![]() |
Disabilities and jobs in broadcasting
|
Disabilities and jobs in broadcasting
|
Disabilities and jobs in broadcasting
John Higdon wrote:
With all due respect, that is spoken just like someone who is not in the business. I am days off the NAB convention floor, and even I was a bit overwhelmed by some of the new tools for production and transmission that have come out in just the past year. I can't imagine anyone currently in the business saying that "there is nothing new under the sun in broadcasting". Sure, there'll always be new equipment. But, you weren't talking about equipment. You were talking about *doing* broadcasting -- the production end of it and I was responding to that. I also pointed out the sound collages that "Radio Lab" is doing, which wouldn't have been possible in a pre-digital age, or as easily possible at any rate. You were talking about the teaching of skills that would lead to innovations in programming. That's where I said that broadcasting is a mature industry and that there's only a certain amount of things you can do with the medium. I never went near one of those schools. But I cannot imagine that such schools did not teach production, broadcast management, script writing, technical basics, and the various performance techniques. When I did a talkshow at KKEY, we had interns from a commercial broadcasting school, I think it was Columbia. The bulk of what the interns knew were board opping and talking into a mic. Broadcast management? Shirley, you jest. If they didn't teach all of those things, they not only should have failed when they did, but they should never have been in the business in the first place. Remember the ads? They showed some guy in a booth talking into a mic and moving a fader and clicking a switch. "Hi, this is Joe Schmuck. You can be on the air just like me..." They never showed anybody looking at Arbitron printouts, writing checks, or for that matter even looking into the back of a transmitter. They always showed the DJ. So, this was not false nor misleading advertising. They taught people who to be DJs in an already overcrowded field of DJs. Even leaving local broadcasting out of the discussion, are you saying that not a single talented human being is utilized in syndication, satellite and Internet audio services? That's truly incredible. No, but I believe in what Rich Wood (syndicator of Sally Jessy Raphael, Wolfman Jack, and a ton of other people, along with op mgr for XETRA, WOR, etc) has always said: "I can teach people how to do radio, but only if they have something to say when they open the mic." But again, you led off the reply with talk about equipment and finished with talk about production. Equipment is not mature, production is, for the most part. |
Disabilities and jobs in broadcasting
John Higdon wrote:
It was explained to me by the owners of some very successful stations that music is simply the glue that holds what a station really does together and keeps the audience from tuning away. The station interacts with listeners, in person and on the air. The station keeps listeners informed about important local events. The station provides news and timely information to help listeners plan their days and get about smoothly. In your 1977 world, yes, but people simply don't listen that way any longer. Yes, there are your stations, which do that sort of thing, but the majority of big stations are jukeboxes. Take news for instance. Most stations have ONE news person for a cluster of 4 or 5, and they usually do the mornings and record some drop-ins for other hours if they offer them at all. In our day, say 1977, KIOI had one news person and KFRC had at least 5. For someone so close to broadcasting you don't seem to be seeing what's been going on. First, you didn't even know that stations, even your suburban ones, tested music before they played it. You thought that it was purely seat of the pants decisions! And you're right up there in it every day and you didn't know this. I suggest that if you want to learn a little more about the production side of broadcasting you talk with people in the business as I do, and find out what's going on. The station helps its fellow community businesses succeed and prosper, not just by selling spots but by working with them individually to devise and execute a plan which maximizes their success. Again, that's not how most of the big stations work. Sure, they'll join the local chamber of commerce and donate money to the Little League, but gone are the days when KKSF used to bankroll ambient music CDs to benefit AIDS charities. Today, KGO stands out as one of the few big stations anywhere that does anything for its community. But look at the other Citadel stations -- I don't even think KABC or WABC have any live local talent at all anymore, except maybe a weekend gardener infomercial talkshow. How can I get it across to you that radio broadcasting is so much more than playing records into the airwaves? In your world it is, but step outside your world and it's jukeboxes. Hell, listen to KOIT, the most successful music station in town for over a decade and what is it? It's a jukebox that sounds automated even when it's live. The extent of community service they do is reading 2 PSAs an hour and giving the weather forecast, something that could be done from Albuquerque. |
Disabilities and jobs in broadcasting
John T wrote:
Among our instructors were Aldy Swanson of KYUU, former KGO-TV reporter Paul Wynne, and a former PD at KSOL, whose name I don't recall. Oh, and a guy (whose name I *should* recall but don't) heard on several stations for his sports reports from the Oakland Coliseum. Sal Bando? The problem with Bailie and other courses was that the days of local personality radio were coming to an end. The conglomeration of the industry was just beginning, and the school lost relevance within a couple of years after I was there. Exactly. In any case, Bailie was a legit operation at that time, and was a stepping stone for many into small to medium market radio and/or TV work-- and for a few it was an entrance directly into the SF market. Again, as I said to JH in another post, the ads were not false or misleading. They did teach people how to be DJs. |
Disabilities and jobs in broadcasting
|
Disabilities and jobs in broadcasting
|
Disabilities and jobs in broadcasting
David Kaye wrote:
John Higdon wrote: It was explained to me by the owners of some very successful stations that music is simply the glue that holds what a station really does together and keeps the audience from tuning away. The station interacts with listeners, in person and on the air. The station keeps listeners informed about important local events. The station provides news and timely information to help listeners plan their days and get about smoothly. In your 1977 world, yes, but people simply don't listen that way any longer. Yes, there are your stations, which do that sort of thing, but the majority of big stations are jukeboxes. This is true, but it's also a really bad thing. The vast majority of radio stations on the air don't actually provide any real benefit to the public. They aren't relevant to the listener, and people don't specifically tune into them. They just happen to hit the station for their normal 2.4 minutes as they are scanning their way down the dial. How can I get it across to you that radio broadcasting is so much more than playing records into the airwaves? In your world it is, but step outside your world and it's jukeboxes. Hell, listen to KOIT, the most successful music station in town for over a decade and what is it? It's a jukebox that sounds automated even when it's live. The extent of community service they do is reading 2 PSAs an hour and giving the weather forecast, something that could be done from Albuquerque. What makes it sucessful, though? Do people really go out of their way to listen to it, or do they just happen to turn it on because it's the loudest thing on the dial as they tune by and it happened to be playing a song they like? From my perspective, I think much of what is wrong with radio is that the bands are too crowded with stations that are all playing the same song at the same time. I think the only thing that will save radio is for the marginal stations to go dark. We need to see a _lot_ of stations going dark. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Disabilities and jobs in broadcasting
In article ,
David Kaye wrote: (Scott Dorsey) wrote: See, you could make that into a fun tour, talking about the history of the station and what used to be in this room and what used to be in that room, and how technology has changed things both for the better and the worse. Would if it were. The history of KDYA 1190 is Lou Ripa's KNBA in Vallejo with a totally different format and nothing remarkable in its history (unless you consider Lou's morning restaurant interviews of 40 years ago). KDIA 1640 is an extended band drop-in with no history. The KDIA callsign used to belong to a totally unrelated station (KMKY 1310). THAT is interesting. That's something worth talking about... how we got into the situation where the whole extended band was created. THAT is an important part of radio history. The offices are in a generic office building in Richmond, which could have been a law firm or any other generic office. There's no there there. What is interesting about the station isn't anything that is in the station itself, it's how the industry got to be where it is and how the station got to be there. It doesn't look very exciting and the tour itself isn't much, but there's a lot of interesting stuff that happened in order to get things to the point of that PC automation system sitting in an office park. And this isn't unlike other stations. Today's radio stations are computers like people have at home, mixing boards like one might see in a DJ booth at a nightclub, though not as sophisticated, transmitters are in distant locations that nobody but the chief engineers visit. There's really not much to see. No, but there's a _lot_ to talk about. Everything is in little boxes in racks that look like every other rack in every other industry, but how it got to be that way is the story of radio. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
Disabilities and jobs in broadcasting
"John Higdon" wrote:
Would Mike Amatori, production director of KGO, San Francisco do, or his associate Craig Bowers? We talk about this all the time. Actually, I imagine you are joking...since I have been in this business full-time for over forty years, and it would be inconceivable that I would not speak with those by whom I am surrounded on an everyday basis, don't you think? But you didn't even know that your own stations test their music before playing it. You thought they operated on hunches. If you didn't know this fundamental aspect of today's programming, there's probably more things about modern radio that you don't know. Okay, I went to school with Mike Amatori. I want to be as supportive as possible, but unfortunately, when it comes to production he's fairly blind to modern ideas and techniques. His stuff, unfortunately, sounds 40 years out of date. Frankly, he's not very good. His delivery is singsongy. He makes little use of music beds, no use of sound effects, speed changes, etc. Heck, there are spots he could do with multiple voices, back and forth banter, lots of things, but he just knocks out the same old same old day after day. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:19 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com