• 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

WBZ

This is for WBZ program director Peter Casey and company: We all know radio is full of ripoffs and cliches but please get your ripped off radio cliches right!

"You give us 22 minutes, we'll give you the world" only makes sense if you're on a 20 minute news clock like WINS in New York. If I listen to WBZ for 22 minutes between 5 AM and 8 PM, I'll get two traffic reports on the threes, two weather reports on the tens (it should be three of them but you cheat me out of weather reports at the top and bottom of the hour), a sports report, and some news in between but not all of it. If I give you 23 minutes, I'll get an extra traffic report. If I give you 30 minutes, I'll get a business report. So please change it to "You give us 32 minutes yadda yadda" or something like that that. As far as after 8 is concerned, I'll just pretend that listening to a half hour of Paul Sullivan, Lovell Dyett, or Jordan Rich is the equivalent of getting the world. God knows I'm not getting the world from them in 22 minutes right now.

Secondly, you have mangled your BZ Phone Force promo. The promo says "If you're not seeing what we're saying, call (phone number)." The cliche heard all over the country that you're ripping off is "If WE'RE not saying what YOU'RE seeing" (emphasis added). The current script of the promo asks listeners to verify whether the traffic reports are correct like it's their job to fact check your broadcasts! The intention of the "real" cliche is to solicit listeners to contribute useful traffic tips that they see but the station isn't yet reporting. It's like you don't even know what you're ripping off or what it means. Even if you didn't adapt it to WBZ, you did correctly rip off the "22 minutes" cliche. On the other hand the phone force promo faux pas is a real head scratcher and knee slapper. Ridiculous!

WBZ gets credit for correctly using the hackneyed "The news watch never stops" even if its not really true. There's no one news watching in your newsroom overnight until the morning show staff gets in. If news breaks overnight while Steve Lavelle is taking calls from nursing home residents, who is in the WBZ newsroom to go live with it? No one. But don't worry. I won't tell.
 
the average listener pays little attention to the details..

> This is for WBZ program director Peter Casey and company: We
> all know radio is full of ripoffs and cliches but please get
> your ripped off radio cliches right!
>
> "You give us 22 minutes, we'll give you the world" only
> makes sense if you're on a 20 minute news clock like WINS in
> New York. If I listen to WBZ for 22 minutes between 5 AM and
> 8 PM, I'll get two traffic reports on the threes, two
> weather reports on the tens (it should be three of them but
> you cheat me out of weather reports at the top and bottom of
> the hour), a sports report, and some news in between but not
> all of it. If I give you 23 minutes, I'll get an extra
> traffic report. If I give you 30 minutes, I'll get a
> business report. So please change it to "You give us 32
> minutes yadda yadda" or something like that that. As far as
> after 8 is concerned, I'll just pretend that listening to a
> half hour of Paul Sullivan, Lovell Dyett, or Jordan Rich is
> the equivalent of getting the world. God knows I'm not
> getting the world from them in 22 minutes right now.
>
> Secondly, you have mangled your BZ Phone Force promo. The
> promo says "If you're not seeing what we're saying, call
> (phone number)." The cliche heard all over the country that
> you're ripping off is "If WE'RE not saying what YOU'RE
> seeing" (emphasis added). The current script of the promo
> asks listeners to verify whether the traffic reports are
> correct like it's their job to fact check your broadcasts!
> The intention of the "real" cliche is to solicit listeners
> to contribute useful traffic tips that they see but the
> station isn't yet reporting. It's like you don't even know
> what you're ripping off or what it means. Even if you didn't
> adapt it to WBZ, you did correctly rip off the "22 minutes"
> cliche. On the other hand the phone force promo faux pas is
> a real head scratcher and knee slapper. Ridiculous!
>
> WBZ gets credit for correctly using the hackneyed "The news
> watch never stops" even if its not really true. There's no
> one news watching in your newsroom overnight until the
> morning show staff gets in. If news breaks overnight while
> Steve Lavelle is taking calls from nursing home residents,
> who is in the WBZ newsroom to go live with it? No one. But
> don't worry. I won't tell.
>
 
And The New York Times tells us they will give only "The News That's Fit To Print" then they give us Judy Miller. Suggestion: do not rely on just ONE news source.


> This is for WBZ program director Peter Casey and company: We
> all know radio is full of ripoffs and cliches but please get
> your ripped off radio cliches right!
>
> "You give us 22 minutes, we'll give you the world" only
> makes sense if you're on a 20 minute news clock like WINS in
> New York. If I listen to WBZ for 22 minutes between 5 AM and
> 8 PM, I'll get two traffic reports on the threes, two
> weather reports on the tens (it should be three of them but
> you cheat me out of weather reports at the top and bottom of
> the hour), a sports report, and some news in between but not
> all of it. If I give you 23 minutes, I'll get an extra
> traffic report. If I give you 30 minutes, I'll get a
> business report. So please change it to "You give us 32
> minutes yadda yadda" or something like that that. As far as
> after 8 is concerned, I'll just pretend that listening to a
> half hour of Paul Sullivan, Lovell Dyett, or Jordan Rich is
> the equivalent of getting the world. God knows I'm not
> getting the world from them in 22 minutes right now.
>
> Secondly, you have mangled your BZ Phone Force promo. The
> promo says "If you're not seeing what we're saying, call
> (phone number)." The cliche heard all over the country that
> you're ripping off is "If WE'RE not saying what YOU'RE
> seeing" (emphasis added). The current script of the promo
> asks listeners to verify whether the traffic reports are
> correct like it's their job to fact check your broadcasts!
> The intention of the "real" cliche is to solicit listeners
> to contribute useful traffic tips that they see but the
> station isn't yet reporting. It's like you don't even know
> what you're ripping off or what it means. Even if you didn't
> adapt it to WBZ, you did correctly rip off the "22 minutes"
> cliche. On the other hand the phone force promo faux pas is
> a real head scratcher and knee slapper. Ridiculous!
>
> WBZ gets credit for correctly using the hackneyed "The news
> watch never stops" even if its not really true. There's no
> one news watching in your newsroom overnight until the
> morning show staff gets in. If news breaks overnight while
> Steve Lavelle is taking calls from nursing home residents,
> who is in the WBZ newsroom to go live with it? No one. But
> don't worry. I won't tell.
>
 
> > only "The News That's Fit To Print"
>
> According to whom? Pinchy?
>
No, his great grand father.
 
> the average listener pays little attention to the details..

The average listener pays little attention to radio at all. They turn it on and turn it off. Maybe they change the station sometimes. That's it. Nonetheless, anything worth doing is worth doing well and that includes imaging/positioning a radio station.
 
> the average listener pays little attention to the details..

You're right, but stations dish out a lot of BS very frequently for a reason. Even if you're not completely tuned to the sound coming out of the speakers, you'd think that if your conscious and subconscious alternate hearing "your official weather station", "in-depth team coverage", "more than just the headlines", "fastest triple doppler radar", etc. that it would eventually make an impact. The station that has this meaningless imaging will do better than the station that says, "OK, here's the weather". Empty positioning statements make up half the newscast on some stations.
 
Re: WBOQ--was WBZ

> > the average listener pays little attention to the
> details..
>
> You're right, but stations dish out a lot of BS very
> frequently for a reason. Even if you're not completely tuned
> to the sound coming out of the speakers, you'd think that if
> your conscious and subconscious alternate hearing "your
> official weather station", "in-depth team coverage", "more
> than just the headlines", "fastest triple doppler radar",
> etc. that it would eventually make an impact. The station
> that has this meaningless imaging will do better than the
> station that says, "OK, here's the weather". Empty
> positioning statements make up half the newscast on some
> stations.
>
Here's an example of a completely meaningless positioner that I heard the other day. Can't swear that I've got it right word for word, but I think I'm doing justice to the message: "Now it official---We're America's #1 Good-time Favorities station! WBOQ Gloucester." Is WBOQ perhaps the only US station using the "Good-time Favorites" positioner? If true, it's hard to believe, but of course, #1 is not defined and I can't believe that anybody keeps accurate track of which stations use what positioner. Maybe somebody holds a copyright on the phrase "Good-time Favorites." If so, how does the copyright holder find out who is using his copyrighted phrase without paying royalties? Still, it doesn't really matter that the positioner is nonsense. It sounds good, and it must impress SOMEONE--even if the only someone is the station owner.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom