• 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

Steve and DC in StL 101.1 The River

D

dietdrpepper

Guest
Steve and DC are back in StL on 101.1 The River.

Comment as you will.. discuss.. praise... insult... argue.

Flame Steve and DC, flame the competition, try not to flame each other.

Just don't mention that other site.
 
> Steve and DC are back in StL on 101.1 The River.
>
> Comment as you will.. discuss.. praise... insult... argue.
>
> Flame Steve and DC, flame the competition, try not to flame
> each other.
>
> Just don't mention that other site.
>
It is nice to hear that they will be back on in STL. I am sure they will do well. They always have!

This is probably why "you" can't mention "that" other site. <P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Biore on 12/28/05 07:44 AM.</FONT></P>
 
> > Steve and DC are back in StL on 101.1 The River.
> >
> > Comment as you will.. discuss.. praise... insult... argue.
>
> >
> > Flame Steve and DC, flame the competition, try not to
> flame
> > each other.
> >
> > Just don't mention that other site.
> >
> It is nice to hear that they will be back on in STL. I am
> sure they will do well. They always have!
>
> This is probably why "you" can't mention "that" other site.
>

call me stupid, but... what are you both talking about?
 
> > > Steve and DC are back in StL on 101.1 The River.
> > >
> > > Comment as you will.. discuss.. praise... insult...
> argue.
> >
> > >
> > > Flame Steve and DC, flame the competition, try not to
> > flame
> > > each other.
> > >
> > > Just don't mention that other site.
> > >
> > It is nice to hear that they will be back on in STL. I am
>
> > sure they will do well. They always have!
> >
> > This is probably why "you" can't mention "that" other
> site.
> >
>
> call me stupid, but... what are you both talking about?
>

OK OK... My Bad! I suppose i should check "that" other site, before i posted that. Now i fully understand.

Why does he dislike them so much? I really haven't heard them much, I am excited that there will be a few new options in Morning Show Radio soon! I wish them and the others the best of luck!

Josh
 
My experience of that other stlmedia site is that when the subject of the two particular hosts is mentioned, a certain degree of wierdness emerges.

IT used to be that there were the regulars who used the board. But when these two people were the subject, people would come out of the woodwork to post, and would insult anyone that said anything against said morning show.

The host of said bulletin board got angry at the anonymous posters taking shots, and also things they supposedly said. Some of it may even involve a feud between said morning hosts and another AM in the PM kind of host. Who knows. Just don't talk bad about AM in the PM or you won't post on that site!

But yes you are forbidden to talk about said morning show at said media site. The site is a better site because of the rules. Classless morning shows usually attract classless people. If you want a good message board, sometimes you have to take certain measures. Yet, on the other hand, the board host likes to attack on his front page, and generally cannot take it in with the same measure that he dishes it out. It's like a 7 year old who invites his friends to jump on a trampoline. He can kick anyone on there he wants. But once someone kicks him back, they are not allowed to play anymore. That is the rules that said board host plays by, yet one cannot disupute the quality of his space on the Web. It's a good site in spite of itself.

But life moves on. I hope I presented this situation in as unbiased manner as possible.
 
> Steve and DC are back in StL on 101.1 The River.
>
> Comment as you will.. discuss.. praise... insult... argue.
>
> Flame Steve and DC, flame the competition, try not to flame
> each other.
>
> Just don't mention that other site.
>
Why would anyone want those two hoosier racists on their station? Its St. Louis, nuff said.
 
> Why would anyone want those two hoosier racists on their
> station? Its St. Louis, nuff said.
>


What really irks me about Steve and DC is that after that incident
and they left for Denver(only to return a short time later) they suddenly
found Jesus. So now that they pray on their show, everything's forgiven.

Wrong.

They're nothing but hypocrites. They make fun of people on the air and then they turn around and pray for them on the air. I like to think of myself as a Christian, but I get so irritated when people use religion as a crutch to make themselves look better in front of others.

If Steve and DC really want to pray and spread the gospel to listeners,perhaps they should look into offering the show to Contemporary Christian stations. IMO, that's the only format that would except live on-air prayer. They would have to cut out the crank calls and wouldn't mention Steve's affection for Jack Daniels and Coca-Cola.

This is just my opinion. I could be wrong.
 
> Wrong.
>
> They're nothing but hypocrites.

I'll bite on this post. How do you know this?

> They make fun of people on
> the air

They poke fun at just about everything at some point because it's a comedy based show. Is that bad?

> and then they turn around and pray for them on the
> air.

They haven't claimed to be priests. Just radio DJ's, where one of them - I don't believe both - is active in his church. I don't find that unbelievable and I think that's all they are saying. DC's proven to me that he knows what hes talking about usually when the topic does go to religion.

Yes, the show has taken a drastic change from it's original days on Q106.5. But Q106.5 was a CHR station and they were hired to be "shock jocks". They were doing what they were supposed to do.

After having delivered strong ratings, and getting older - and remember DC has gotten married, I'm sure they had more of a say as to the direction of the show. Remember when they started they were merely hired by WKBQ. Now they own their own syndication company that distributes the show.

Religion should be a valid topic for a morning show that covers everything. They'll talk about sex too. Or TV highlights. Or interview a musician. Why not? Religion is a part of culture. I'm NOT a religious person but I accept it, and frankly, I'm sure a portion of the audience appreciates it. Look at the success of "Passion of The Christ". I'm sure a lot of non-diehard Christians went to see that.

> I like to think of myself as a Christian, but I get so
> irritated when people use religion as a crutch to make
> themselves look better in front of others.

I don't know them personally - I'm just a listener - but I'd have to ask why you assume as I did at first that it's insincere? Has an occasional mention of church increased their ratings? No, in fact, ratings from "shock jock" days have been down and it seems that EVERY station program director they've worked with disagrees with the topic. It doesn't seem to get them any personal gain. I'd guess that it's true personal belief from one of the hosts.

> If Steve and DC really want to pray and spread the gospel to
> listeners,perhaps they should look into offering the show to
> Contemporary Christian stations.

The show is offered to all stations. I'm sure Contemporary Christian stations wouldn't take it in it's current form and it's probably too out-of-format for them. Their loss.

DC also records a Sunday morning show with Contemporary Christian music. That's available to them and would make a nice match. From the portions I've heard of it, it's a good show.

> They would have to cut
> out the crank calls and wouldn't mention Steve's affection
> for Jack Daniels and Coca-Cola.

I'm not perfect either. And from my impression of listening, I don't think Steve is a go-to-church-every-week kind of person (I could be wrong). He sometimes disagrees with some of DC's viewpoints on religion. Sometimes they agree. There is an obvious respect of viewpoints either way.

I think people that don't listen to the show often focus too much on this topic. They've got a really good morning show at this point that covers just about every topic. They are great partners and are good with the comedic timing. And they've been around in St. Louis for a long time, are familiar to the listeners, and have strong name recognition. They deserve a place on the dial here.
 
> > Wrong.
> >
> > They're nothing but hypocrites.
>
> I'll bite on this post. How do you know this?
>
> > They make fun of people on
> > the air
>
> They poke fun at just about everything at some point because
> it's a comedy based show. Is that bad?
>
> > and then they turn around and pray for them on the
> > air.
>
> They haven't claimed to be priests. Just radio DJ's, where
> one of them - I don't believe both - is active in his
> church. I don't find that unbelievable and I think that's
> all they are saying. DC's proven to me that he knows what
> hes talking about usually when the topic does go to
> religion.
>
> Yes, the show has taken a drastic change from it's original
> days on Q106.5. But Q106.5 was a CHR station and they were
> hired to be "shock jocks". They were doing what they were
> supposed to do.
>
> After having delivered strong ratings, and getting older -
> and remember DC has gotten married, I'm sure they had more
> of a say as to the direction of the show. Remember when they
> started they were merely hired by WKBQ. Now they own their
> own syndication company that distributes the show.
>
> Religion should be a valid topic for a morning show that
> covers everything. They'll talk about sex too. Or TV
> highlights. Or interview a musician. Why not? Religion is a
> part of culture. I'm NOT a religious person but I accept it,
> and frankly, I'm sure a portion of the audience appreciates
> it. Look at the success of "Passion of The Christ". I'm sure
> a lot of non-diehard Christians went to see that.
>
> > I like to think of myself as a Christian, but I get so
> > irritated when people use religion as a crutch to make
> > themselves look better in front of others.
>
> I don't know them personally - I'm just a listener - but I'd
> have to ask why you assume as I did at first that it's
> insincere? Has an occasional mention of church increased
> their ratings? No, in fact, ratings from "shock jock" days
> have been down and it seems that EVERY station program
> director they've worked with disagrees with the topic. It
> doesn't seem to get them any personal gain. I'd guess that
> it's true personal belief from one of the hosts.
>
> > If Steve and DC really want to pray and spread the gospel
> to
> > listeners,perhaps they should look into offering the show
> to
> > Contemporary Christian stations.
>
> The show is offered to all stations. I'm sure Contemporary
> Christian stations wouldn't take it in it's current form and
> it's probably too out-of-format for them. Their loss.
>
> DC also records a Sunday morning show with Contemporary
> Christian music. That's available to them and would make a
> nice match. From the portions I've heard of it, it's a good
> show.
>
> > They would have to cut
> > out the crank calls and wouldn't mention Steve's affection
>
> > for Jack Daniels and Coca-Cola.
>
> I'm not perfect either. And from my impression of listening,
> I don't think Steve is a go-to-church-every-week kind of
> person (I could be wrong). He sometimes disagrees with some
> of DC's viewpoints on religion. Sometimes they agree. There
> is an obvious respect of viewpoints either way.
>
> I think people that don't listen to the show often focus too
> much on this topic. They've got a really good morning show
> at this point that covers just about every topic. They are
> great partners and are good with the comedic timing. And
> they've been around in St. Louis for a long time, are
> familiar to the listeners, and have strong name recognition.
> They deserve a place on the dial here.
>
How can you say they DESERVE a place on the dial ANYWHERE!!! The only reason why they are even on the air in STL is because NO other market will have them. Is STL that racist and narrow-minded that they would want Steve and DC? Stupid question, of course they are!!! At least Denver had the good sense to get rid of them when they found out about the comments that they made. I don't care if it was thirteen years ago.
 
> How can you say they DESERVE a place on the dial ANYWHERE!!!
> The only reason why they are even on the air in STL is
> because NO other market will have them. Is STL that racist
> and narrow-minded that they would want Steve and DC?

Wow, your second post about the "racist comment".

I didn't hear the show that got them canned from WKBQ but from what I read, they said that Martin Luther King Jr. should have been shot (or something like that) as a side comment intended at the time as humor. It wasn't a planned discussion or topic, was said only once, and wasn't meant seriously. I don't know if thats even a racist comment because I believe they probably would've said the same thing about a white person for humor. In fact, I'm SURE they've said worse about white people. In other words, as I said originally, they goof on EVERYBODY.

After the incident, they attended sensitivity training and went back to work for WKBQ after that trip to Denver, and when they returned, they took tons of listener calls about it and haven't had another "racist" comment happen since in the 10+ years since that incident. It doesn't seem like there is much of a history to support the opinion that they are racist.

Kristi Carson also worked as their female sidekick/news girl on the show for years. I think she's black.
 
> > How can you say they DESERVE a place on the dial
> ANYWHERE!!!
> > The only reason why they are even on the air in STL is
> > because NO other market will have them. Is STL that
> racist
> > and narrow-minded that they would want Steve and DC?
>
> Wow, your second post about the "racist comment".
>
> I didn't hear the show that got them canned from WKBQ but
> from what I read, they said that Martin Luther King Jr.
> should have been shot (or something like that) as a side
> comment intended at the time as humor. It wasn't a planned
> discussion or topic, was said only once, and wasn't meant
> seriously. I don't know if thats even a racist comment
> because I believe they probably would've said the same thing
> about a white person for humor. In fact, I'm SURE they've
> said worse about white people. In other words, as I said
> originally, they goof on EVERYBODY.
>
> After the incident, they attended sensitivity training and
> went back to work for WKBQ after that trip to Denver, and
> when they returned, they took tons of listener calls about
> it and haven't had another "racist" comment happen since in
> the 10+ years since that incident. It doesn't seem like
> there is much of a history to support the opinion that they
> are racist.
>
> Kristi Carson also worked as their female sidekick/news girl
> on the show for years. I think she's black.
>
If you go back, what happened was they were asking ignorant question about why does there have to be African-American magazines and African-American events. They said that there wasn't stuff like that for white people. An African-American caller tried to explain to them the reason why there is stuff like that is because mainstream society normally doesn't touch on subjects/issues that affect blacks in general. She also tried to get across to them that things that are in the mainstream are implied to be white-oriented. It isn't going to be the same for whites as it is for minorities.
That is when they got really ignorant with the caller and proceeded to tell her that she was, "acting like a (BLEEP)." It was not said once but twice to her. I think this type of behavior is inexcusable and that St. Louis should have been like other cities and not let them work. EVEN NOW!!!!
 
> > > How can you say they DESERVE a place on the dial
> > ANYWHERE!!!
> > > The only reason why they are even on the air in STL is
> > > because NO other market will have them. Is STL that
> > racist
> > > and narrow-minded that they would want Steve and DC?
> >
> > Wow, your second post about the "racist comment".
> >
> > I didn't hear the show that got them canned from WKBQ but
> > from what I read, they said that Martin Luther King Jr.
> > should have been shot (or something like that) as a side
> > comment intended at the time as humor. It wasn't a planned
>
> > discussion or topic, was said only once, and wasn't meant
> > seriously. I don't know if thats even a racist comment
> > because I believe they probably would've said the same
> thing
> > about a white person for humor. In fact, I'm SURE they've
> > said worse about white people. In other words, as I said
> > originally, they goof on EVERYBODY.
> >
> > After the incident, they attended sensitivity training and
>
> > went back to work for WKBQ after that trip to Denver, and
> > when they returned, they took tons of listener calls about
>
> > it and haven't had another "racist" comment happen since
> in
> > the 10+ years since that incident. It doesn't seem like
> > there is much of a history to support the opinion that
> they
> > are racist.
> >
> > Kristi Carson also worked as their female sidekick/news
> girl
> > on the show for years. I think she's black.
> >
> If you go back, what happened was they were asking ignorant
> question about why does there have to be African-American
> magazines and African-American events. They said that there
> wasn't stuff like that for white people. An
> African-American caller tried to explain to them the reason
> why there is stuff like that is because mainstream society
> normally doesn't touch on subjects/issues that affect blacks
> in general. She also tried to get across to them that
> things that are in the mainstream are implied to be
> white-oriented. It isn't going to be the same for whites as
> it is for minorities.
> That is when they got really ignorant with the caller and
> proceeded to tell her that she was, "acting like a n-word."
> It was not said once but twice to her. I think this type
> of behavior is inexcusable and that St. Louis should have
> been like other cities and not let them work. EVEN NOW!!!!
>
Also, if this Kristi Carson person is black (which I don't think she is), what does that have to do with anything? That doesn't mean anything. That doesn't mean they don't have a prejudical attitude towards African-Americans. Besides, that would be more on the station's end to hire an on-air news person.
 
> > That is when they got really ignorant with the caller and
> > proceeded to tell her that she was, "acting like a
> n-word."
> > It was not said once but twice to her. I think this type
> > of behavior is inexcusable and that St. Louis should have
> > been like other cities and not let them work. EVEN
> NOW!!!!

Hmm, that sounds familiar too. You are probably right. The Martin Luther King thing was a NYC morning show, wasn't it? Howard Stern?

> Also, if this Kristi Carson person is black (which I don't
> think she is), what does that have to do with anything?
> That doesn't mean anything.

I think she was. But she's no longer with the show anyway. But that was when the show was on in several cities so I think it would've been their hire. Not sure.

I know it occasionally gets mentioned more recently that current producer Julie (white) has a black boyfriend. Whenever they have friends/family of the staff come in, he does too. I've never heard anything negative/etc. But who knows?

I just don't think one incident of anything implies a pattern. But you are correct that better judgement should've been used on the incident you mention.
 
> My experience of that other stlmedia site is that when the
> subject of the two particular hosts is mentioned, a certain
> degree of wierdness emerges.
>
> IT used to be that there were the regulars who used the
> board. But when these two people were the subject, people
> would come out of the woodwork to post, and would insult
> anyone that said anything against said morning show.
>
> The host of said bulletin board got angry at the anonymous
> posters taking shots, and also things they supposedly said.
> Some of it may even involve a feud between said morning
> hosts and another AM in the PM kind of host. Who knows. Just
> don't talk bad about AM in the PM or you won't post on that
> site!
>
> But yes you are forbidden to talk about said morning show at
> said media site. The site is a better site because of the
> rules. Classless morning shows usually attract classless
> people. If you want a good message board, sometimes you have
> to take certain measures. Yet, on the other hand, the board
> host likes to attack on his front page, and generally cannot
> take it in with the same measure that he dishes it out. It's
> like a 7 year old who invites his friends to jump on a
> trampoline. He can kick anyone on there he wants. But once
> someone kicks him back, they are not allowed to play
> anymore. That is the rules that said board host plays by,
> yet one cannot disupute the quality of his space on the Web.
> It's a good site in spite of itself.
>
> But life moves on. I hope I presented this situation in as
> unbiased manner as possible.
>

Well done.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom