A few things...
"A real guest" I suppose mean whatever anyone wants it to mean. Anybody specifically invited to appear with us on the show, to me, is "a real guest". Some are of more interest to particular people than others, which as Mike From Delaware would say is why Baskin-Robbins has the 31 flavors...
Maybe Kyle prefers to post only when he has a real guest. It looks like he didn't get one this week, so they will fill the time with a "contributor."
It's not at all like that. There was originally to have been no scheduled guest this week, not because Kyle didn't or couldn't get one, but because I've said repeatedly that I don't like having guests every week. With Kyle's contacts and track record, we certainly could have one booked for every program. I happen to like having open shows, and maintain some of our best ones were those without scheduled guests (even though I've loved having the opportunity to chat with some of the greats who have appeared on the Racket). Just a few days ago we learned Steve would be in town, and jumped at the opportunity to have him come in and join us in person (and I had never before had the chance to meet him, though we've corresponded via E-mail and telephone off and on for a number of years).
While the program's hosts have ranted about infomercials and brokered programming in the past , with an actual home shopping and infomercial pitchman on the show to talk about the topic, they will most likely avoid mentioning it.
What I've ranted about (re: infomercials) specifically was the fact that stations have abused their air by, in many cases, running far too many of them. I have no problem with the concept of infomercials themselves, provided their not frauding the public. A chicken roaster that clearly works, to me, is in a different league than the myriad of questionable "diet pills" and colon products.
At one point, FCC regs did not allow what we now call infomercials or home shopping programs. Now brokered programming, also including paid religion, has taken over much of AM radio, off hours on network TV affiliates (3, 6, 10, 17, 57) and almost all of the program schedules on the remaining OTA TV stations (44, 48, 51, 60, 61) - not to mention the amount of cable bandwidth devoted to to brokered programming.
I understand what you're saying, but brokered programming (including direct selling and religion -- to me one in the same) is as old as broadcasting itself. Some of the original licensees in the 1920s were churches. And 95 percent of the time listeners heard Father Coughlin in the 1930s, they were listening to brokered programming. Sister Aimee Semple built an entire empire (literally, with a multi-million dollar "castle") from religious radio via KFSG. What about "Doctor" John Romulus Brinkley's "goat gland" potions to cure male impotence via KFKB? At one point, the Roosevelt Administration tried to (and ultimately succeeded) shut him down before he just went over the border and blasted half the country from Mexico with 100,000 watts...
These programs and people behind them are sleazy and dishonest. The industry drives away its audience (and its future) in favor of quick and easy money.
The goat glands notwithstanding, that's a pretty broadly-spoken blanket statement to make. I wouldn't lump in an entertainer like Steve Bryant (who sold by being entertaining) with "Great American Products" or the "American Health Radio Journal", complete with their phony on-air phone calls (like the one about poop size and color that made Roscoe laugh hysterically a few weeks back).
As far as the industry driving away its audience, I say let 'em keep hanging themselves. In my opinion, brokered programming by far isn't the only thing terrestrial radio is running that causes continuing audience erosion.
The Radio Racket also likes regularly to ridicule a former TV disco host who now does brokered programs on two local stations because he pays to be on the radio. Amazon lists the publisher of the book Mr. Bryant will likely promote as "Simple, Effective, Literary Publishing," which appears to be a vanity press operation. If the Radio Racket hosts are so quick to take aim at somebody who buys time for his own radio radio show, will they comment on somebody paying to get his own book published?
Personally, I think a comparison between RJ and Steve Bryant should be considered insulting to anyone with a pulse. And yes, I already HAVE commented about "self-publishing" as Steve and I have actually joked about this together on the Racket ("Steve, is this really a
brokered book?") and chuckled over it. I suppose a major difference is that Steve has used such means to launch (and subsequently, shop around before signing on) successful efforts at actually getting a legitimate deal.
Another topic that may not come up is the practice of hiring amateurs, rather than experienced radio people, for on-air jobs in radio - sometimes via "star search" type contests.
Mike, you should know better than to even suggest that you and I have opposing opinions on this. I am constantly ranting about amateurs getting major-market jobs, specifically in talk radio, while talented, more effective pros sit on the sidelines (and often are willing to work for much less money).
It's sad when Radio Racket grabs defeat from the jaws of victory. It seems it takes a step toward getting better and then two steps back. The hosts have said they often don't have time for things like planning meetings and show prep. Maybe if they are unwilling or unable to invest the time to do the show right - to do a professional broadcast for broadcast professionals - maybe they should not do it all. I hope they decide to take the show seriously. When the show is good, it's very good. And we need a show like this - done well.
Thanks, I think... While I think you may have been being a tad dramatic about what we do, I will point out that six years elapsed between the end of the WVLT show and the launching of the Racket... In that time, any one of thousands of radio people could have taken up the cause. Nobody did when there was a "need" for it, so I doubt anyone will now (other than RJ, who seems intent on "doing our act" quite badly every week on WNWR). I've said if anyone else wants to try doing this, I'd even listen if it were any good (or so bad it became funny, as with RJ).
I merely point out that different standards appear to be applied for Steve and RJ.
Considering one spends considerable hours every month contributing wonderfully funny bits for us, has done nothing but help promote the show, has been incredibly kind, and has a stellar track record of success -- while the other is a frustrated industry joke, who for absolutely no identifiable reason chose to attack us (and me personally) completely unprovoked, you're damned right there are different standards being applied. No argument there.
My intent is to urge you guys look for and find some way to have the show consistently be something you can be proud of.
The most obvious way to achieve that would be for us to continue building cume, and managing to get enough advertiser support that the program will allow us to quit our jobs and devote dozens of hours a week to the cause. As unlikely as that scenario may sound, after having read Steve Bryant's
Selling The Way America Buys, I now will have a much better chance at making that happen...
Thank you for taking the time to write about the program... I hope you'll call-in tonight while Steve is there to continue this discussion, which could end up being very good radio...
