• TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
  • Follow
    • Follow
    • facebook
    • twitter
    • google+
    • instagram
    • youtube
Hearst Corporation
  • TV
  • MOVIES
  • MUSIC
  • SHOWBIZ
  • SOAPS
  • GAMING
  • TECH
  • FORUMS
Forums
  • Register
  • Login
  • Forums
  • Entertainment
  • Radio
LBC General Chit-Chat (Part 32)
<<
<
527 of 556
>>
>
MartinRosen
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by snowy ghost:
“And her tweet about Carrie Fisher was an example of her stepping over the mark ..as i imagine it was not the view of LBC or the DM”

Dare I say it. I agree with Katie.

I am afraid it is boring to have all or a substantial part of the programme dedicated to someone who has just died, whether it be Bowie, George Michael, Carrie Fisher, Debbie Reynolds (and unfortunately so many others this year). Everybody ringing in will say how wonderful the person is, and it is such a great loss. Very few, if any will be able to talk about them personally.

I am not saying ignore their death, but report it on the news, maybe bring in an entertainment correspondent on a programme, who can perhaps tell us more about the person that we didn't know, but to give over a whole bulletin or programme about someone who has just died is OTT as far as I'm concerned.
PhoebeJeebie
29-12-2016
My period on the naughty step appears to have ended.
Thank you to the 'milk monitor' who turned super grass.......one of the usual suspects no doubt 😀
Still, it gave me the chance to read a George Orwell classic rather than busy my typing fingers. I'd forgotten quite how visionary Orwells predictions were........"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it"

Of course the word 'drifts' is not meant as a reference to the multitude of ❄️❄️❄️ who appear to have come out of their igloo.

*Wolfie Smith.......loving your work 😀
lordloz
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by PhoebeJeebie:
“My period on the naughty step appears to have ended.
Thank you to the 'milk monitor' who turned super grass.......one of the usual suspects no doubt 😀
Still, it gave me the chance to read a George Orwell classic rather than busy my typing fingers. I'd forgotten quite how visionary Orwells predictions were........"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it"

Of courzse the word 'drifts' is not meant as a reference to the multitude of ❄️❄️❄️ who appear to have come out of their igloo.

*Wolfie Smith.......loving your work 😀”

Welcome back indeed Lady Phoebe... you have been sorely missed....Oh what festive fun we've had...I was briefly MIA but maybe I wasn't quite so "naughty" as you.... Oh the thought of it *sigh*

I have decided to try to ignore those delicate souls who seem to want to try and keep needling instead of mature discussion and some good humour.

I long ago in the real world decided to move away from anyone who was a positive energy Hoover as life is too short... now time to do the same in the virtual world....

I agree Wolfie can we have part 2 of o brien's Christmas vacation please? Still laughing at part 1 and of course Mrs SWMBO o brien and family is fair game for some light hearted pokes as he so frequently reminds listeners of their existence so very often....
Oscar_
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by MartinRosen:
“If they let every caller on who rang in, you may get someone that can hardly string a sentence together properly, someone who is a racist (and would admit it to a producer), or even someone who comes on to say "Yeh, I agree with you" (end of conversation).

I think it is better that they attempt to screen the calls ... else you would have somebody like me ringing in”

If you look at past and current examples of phone-in shows that allow everybody on (out of choice or by necessity) you find that the method works equally as well if not better.

Part of the skill of being a host involves getting the best out of the callers. Sometimes this might involve cutting a call fairly short. Sometimes the "inarticulate" callers can provide some interesting content, but again the host needs to know how to facilitate this. Just because a caller made a "bad" call one day does not mean that their call will be bad on another occasion. All conversations vary. I'm sure I don't need to remind you that usually they have a dump button. I have heard the "C" word go out on more than one occasion on a BBC phone-in and it really doesn't matter. No harm is done.

I just happen to believe that phone-in talk radio stations should respect their callers and recognise the value that they bring. A caller is listening to the host and is calling in to speak to the host. The caller does not know the call-screener from Adam and does not want to be judged and looked-down-the-nose-at by some snotty oik who is answering the lines and who is probably not good enough to be a host and probably would be a rubbish caller themselves if they had the guts to try it sometime.
MartinRosen
29-12-2016
I agree there is a skill to being a phone-in host. However, there maybe times when the caller is in full flow and the presenter needs to speak to the producer or vice versa.

However, it can be argued both ways.

One other good reason for filtering calls, is that someone may ring in with something really interesting, but because of the relatively boring calls preceeding him/her, they don't get a chance to get on air.

If it is, say an overnight programme where there are relatively few calls I agree let them all on. However on a programme like Nick Ferrari's where he only has time for relatively few calls, surely the best should be given priority.
Shirley-Heights
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by Oscar_:
“ All conversations vary. I'm sure I don't need to remind you that usually they have a dump button. I have heard the "C" word go out on more than one occasion on a BBC phone-in and it really doesn't matter. No harm is done.
”

I still can't believe that the BBC do not have a dump button, or if they do have now, the presenter or producer and/or techy person don't use it.

It does make for amusing listening but then the presenter wastes time afterwards apologising to those listeners who are easily offended.
Oscar_
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by MartinRosen:
“One other good reason for filtering calls, is that someone may ring in with something really interesting, but because of the relatively boring calls preceeding him/her, they don't get a chance to get on air.

If it is, say an overnight programme where there are relatively few calls I agree let them all on. However on a programme like Nick Ferrari's where he only has time for relatively few calls, surely the best should be given priority.”

That is why I said that the host is the person who must decide that the caller has little to offer and therefore make that call a short one.

I understand the limitations of a busy show. The notion of the "best" calls is a bit subjective, but more importantly I don't accept that the call-screener is able to make that judgement when answering the call and before the call has been put to air. Sometimes we hear calls that start off rather boring and only when we get some way in something is said which unearths a gem and has everybody pricking their ears up.

End the DOURness, let the conversation flow naturally and tell Park to get stuffed, because when it comes to talk radio he doesn't know his rear end from his elbow.
Wolfie Smith
29-12-2016
Katie vs Brian (Part 2)

The 44 year old broadcaster jumped as the elderly lady thrust a pound coin into his hand saying "Go and get a cup of tea, love - keep warm" and pulled her shopping basket further along the promenade. He hadn't expected to spend the afternoon on his own. He had been sitting on a bench, gazing out to sea for hours while fiddling with his unkempt beard, even he admitted his tank top had something of the vagrant about it.

This was no time to worry about sartorial elegance, despite previously being a purveyor of trousers in the West End. Hopkins covering for Shelagh on LBC had got under his skin and he was desperate to find a bigger insult than 'Nazi' to add to his armoury. What if his tantrum didn't work next time and Hopkins replaced HIM?

In the back of his mind there was a nagging doubt. What it calling even the most rational of people racist wasn't working any more? What if he was part of the problem? What if peddling fear to concerned people was doing more harm than good? Surely a woman he considered a Nazi couldn't stand in for him the next time he visited Northern France? What if his act had been thoroughly rumbled? What if his ilk had helped the cause of Brexit and a Trump victory? He had a box of trolls and Hillary had a basket of deplorables...it just hadn't worked.

He thrust the pound coin into his pocket and his mind still raced as he tucked his Jamie Oliver cookbook under his arm and shuffled back to the family. He didn't want to spoil the New Year celebrations. 2017 was going to be better, wasn't it?
zebra23
29-12-2016
Regarding censoring of calls, there is also self-selection by the callers themselves. I sometimes would like to contribute to JOB's topic - almost certainly with an opposing view - but experience leads me to believe I would be derided for not holding his view, rather than being judged on the eloquence of my argument. I have noted this particularly when he begins the topic "now I don't want to fall out with anyone over this........" - reminding me of Kaa in the Jungle Book hissing "trust in me....." to Mowgli - as I know the treatment any hapless caller is about to receive.
Wolfie Smith
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by PhoebeJeebie:
“My period on the naughty step appears to have ended.
Thank you to the 'milk monitor' who turned super grass.......one of the usual suspects no doubt 😀
Still, it gave me the chance to read a George Orwell classic rather than busy my typing fingers. I'd forgotten quite how visionary Orwells predictions were........"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it"

Of course the word 'drifts' is not meant as a reference to the multitude of ❄️❄️❄️ who appear to have come out of their igloo.

*Wolfie Smith.......loving your work 😀”

Great post. A pleasure to meet you here Miss Phoebe.
Nosedive
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by MartinRosen:
“Dare I say it. I agree with Katie.

I am afraid it is boring to have all or a substantial part of the programme dedicated to someone who has just died, whether it be Bowie, George Michael, Carrie Fisher, Debbie Reynolds (and unfortunately so many others this year). Everybody ringing in will say how wonderful the person is, and it is such a great loss. Very few, if any will be able to talk about them personally.

I am not saying ignore their death, but report it on the news, maybe bring in an entertainment correspondent on a programme, who can perhaps tell us more about the person that we didn't know, but to give over a whole bulletin or programme about someone who has just died is OTT as far as I'm concerned.”

I agree Martin. I thought similar things when I wrote this earlier this morning in #13122. Unfortunately I didn't elicit any responses though:

Originally Posted by Nosedive:
“At 07:40 this morning after 40 minutes of listening I had switch off Andrew Castle in frustration.

The constant references to the passing of Debbie Reynolds just seemed so irritatingly over the top for such news in the grand scheme of things.

Then, when he did go the subject fully and cue the specialist reporter, his sentiments seemed so affected and incongruent, I would suggest it was purely LBC's agenda driving the urgency of this story and not the priority of the headline in the world this morning at all. Very disappointing.”

Nosedive
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by PhoebeJeebie:
“My period on the naughty step appears to have ended.
Thank you to the 'milk monitor' who turned super grass.......one of the usual suspects no doubt 😀
Still, it gave me the chance to read a George Orwell classic rather than busy my typing fingers. I'd forgotten quite how visionary Orwells predictions were........"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it"

Of course the word 'drifts' is not meant as a reference to the multitude of ❄️❄️❄️ who appear to have come out of their igloo.

*Wolfie Smith.......loving your work 😀”

Welcome back Phoebe, hoped it wouldn't be too long.
Nosedive
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by Wolfie Smith:
“Katie vs Brian (Part 2)

The 44 year old broadcaster jumped as the elderly lady thrust a pound coin into his hand saying "Go and get a cup of tea, love - keep warm" and pulled her shopping basket further along the promenade. He hadn't expected to spend the afternoon on his own. He had been sitting on a bench, gazing out to sea for hours while fiddling with his unkempt beard, even he admitted his tank top had something of the vagrant about it.

This was no time to worry about sartorial elegance, despite previously being a purveyor of trousers in the West End. Hopkins covering for Shelagh on LBC had got under his skin and he was desperate to find a bigger insult than 'Nazi' to add to his armoury. What if his tantrum didn't work next time and Hopkins replaced HIM?

In the back of his mind there was a nagging doubt. What it calling even the most rational of people racist wasn't working any more? What if he was part of the problem? What if peddling fear to concerned people was doing more harm than good? Surely a woman he considered a Nazi couldn't stand in for him the next time he visited Northern France? What if his act had been thoroughly rumbled? What if his ilk had helped the cause of Brexit and a Trump victory? He had a box of trolls and Hillary had a basket of deplorables...it just hadn't worked.

He thrust the pound coin into his pocket and his mind still raced as he tucked his Jamie Oliver cookbook under his arm and shuffled back to the family. He didn't want to spoil the New Year celebrations. 2017 was going to be better, wasn't it?”

First class Mike. I loved some of the subtle references in there!
mumbles26
29-12-2016
Gotta love Wolfie 😂
radiodad
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by Oscar_:
“In your opinion, do you honestly think that all this highly complex analysis of the callers actually makes for a better output on LBC for the listener?

I can't help feeling that it does have the effect of making the production team feel smug and self-important, that they are performing a function that requires PhD in PhoneBOX call-handling or something.

Regarding line quality, it isn't working. The number of callers on naff obamaphones that I hear on LBC is a disgrace. Major fail that the producers don't identify those before putting callers on.

Otherwise they should just rack up the calls and let the people speak. Don't try to be a bunch of smart-alecs. Callers want to speak to the HOST. Don't ask them for an audition or a chuffin' dress-rehearsal. Many callers who would make the station sound more interesting and enjoyable get put off by the process.

Classic case of being too clever by half. No need to be so DOUR and no need to arrogantly LEAD Britain's conversation. What they should do is let it flow, because conversation works best (and sounds best) when it happens that way.”

Yes in a word, some people call up for anything. Belive it or not some people literally call up every hour or call up and ask "what are you talking about at the moment". LBC's average listening time is a lot bigger than music stations so as a result some people with me listening for long periods of time. If someone calls again with the same view they just spouted 2 hours previous to another presenter it makes for boring radio.

Breakfast and Drive is another good example, if someone phones in at 8am and your traveling to work and hear there point and then at 5pm you travel home and hear the exact same point it's dull and you would likely switch over. This is where the likes of phonebox technology comes into it's own.

As said 15 callers an hour is about the most you will get on, if 100 people an hour call there is always going to be people that miss out. Why would you have a someone boring on when you have a stack of others with better points. I agree you can get some gold out of racking them up and putting them on, Iain Lee's triple M is a great example but by his own words the format "Get's a lot of misses and we have to go through a lot of rubbish but when we hit gold it's brilliant"

Regarding call quality it's very difficult, sometimes when you prep the caller for air in the 2 minutes it takes before going on air they may move and the signal goes poor, may switch to handsfree even though they have been told not to or something like a road drill has fired up and is causing horrible background noise. A poor line all never be put though unless someone have a story/Gold that people will put up with interference for but every attempt will have been made before hand to try a different line or improve the quality.


Originally Posted by lordloz:
“Hi Radiodad, I know from before you know far more than me how radio production works but just a question I've highlighted is if that's the case how do Tony from Liverpool on NF, David from Exeter and Peter from (can't remember) on Nick Abbott et al get on a daily basis if that's the case. I'm not knocking them as they are pretty much always good callers but guess they are considered safe and reliable then...

I'm sure practice makes perfect and if we all called often enough we'd be ok too
OT but had 2 tweets read out by James Max this morning anti Vic Beckham (funny how only 140 characters and still edited it to a couple of words.... )

& he tweeted me to call in.... I didn't... mind you if it had been the goddess Julia in whose slot he's in I would have been tempted just to talk to her luscious plummy tones *sigh* ”

Shows like Nick Abbott and overnights will struggle for calls more and as a result calls that may not be of best quality or regular callers maybe used. Certainly if you put a regular on in daytime day after day while the switchboard was rammed you would be questioned on why you are doing it. Even the late shows will sometimes not put someone to air even if the switchboard is dead because they have been on far too much.

NF is a different kettle of fish and while he may have regulars they won't be everyday they will be likely once a week (on a different day and time to last time) at very most.
Crawley Cutie
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by snowy ghost:
“I have switched the radio off”


You missed a very sympathetic and sad hour of phone- ins. These were from mothers whose children had died, either as babies or adults. This, in recognition of Debbie Reynold's death.

Katie handled it very well. I am not a fan - but can't fault her radio presenting style. I sometimes agree with her - sometimes disagree.....

Incidentally, I turned on my 'favourite,' NA, at 10.15 and my ears were bombarded with Brexit/Trump talk. He is obviously managing to insert these subjects between his A-Z

Happy twixt Xmas and New year.... Wednesday

Ps. Note to radiodad - A very interesting post.....Thank you.
gamzattiwoo
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by PhoebeJeebie:
“My period on the naughty step appears to have ended.
Thank you to the 'milk monitor' who turned super grass.......one of the usual suspects no doubt 😀
Still, it gave me the chance to read a George Orwell classic rather than busy my typing fingers. I'd forgotten quite how visionary Orwells predictions were........"The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it"

Of course the word 'drifts' is not meant as a reference to the multitude of ❄️❄️❄️ who appear to have come out of their igloo.

*Wolfie Smith.......loving your work 😀”

Oh dear. What did you do? The thing is we don't ever know what someone's offence is and do not realise why or if they have disappeared for a while.
Peachykeen
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by snowy ghost:
“I have not been aware of any petty insults or name calling
But have to say I am getting irritated by these on going pops at people who are allegedly doing this
It all reminds me of the playground in primary school”

Just before you started posting regularly on the thread we had the ' O'Brien Wars' and several posters ended up getting banned.

Some have reappeared due to the DS amnesty and it has reopened old wounds.

All I'll say is , get yourself a tin hat for when James reappears next week
Peachykeen
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by MartinRosen:
“Dare I say it. I agree with Katie.

I am afraid it is boring to have all or a substantial part of the programme dedicated to someone who has just died, whether it be Bowie, George Michael, Carrie Fisher, Debbie Reynolds (and unfortunately so many others this year). Everybody ringing in will say how wonderful the person is, and it is such a great loss. Very few, if any will be able to talk about them personally.

I am not saying ignore their death, but report it on the news, maybe bring in an entertainment correspondent on a programme, who can perhaps tell us more about the person that we didn't know, but to give over a whole bulletin or programme about someone who has just died is OTT as far as I'm concerned.”

It's all been blown up out of proportion and I blame the 24hrs news culture we have now.
They need to fill hours of radio/TV and what easier way than a celebrity death with a body of work and controversial private life.

This kind of blanket coverage should only be for something like the death of the Queen, major parliament incidents or acts of terrorism. Real news.
Crawley Cutie
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by gamzattiwoo:
“Oh dear. What did you do? The thing is we don't ever know what someone's offence is and do not realise why or if they have disappeared for a while.”


We always know the, 'If' - coz, it's always depicted under their details, on the left. Never, the, 'Why,' though

Dare not say anymore - else, It will be my turn
Crawley Cutie
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by Peachykeen:
“It's all been blown up out of proportion and I blame the 24hrs news culture we have now.
They need to fill hours of radio/TV and what easier way than a celebrity death with a body of work and controversial private life.

This kind of blanket coverage should only be for something like the death of the Queen, major parliament incidents or acts of terrorism. Real news.”


I agree. We live in a Celebrity culture, now....... and some people love to express their sorrow at losing someone they never met/knew.

As you say, Peachy, the timing of these sad deaths at Christmas are filling a massive 'news' hole, during the slow period of the holidays.
lordloz
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by Wolfie Smith:
“Katie vs Brian (Part 2)

What if peddling fear to concerned people was doing more harm than good? Surely a woman he considered a Nazi couldn't stand in for him the next time he visited Northern France? What if his act had been thoroughly rumbled? What if his ilk had helped the cause of Brexit and a Trump victory? He had a box of trolls and Hillary had a basket of deplorables...it just hadn't worked.”

genius...again thank you

I'm still laughing at the other genius for today which was Gareth of Cleethorpes (a noble title) had KH giggling like a schoolgirl....

I do this from memory and may not be 100% as I was laughing too much myself....

GoC "well done Katie, you give balance to the liberal left leaning of the other LBC presenters like James O'Brien who will soon disappear up his own hubris.. :eek

KH I couldn't possibly say Gareth..

I know you can't so I'll say it for you....little popinjay....

comedy gold....
gamzattiwoo
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by Crawley Cutie:
“We always know the, 'If' - coz, it's always depicted under their details, on the left. Never, the, 'Why,' though

Dare not say anymore - else, It will be my turn ”

Yes I guess so and to be fair I didn't expect to be told.
lordloz
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by Peachykeen:
“It's all been blown up out of proportion and I blame the 24hrs news culture we have now.
They need to fill hours of radio/TV and what easier way than a celebrity death with a body of work and controversial private life.

This kind of blanket coverage should only be for something like the death of the Queen, major parliament incidents or acts of terrorism. Real news.”

I do agree, also tried to agree with Martin earlier but tablet not playing ball..

3 hours of mawkish maudlin from Fanny Allen was too much.... I'm moved by famous people and icons but never laid flowers at their door or called radio stations even those I've met...
Barry Sheene was an absolute rebel and hero to me and the reason I started riding motorbikes..... I met him in the last years of his life and was not disappointed...he was the genuine article and a lovely lovely guy, I was very when he died for a while but that's all...i wasn't his family or close friend and still didn't do any of the above......

I'm with Andy Kershaw on this.......GM was a fleeting pop star that's about right....that's not criticising his charity etc. but he was not Lennon/Hendrix/Harrison/Bowie etc.etc...

Fanny Allen comedy gold today (damn you insomnia) was criticising Kershaw... go away Andy no one cares what you think, you're a sad old man and irrelevant wittering on about George Michael and no one cares............... err....pot kettle anyone???
snowy ghost
29-12-2016
Originally Posted by Peachykeen:
“Just before you started posting regularly on the thread we had the ' O'Brien Wars' and several posters ended up getting banned.

Some have reappeared due to the DS amnesty and it has reopened old wounds.

All I'll say is , get yourself a tin hat for when James reappears next week ”

Thanks Peachy
<<
<
527 of 556
>>
>
VIEW DESKTOP SITE TOP

JOIN US HERE

  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Hearst Corporation

Hearst Corporation

DIGITAL SPY, PART OF THE HEARST UK ENTERTAINMENT NETWORK

© 2015 Hearst Magazines UK is the trading name of the National Magazine Company Ltd, 72 Broadwick Street, London, W1F 9EP. Registered in England 112955. All rights reserved.

  • Terms & Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Complaints
  • Site Map