you refer to, especially if the station
> management made a point of teaching them to him.
>

I'll give you great example of someone who couldn't do it, from down in Tampa.

Keyshawn Johnson is clearly a bright, articulate guy. WDAE in Tampa signed him to do a show a couple of years ago, and he insisted on flying totally solo (normally the active jocks are paired with a station host who handles the business end of the show). On his first show, he came on, did about a 20-second open and said, "Let's go to the phones." This of course was followed by about 30 seconds of silence, after which you could hear his producer say into his headphones, "...uhhh, Key, we don't have any calls yet." It never got much better.

But this conversation has gotten away from my real point.... there ARE probably hunderds of people in other lines of work in the Pittsburgh area who could do a decent talk show.

Who cares?

What we were talking about is righting the listing Titanic of radio station that is KDKA. They sound old and slow compared to the WLWs and WFLAs of the world. Some OK guy off the street does not fix that. No one will care.

The station needs an established star-quality host soon. Someone who can draw new listeners (even without billboards). The entire decision to go forward with WPGB hinged upon signing Quinn. If they had not snagged him, you'd have Sunny 104.7 playing the best mix of the 80's, 90's and today now (and we'd be writing about when it was switching to JACK).

But RR, my point is that while you're right those people can be found, it is not the answer in this case.

<P ID="signature">______________
"With God as my witness, I could have sworn turkeys could fly."</P>

 

[JohnnyMorganWXJX]

Sunny...Yesterday My Life Had Turned to Rain

>
> The station needs an established star-quality host soon.
> Someone who can draw new listeners (even without
> billboards). The entire decision to go forward with WPGB
> hinged upon signing Quinn. If they had not snagged him,
> you'd have Sunny 104.7 playing the best mix of the 80's,
> 90's and today now (and we'd be writing about when it was
> switching to JACK).

That's probably exactly right. WJJJ's Jammin' Oldies format was toast (once they got rid of Clarke Ingram it was only a matter of time); the only other choice was a CC standard "Mix" station (battling Star and Wish at the same time). Sunny would have been a loser comparatively; WPGB has made gains 12+, but seems to have plateaued. Demos may fare better, but talk radio is an older skewing genre.

 

[Part-timer]

Re: Sunny...Yesterday My Life Had Turned to Rain

> >
> > The station needs an established star-quality host soon.
> > Someone who can draw new listeners (even without
> > billboards). The entire decision to go forward with WPGB
> > hinged upon signing Quinn. If they had not snagged him,
> > you'd have Sunny 104.7 playing the best mix of the 80's,
> > 90's and today now (and we'd be writing about when it was
> > switching to JACK).
>
> That's probably exactly right.

I had friends in the building... that's first-hand info.<P ID="signature">______________
"With God as my witness, I could have sworn turkeys could fly."</P>