What Makes a Good & Bad Talk Show Host?

[adguy]

The only terrestrial radio I ever listen to anymore is generally AM Talk. I listen to both nationally sydicated and local hosts and I see a real difference between the good and bad hosts. I find it amazing how some get on and then stay on the air when they don't pay for the airtime.

Here's my take on good host traits:
1) They have an opinion on most topics.
2) They are generally irreverent and have a tendency to be controversial.
3) They inspire callers that either kiss their a-- or hate their guts (no in-between).
4) They always have callers on the line.
5) They can constantly get good guests.
6) They generally limit their guests' airtime.
7) They often blow by the hard breaks.
8) You get pissed off when they take vacation.

Here's the take on bad hosts:
1) They try to take both sides of an issue to please everyone.
2) They tend to be monotone in delivery.
3) They have to beg for callers.
4) They take any caller (never screen).
5) They constantly read lists from printed material.
6) They often talk about topics uninteresting to their format & listeners.
7) They drag on good topics when they get lucky.
8) Fake laughing along with other fake emotions.

I'm curious to what this board may think about my takes. I'd like to hear other takes and of course what local and national hosts fit into one of the two categories (good or bad).

 

[Jay5Ok]

I would put Howard Stern in that first category and a lot of the second category describes Jim Rome.

 

[landtuna]

About the only time I listen to talk radio is during infrequent cross-country overnight drives. Seems like not much else on the air outside metro areas.

Honestly, from what I've heard I can't imagine anyone being a big fan of this genre. Most hosts either seem to be blowhards with opinions on everything or they do nothing but take phone calls from people who obviously don't have lives or many living brain cells - especially the 'favorite' callers. And, it seems, most hosts do more self-promotion than Billy Mays.

We have today way too many 'personalities' (a very overused term) who make their living by being controversial - most of the time totally without substance or anything approaching reality.

On occasion I've heard interesting banter from one person but usually it is from a small group, two or more. And the discussion does not involve baiting callers into arguments ala Maury-type insult-fests but rather is an intelligent in-depth (or maybe just humorous) discussion. One of the most interesting shows I've ever heard was a discussion about bacon. Started out serious but morphed into a very funny joke-fest with bacon as the subject. I laughed my butt off for the 100 miles I was able to receive this signal. I'll go to my grave laughing about this one show, which is what talk shows should aspire to be.

As always YMMV.

 

[primarysuspect]

The only terrestrial radio I ever listen to anymore is generally AM Talk. I listen to both nationally sydicated and local hosts and I see a real difference between the good and bad hosts. I find it amazing how some get on and then stay on the air when they don't pay for the airtime.

Here's my take on good host traits:
1) They have an opinion on most topics.
2) They are generally irreverent and have a tendency to be controversial.
3) They inspire callers that either kiss their a-- or hate their guts (no in-between).
4) They always have callers on the line.
5) They can constantly get good guests.
6) They generally limit their guests' airtime.
7) They often blow by the hard breaks.
8) You get pissed off when they take vacation.

Here's the take on bad hosts:
1) They try to take both sides of an issue to please everyone.
2) They tend to be monotone in delivery.
3) They have to beg for callers.
4) They take any caller (never screen).
5) They constantly read lists from printed material.
6) They often talk about topics uninteresting to their format & listeners.
7) They drag on good topics when they get lucky.
8) Fake laughing along with other fake emotions.

I'm curious to what this board may think about my takes. I'd like to hear other takes and of course what local and national hosts fit into one of the two categories (good or bad).

I really disagree. Roger Gray was the middle of the road and he was extremely good at his job and had a very enjoyable talk show. When his show was sandwiched between conservative bookends, he lost his audience. To the detriment of the product.

I'll give you a rule of thumb that I use for deciding what a good or bad talkshow host does:

I think a bad talk show host does two things:

1. He (or she) stays on one topic during a segment. If you cannot articulate your position in less than one segment, you are not a good host.
2. I turn off the show whenever the host begins trying to imitate the voice of whom he is speaking about. It is, to me, not entertaining and is possibly the most childish thing I have heard coming from an adult.

I think a good talk show host does two things:

1. They don't screen calls. Screening calls, to me, usually results in one opinion being heard which, again to me, is not interesting. It also, I feel, illustrates poor intellect because if someone wants to call up and talk about subject X and you can't speak about subject X (as long as it's not something like South African Cricket matches), why are you considered any type of authority on Subject "Y" an "Z"?

2. They take centerist positions and call out the caller on whatever point they take, pro or con.

I guess I like intelligent, well informed and socially aware hosts. I don't think we have an abundance of them on the airwaves; especially in Houston

 

[walter1]

Ratings

 

[adguy]

So far I agree with Walter 1. It's definitely ratings, but you have to do something out of the norm consistently to get them. Roger Gray was a centrist and a professional. The problem with Roger was invitably ratings. He obviously didn't conform to the changes going down in talk radio since Rush Limbaugh entered the national scene in earnest in the 90's. Those changes include taking sides and being irreverent. If you are a talk show host and a centrist politically and socially, you take a strong position on either side of an issue. You go issue by issue. Bill O'Reilly does this well as does Geraldo Rivera on TV.

 

[ChuckTiller]

When the now late Tim Russert asked Lawrence E. Spivak, originator of the NBC News program "Meet the Press" and one of the first broadcasters to use panels of reporters to interview national and international leaders, what advice can you give me? Spivak told Russert, take the opposite view of whoever you are interviewing. Study that position and be prepared to challenge those views. Russert, although a liberal, continued that style without allowing his personal views to influence the interview. He was very capable of taking either side to get a successful fair interview. Of course, not all interviews are perfect. More often than not, Russert did an excellent job.

Actually, Roger Gray did have good ratings. The management did not care for his centrist views. At that time, the Supertalk management of KPRC/KSEV wanted Roger to be completely on the right, in spite of his success ratings wise. The bad ratings came at KKTL 97TALK-FM. The problem there has been discussed many times on this board. That problem was the signal. Had we been on a full city grade signal, we would have fared a lot better. If that had been the case, the newstalk landscape in Houston today might look a little different.

 

[primarysuspect]

When the now late Tim Russert asked Lawrence E. Spivak, originator of the NBC News program "Meet the Press" and one of the first broadcasters to use panels of reporters to interview national and international leaders, what advice can you give me? Spivak told Russert, take the opposite view of whoever you are interviewing. Study that position and be prepared to challenge those views. Russert, although a liberal, continued that style without allowing his personal views to influence the interview. He was very capable of taking either side to get a successful fair interview. Of course, not all interviews are perfect. More often than not, Russert did an excellent job.

Actually, Roger Gray did have good ratings. The management did not care for his centrist views. At that time, the Supertalk management of KPRC/KSEV wanted Roger to be completely on the right, in spite of his success ratings wise. The bad ratings came at KKTL 97TALK-FM. The problem there has been discussed many times on this board. That problem was the signal. Had we been on a full city grade signal, we would have fared a lot better. If that had been the case, the newstalk landscape in Houston today might look a little different.

That is the way I remember it too.

As for irreverence, he was irreverent as I recall but the topic wasn't personal attacks or ad hominen assaults on a political figure's character, the irreverence was more along the lines of being topical.

I concur that perhaps we'd have more Charlie Pulillos on the air who are right down the middle than Chris Bakers or Chris Berry's who were slanted and frankly quite boring because you knew what they were going to say before you got out of bed that morning.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

The only terrestrial radio I ever listen to anymore is generally AM Talk. I listen to both nationally sydicated and local hosts and I see a real difference between the good and bad hosts. I find it amazing how some get on and then stay on the air when they don't pay for the airtime.

Here's my take on good host traits:
1) They have an opinion on most topics.
2) They are generally irreverent and have a tendency to be controversial.
3) They inspire callers that either kiss their a-- or hate their guts (no in-between).
4) They always have callers on the line.
5) They can constantly get good guests.
6) They generally limit their guests' airtime.
7) They often blow by the hard breaks.
8) You get pissed off when they take vacation.

Whether I tune in talk radio; engage the airline passenger next to me in discussion; take a Sunday morning to hear the delivery in a house of worship; or sit down with my wife after the dinner dishes are clean; I want to come away from a conversation feeling that I have learned something I didn't know; feeling I need to do a little research to confirm my own position.

To me one of the better talk show hosts is Terri Gross on NPR and I don't think she would score well on your list of traits for a good show host.

We all have our own personalities. I read your list and I think: This guy enjoys going to the sports bar and gathering in a crowd of GUYS and having a discussion that is a winner-take-all-sport. Insults are allowed. Shouting is allowed. I realize a significant portion of today's Talk Radio Audience shares this rowdy, combative mentality.

I don't tolerate a pastor with that mentality, the airline would make an emergency stop and ask me to exit if my conversation were male-sports-syndrome in style, and I would be searching for a new spouse if I engaged in that style of conversation after the dinner dishes have been put away. Why on the worst day of my life would I want my radio to treat me like dog droppings?

My list would include:

The host must be intellectually honest.

The host must believe in the liberty and dignity of every citizen.

The host must demonstrate that he/she expects to learn at least one new fact or concept EVERY DAY.

 

[rogergray]

Well, OK, I'll get sucked into this. You're all a little right, and thanks for the kind words here and there. Commercial talk radio has painted itself into a corner philosophically. It is a profitable corner, and as a partner in a radio station now and in the past, I'm all for profit. What's profitable doesn't always make for great radio, but no matter. As someone who plied the trade for a long time though, I do miss the variety of opinion we used to find. The country is roughly 50-50 Democratic and Republican, and ideally, that could be reflected in the audience. But we have decided to program for one side of that divide, and one side only. That's a business choice, pure and simple.
But, look at the ratings for KSEV and KPRC as examples. When I was there, though not because of me, these stations were either top ten or just out. Patrick in the early years had a flair for the outrageous, and that's why he could hire me away from KPRC. Then we turned around and bought them. He underwent a real religious conversion, and he found over the years, and the issues we differed on were bigger to him than the ratings I was still producing. And they were good, by the way. So we parted ways and he got the station he wanted from morning to night.
Where are they now? Where is KPRC? And just for grins, where is the ostensibly liberal KUHF with the dreaded NPR programming? The second most listened-to national program after Limbaugh isn't Hannity or any of the other inferior clones. It's "All Things Considered."
I have always been of the opinion that people are generally a mix of opinions. I am a gun-owning, pro-life, pro-national health voter who thinks W peter-principled out at Governor. We used to have choices like Adams and Jefferson and now we're down to McCain and Obama. I think it's proof Darwin might be wrong. Where is that view on radio? When I look at the Democrats and Republicans and think "a pox on both your houses" I don't think I'm alone. And don't anyone say Hannity with his little index card bullet points that seemingly must precede any mention of a Democrat. He isn't independent, he just wanted Romney.
So, that's the biz and it isn't going to change for awhile. It's an echo chamber but a profitable one, so what the hell. I can't entirely blame management for wanting to ride this particular horse until it craters. Then we'll ride another one.
I still do car reviews and when I get one with satellite radio, my first 3 presets are the BBC, the left talk channel and the right talk channel. The quality of the talent may be iffy, like Mike Malloy, Alex Bennett, Savage or Levin, all of whom are simply mouthy as opposed to truly fun to listen to. We always tried to have fun and remember it's only radio. We aren't bringing world peace, or in Patrick's case, the Second Coming.
Just some random thoughts from someone who worked in the vineyard for 39 years.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

RogerGray.... what a great post. I am sorry we did not cross paths years ago.... and maybe get harnessed up together.

Radio and television have both "chased" programming through the years that promised and produced profits. And when a particular "ride" wore out, we grabbed a new, fresh horse like a Pony Express rider and the business moved forward.

We all have to hope that will happen again. That the rider remains healthy and will be able to grab the next horse and run. My fear, though, is that today's abraisive, name calling, over-the-top Radio Talk may turn into a burst appendix that leaves the rider forever limping and hurting and unable to ever again "carry the mail" the way it used to happen.

I guess I could even live with the demise of radio...... but the pain of having the lemmings who worship today's Talk Radio come and disrupt our civic clubs and Sunday School classes and health-club gyms with their regurgitation sometimes makes me hope the demise could come SOON!

 

[adguy]

Great post Roger and well stated. I wholeheartedly agree with you. Let me add to it. I truly believe that the proliferation of "right wing radio" is purely a result of entertainment value. Rush entertains and manages to get the ire of millions. Hannity & Levin, although not the talent of Rush have managed to entertain enough to grab the ratings necessary to sustain their talk shows. The problem with the other side is they have not cultivated a compelling enough host with the entertainment value that the aforementioned seem to have. With that said, I am a Rush fan. I happen to agree in principle with the conservative agenda, although I am no right winger. If a left wing host as entertaining as Rush showed up I would listen, but that hasn't happened yet. I predict new hosts (on both sides) will come from markets like Houston and DFW. As radio de-consolitates there will be more stations like KSEV and KGOW, both independently and locally owned, that will allow enough creative freedom with their hosts to develope the next radio talk star possibly.

Roger, keep on posting and get back on the radio.

 

[rogergray]

To me entertaining doesn't mean loud. Levin and Hannity lean on callers and simply don't amuse me. Limbaugh can take 'em or leave 'em, though he has fallen victim to the "taking yourself a bit seriously" syndrome. As for the other side...two words, Stephanie Miller. Absolutely hilarious, very quick and the show moves at a breakneck pace. It's like Imus in the old days. Frankly, her politics are secondary. She just makes you laugh. But thanks for the kind words. Would love to be back in town, but looking at the landscape there, I just don't see where that would happen. It's a shame. it's my home town and I do miss it. Thanks for the interesting thread.

 

[FilioScotia]

I truly believe that the proliferation of "right wing radio" is purely a result of entertainment value. Rush entertains and manages to get the ire of millions. The problem with the other side is they have not cultivated a compelling enough host with the entertainment value that the aforementioned seem to have. With that said, I am a Rush fan. I happen to agree in principle with the conservative agenda, although I am no right winger. If a left wing host as entertaining as Rush showed up I would listen, but that hasn't happened yet.

Thanks adguy. That's a perfect summation of the rut that talk radio is in. Like you I lean a little to the right, and a little to the left. I'm a mugwump who listens to Rush every now and then, but I would give anything to hear a liberal talk host who can be as much fun to listen to as Rush.

Why can't liberals be entertaining on the radio? I wish someone could answer that for me.

Radio owners will broadcast whatever makes the most money, and these days conservative radio shows are the money makers. Maybe someday the pendulum will come back to the left and liberal shows can dominate for a while. I would tune in.