Jump to content

great opinion article on wgr 550


Recommended Posts

Name one person who would listen to WGR if LSI was the host? It is their job and sole reason for being on the air to provoke people, and the only way to do that is to be negative and bash people. There are very few effective radio talk show hosts anywhere who aren't obnoxious, unless he or she is a pure interviewer who gets great guests.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LSI?

 

Sorry, but I have to disagree...the only people who enjoy listening to obnoxious radio hosts like Dickerson and Schoop are either obnoxious themselves or masochists.

I've never been able to stomach Dickerson and ever since Schoop took on Dickerson's style (or lack thereof), he's gotten less and less interesting to listen to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LSI?

 

Sorry, but I have to disagree...the only people who enjoy listening to obnoxious radio hosts like Dickerson and Schoop are either obnoxious themselves or masochists.

I've never been able to stomach Dickerson and ever since Schoop took on Dickerson's style (or lack thereof), he's gotten less and less interesting to listen to.

The point is there are many more obnoxious people and masochists as you say who will listen to talk radio than there are people like you. Believe me, if ANY program manager anywhere thought talk show hosts who love their home teams and agree with their callers about how great they are, that's the way the shows would work. But the sad reality is that the negative stuff works. (The obvious exceptions are when teams are winning every single game and the callers and hosts just fellate each other). The stations don't WANT to be negative, they want listeners and callers and know that being negative works with the general public better than lovefests. As a result, it's more the listeners fault than it is the station.

 

It's the exact same thing with reality television and crappy shows and movies. The people in charge don't give two craps what they put on the air, they just want numbers. That's their job. They would LOVE to make great shows people respect but people don't watch or listen to them, so they make what people will watch and listen to. It's not even a chicken or egg thing. In this case, there is a long history of what people listen to and what they watch, and the programmers constantly look at it. When something becomes popular that is what they make, and continue to make, until it is no longer popular or something else becomes more popular, it's not the other way around. They can't decide what you like and then feed it to you the way some people think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Name one person who would listen to WGR if LSI was the host? It is their job and sole reason for being on the air to provoke people, and the only way to do that is to be negative and bash people. There are very few effective radio talk show hosts anywhere who aren't obnoxious, unless he or she is a pure interviewer who gets great guests.

 

Sorry, but as a sports fan, and I consider myself intelligent, I don't need some obnoxious radio personality in the 49th largest market (see: meaningless, irrelevant) telling me what to think and why other callers are wrong. I like sports, I like news and I like sports commentary. What I don't like is arrogant, dismissive and obnoxious hosts who feel that THEY are the reason anyone tunes in. Frankly, THEY are the reason I tuned out.

 

Why have people even call if they only time they can never get through the call. They either get cut off for disagreeing or they cut off mimicking what was already said. WTF kind of crap is that?

 

Someone called me last week and said Poop and the Bullfrog was not Williams and the Bulldog. I tuned it, and to be honest, firing Schopp would be a blessing for that station. Williams outclasses, outshines and out hosts Schopp. I'd start listening again.

 

Sad thing that we're subjected to a guy who in high school spent his time not being cool, collecting baseball cards, playing stratomatic, and collecting stats for the teams in his high school and never felt accepted and now because he thinks he smarter than the population of WNY and has a radio station to use as his bully pulpit, we have to be subjected to it.

 

Or better yet, we don't, we just turn it off!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Name one person who would listen to WGR if LSI was the host? It is their job and sole reason for being on the air to provoke people, and the only way to do that is to be negative and bash people.

Not the only way, just the cheap way.

 

Once upon a time, sports talks shows like those on WBEN or WNSA had producers to schedule interesting guests that you'd tune in to listen too. They also realized that the star of the show was the caller, not the host.

 

Now everything is built around the point-counterpoint two talking heads in the booth model, per the consultant playbook... and guests are like buggy whips and high button shoes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not the only way, just the cheap way.

 

Once upon a time, sports talks shows like those on WBEN or WNSA had producers to schedule interesting guests that you'd tune in to listen too. They also realized that the star of the show was the caller, not the host.

 

Now everything is built around the point-counterpoint two talking heads in the booth model, per the consultant playbook... and guests are like buggy whips and high button shoes.

My point is the audience changed before the stations changed. Believe me, I work in the entertainment field, I guarantee you the programmers at WGR would LOVE to be able to get guests and have their audience make plans to tune in and listen to sterling sports commentary. They know their guys are obnoxious, but the way to get people to listen is to give them what most people want, and most people (or at least the majority) aren't willing to do what you are.

 

This board is the perfect microcosm of the sports fan and radio listening audience. What is the percentage of sterling sports commentators are there versus morons who love to argue?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is the audience changed before the stations changed. Believe me, I work in the entertainment field, I guarantee you the programmers at WGR would LOVE to be able to get guests and have their audience make plans to tune in and listen to sterling sports commentary. They know their guys are obnoxious, but the way to get people to listen is to give them what most people want, and most people (or at least the majority) aren't willing to do what you are.

 

This board is the perfect microcosm of the sports fan and radio listening audience. What is the percentage of sterling sports commentators are there versus morons who love to argue?

Blame Jim Rome for the dumbing-down of sportstalk. Bob Costas does, and I agree with him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is the audience changed before the stations changed. Believe me, I work in the entertainment field, I guarantee you the programmers at WGR would LOVE to be able to get guests and have their audience make plans to tune in and listen to sterling sports commentary. They know their guys are obnoxious, but the way to get people to listen is to give them what most people want, and most people (or at least the majority) aren't willing to do what you are.

 

This board is the perfect microcosm of the sports fan and radio listening audience. What is the percentage of sterling sports commentators are there versus morons who love to argue?

I'd still guess it has more to do with costs/economics than listener preference. Corporate radio'd be happy putting up a test tone if they could get ad dollars to support it.

 

As far as MBs go, my view is that a large share of posters simply ape what they hear/see on ESPN (and the pale imitators on the dial and web) and cover up their lack of knowledge with bombast and invective. I wish more folks would do the research to support their opinion that you and Lori do...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Blame Jim Rome for the dumbing-down of sportstalk. Bob Costas does, and I agree with him.

He became popular doing it but I wouldn't blame him. He's actually rather informed and does his homework regardless of the fact he's a know-it-all and bombastic.

 

I think it's a lot more far-reaching and cultural than that. There are a lot of sociologists and media critics that think the country over the last couple decades or generations has become way more smart-alecky and ironic, and there is a total lack of respect for authority. Many people think "authority" lost their right to the respect by their do-what-I-say -not-what-I-do attitude themselves, but that is a whole 'nother discussion. Look at the popularity of Rush Limbaugh and talk radio on politics. I see no difference. Look at sitcoms, overall I see no difference, they are a lot more crass. Look at how kids speak to their parents versus how they did the same thing 20-30 years ago.

 

I wouldn't blame Jim Rome for that. For the record, I am one who believes the authority figures were as much to blame as the younger generations, and that they lost their right for the respect because of their actions, at least as much as the blame should go to the kids for their entitlement attitude. I'm positive it is large portions of both, and impossible to say which is more to blame. That's just my opinion on it.

 

Like the post-Watergate government, they lost their right to expect our trust and respect. And I think the argumentative blather and wiseass attitude of general public discourse is reflected in sports talk, news talk, politics talk, parent talk, teacher talk, partner talk, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like the post-Watergate government, they lost their right to expect our trust and respect. And I think the argumentative blather and wiseass attitude of general public discourse is reflected in sports talk, news talk, politics talk, parent talk, teacher talk, partner talk, etc.

I blame the Internet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My point is the audience changed before the stations changed. Believe me, I work in the entertainment field, I guarantee you the programmers at WGR would LOVE to be able to get guests and have their audience make plans to tune in and listen to sterling sports commentary. They know their guys are obnoxious, but the way to get people to listen is to give them what most people want, and most people (or at least the majority) aren't willing to do what you are.

 

This board is the perfect microcosm of the sports fan and radio listening audience. What is the percentage of sterling sports commentators are there versus morons who love to argue?

If they let the morons argue then it might even be a little interesting. People are cut off,or immediately two on oned to death. They should allow a forum were more then one caller at the same time can spar with them. Or if they had the balls have an hour of unscreened calls so people could have there true voice be heard on Sully, Schopp ,or whoever get under their skin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...