Alec Baldwin Looking To Do Public Radio Interview Show

aaronread said:

Mostly her show is on outside major markets or on sub-channels (except in DC, of course).

Click to expand...

That's not really true. The Diane Rehm show airs in:

Boston*
New York*
Miami
Detroit*
Tampa
Orlando
Dallas*
Houston*
San Antonio
Seattle
Baltimore
Washington DC*

...to name a few. That's six* of the top ten markets. On Point, which I personally like better than DR, airs in just three. (Boston, NYC and DC).

Click to expand...

Note the word "mostly." Of course she's on in DC, as I said. In New York, WNYC carries one hour of the show on AM. In Boston she's on WGBH going head to head with On Point (and losing). Detroit is no longer a top 10 market and the program is carried on an out-of-market rim-shot.

The show airs live from 9am - 11 am. And Rhem has lots of competition.

On Point in the 10 am hour.
Radio Times in the 10 am hour.
BBC News in the 9 am hour.
The Takeaway mostly in the 9 am hour.

And listener-in, the practice of reverse discrimination or affirmative in public radio is well known. Some approve; some do not. But it's there. As a result some people are put on the air or kept on the air who do not sound like network radio talent.

MattParker said:

And listener-in, the practice of reverse discrimination or affirmative in public radio is well known. Some approve; some do not. But it's there. As a result some people are put on the air or kept on the air who do not sound like network radio talent.

Click to expand...

It's "well known", is it? Maybe there are some complainers inside the industry, but it's the listeners' experience that counts, and I detect no evidence of it. If you are going after Diane's voice quality, why don't you also go after some of the characters on commercial radio who supposedly have good radio voices but sound like sociopaths whenever they open their mouths. My opinion as a listener, whom you folks are supposed to be serving (oh, I forgot, it's the advertisers) is that Diane's program is a superior product.

listener-in said:

It's "well known", is it? Maybe there are some complainers inside the industry, but it's the listeners' experience that counts, and I detect no evidence of it. If you are going after Diane's voice quality, why don't you also go after some of the characters on commercial radio who supposedly have good radio voices but sound like sociopaths whenever they open their mouths. My opinion as a listener, whom you folks are supposed to be serving (oh, I forgot, it's the advertisers) is that Diane's program is a superior product.

Click to expand...

Hey, nobody said you can't like what you like. You seem to be saying that somebody else can't not like what you like.

This is the public radio board. There are other boards dealing with various commercial radio formats and you are free to comment on anyone you think sounds like a "sociopath." Funny how public radio apologists respond when somebody criticizes something, anything, about public radio: Like little kids caught in the cookie jar they immediately talk about somebody else who swiped cookies, too (and got away with it). Apparently, your use of the word "sociopath" means someone you don't like or with whom you disagree. To hang a psychological label on those with different viewpoints apparently is also common practice in the public radio PC community, as when Vivian Schiller made jokes about Juan Williams' purported psychiatrist.

MP, not only am I free to like whomever I like, but I'm also free to defend whom I like when I think criticism is unwarranted. As far as I am concerned, Diane Rehm has an all-too-rare quality that trumps what you perceive as a disqualification from broadcasting - a deep respect for her listeners and their intelligence. By not recognizing why she has such a loyal following, I suggest you are out of touch.

I suppose it's natural that like so many denizens of this board you are so involved in the preoccupations of the insider that you lose the ability to understand the listener's point of view.

I don't use the term sociopath lightly; there are lots of commentators that I don't like but whom I would not think of applying that label to, but there's a handful whose behavior on the air is consistent with that term.

I agree with both of you. A pleasant voice is a prerequisite for being a radio host, especially at the national level. Diane had that in the 80s and 90s. When she had medical issues what, about 8 years ago, WAMU decided that they were better off continuing with Diane and her condition rather than trying to launch a brand new host. I'm sure there's hundreds, if not thousands, of people like Matt who can't get past the vocal condition and choose not to listen to the Diane Rehm show.

PTBoardOp94 said:

I agree with both of you. A pleasant voice is a prerequisite for being a radio host, especially at the national level. Diane had that in the 80s and 90s. When she had medical issues what, about 8 years ago, WAMU decided that they were better off continuing with Diane and her condition rather than trying to launch a brand new host. I'm sure there's hundreds, if not thousands, of people like Matt who can't get past the vocal condition and choose not to listen to the Diane Rehm show.

Click to expand...

PTB, what you say makes a lot of sense. I only heard Diane Rehm within the last couple of years. She was interviewed on Weekend Edition and yes, I was not comfortable listening to her for a prolonged period of time. I suppose it might be different if I were in Washington and had been listening to her for years before she had a speaking disability.

I'm not sure how long NPR has been distributing the show nationally. Markets I've been in had local public radio talk shows in the late morning. In the early 00s, NPR seemed to pushing the Todd Mundt Show from WUOM in the late morning. That show (and its host) seemed to disappear and NPR seemed to start pushing Diane Rehm. But I can understand that long-time listeners would stay with her.

But back to the original point: Given that more and more public radio stations are programming talk between ME and ATC, and given that the schedule seems full with NPR's current offerings (plus PRI's and local shows) where would they put Alec Baldwin? He would be public radio's most high-profile host and I imagine he doesn't work cheap. Either NPR would replace a current show on the satellite feed ("You're the Weakest Link. Good-bye") or put Alec on the bird and let him and some other host(s) fight it out for clearances (a bit Darwinian for NPR's image).

The other issue: Alec Baldwin makes no secret of his progressive political views. NPR continues to deny any kind of liberal bias. Hard to do that with Alec on board. This also smacks of Air America Radio going for liberals with name recognition but no talk radio experience (we know how well that worked). Actually, I think Thom Hartmann would be a better choice for NPR. No movies. No sitcom. But a track record in radio and a style which would fit comfortably on public radio stations.

The show airs live from 9am - 11 am. And Rhem has lots of competition.

Click to expand...

Eh? Rehm airs 10am to 12n ET, just like On Point. And The Takeaway airs 6am to 8am and does live repeats from 8am to 10am.

FWIW, I would not expect Rehm to be competitive to On Point in Boston for a good long time. While it is a national show, On Point is still locally produced and that carries some weight. More importantly, WBUR has carried a call-in talk show in the 10am - 12n slot since 1992; almost twenty years! It's gonna take more than a year or two to get pubradio listeners in Boston used to the idea that there's a call-in talk show on WGBH as well as on WBUR.

Of course, the nice thing about public radio is that ratings don't tell the whole story. Even if it's a much smaller audience, if it's an appreciative audience, they'll give money at pledge time and that matters a lot.


As for Detroit, I stand corrected. It's not Top Ten, it's market #11. Oops. Nevertheless, your assertion that it's "mostly" outside major markets is simply not true. It's on half the top ten (actually, still technically on six of the top ten since WABE HD2 airs it in Atlanta, but I'll concede that one since it's HD2), and also in markets #11, #12, #13, #18 and #20 so half of the top twenty. That's pretty frickin' good! Especially considering it's a national show in the prime timeslot for call-in talk shows, and most public radio stations with any resources realize the best way to establish themselves as serving their local community is to have a local call-in talk show. That's why NYC, LA, SanFran, Philly and - technically - DC and Boston all have pubradio stations with call-in talk show from 10am to 12n (or the rough equivalent, depending a little on which time zone you're in).

Certainly if I had the money to hire a host and a producer or two, you bet I would've done a local call-in talk show from 10am to 12n. Or for at least one of those hours. I like On Point quite a bit, that's why I added it to WEOS's schedule a few years back...but a well-run local call-in show is gonna trump a national call-in show every day of the week and twice on Sunday.

I'm not sure how long NPR has been distributing the show nationally.

Click to expand...

I want to say it was in 1984 when they changed the name from Kaleidoscope to The Diane Rehm Show. But I'm just going on memory there.

(Alec Baldwin) would be public radio's most high-profile host

Click to expand...

Oddly enough, I'm not sure he would be. Not in the public radio world, where Carl Kasell is The Most Interesting Man in the World. ;D But you've got a point that there's no obvious timeslot that needs filling at the moment. That means either they're thinking a weekly show, where competition for the best timeslots is fierce...and dominated by Wait Wait Don't Tell Me, Car Talk, This American Life, and Weekend Edition Sat/Sun...but nevertheless it's easier to get carriage. Or they'll try to make a go of an evening program which is a real b**ch to pull off. People just don't listen to radio much after their evening commute so listener totals tend to drop like a brick after 6pm, maybe 7pm in bigger markets. No matter how good the show is, it's gonna be hard to get enough audience to justify the costs that Alec and a quality staff of producers would require.

One possibility: Lian Hansen has announced she plans to step down and spend more time at the shore. Possibly, Neal Conan, her husband, is also considering scaling back. That leaves an opening for a new show in the mid-afternoon, or TOTN re-tooled with a new host.

A weekly show makes sense. I have read nothing to suggest that Tina Fey is thinking of ending 30 Rock or that Alec Baldwin is thinking of leaving; Doing a weekly sitcom and a daily talk show would be a heckuva grind. And it would likely preclude Baldwin from any other film or theater work.

I think AaronReed is correct, Diane Rehm began airing nationally in the mid 80s. I was going to say '85, but what's a year among friends.

As far as public radio weekends go, there are a lot of marginal shows that might be dropped (by local stations) in favor of an Alec Baldwin interview show. The first ones that come to mind are APM's "Splendid Table" and "Travel with Rick Steves". Both of these shows are well-done, but serve the tiniest of audiences.

As far as public radio weekends go, there are a lot of marginal shows that might be dropped (by local stations) in favor of an Alec Baldwin interview show. The first ones that come to mind are APM's "Splendid Table" and "Travel with Rick Steves". Both of these shows are well-done, but serve the tiniest of audiences.

Click to expand...

True to a certain degree, but again: if the audience is small but donates, then it doesn't matter if it's small. And it's not uncommon for niche audiences to be very appreciative of niche shows come pledge week.

Doing a weekly sitcom and a daily talk show would be a heckuva grind. And it would likely preclude Baldwin from any other film or theater work.

Click to expand...

No argument here. That'd be a work schedule I'd avoid like the plague.

The only exception is that I would be intrigued to see if public radio, as a whole, would produce a daily half-hour show as a counterpoint to Marketplace. Currently there is one...ONLY one...daily half-hour program and that's Free Speech Radio News. FSRN is a decent show but it pairs poorly with Marketplace. FSRN is very heavy on international news, MP is mostly domestic. FSRN is mostly freelance reporters with loose central control, MP is more balanced on freelance vs. in-house, but skews more towards in-house reporters. FSRN has a definite lefty/activist feel going, MP is "right wing" by pubradio standards.

Personally, I would think that Baldwin doing a 30 minute Colbert Report-esque show for radio each day, targeting the 5-7pm drive-time, could actually work really well. He does that "over the top" satire nicely as Jack on 30 Rock. I just don't know if it'd work to do a daily radio show and a weekly TV show.

aaronread said:

Personally, I would think that Baldwin doing a 30 minute Colbert Report-esque show for radio each day, targeting the 5-7pm drive-time, could actually work really well. He does that "over the top" satire nicely as Jack on 30 Rock. I just don't know if it'd work to do a daily radio show and a weekly TV show.

Click to expand...

Even if it's the only thing he does, it's a lot more work than he's used to. Good satire is more time intensive than an interview show.

Just an addendum on the subject of Diane Rehm. This Wednesday her first hour concerned the events in Wisconsin and elsewhere as they affect public employee unions. One of the guest panelists was Phil Kerpen of Americans for Prosperity, one of several front organizations for the Koch Bros. and their political allies. While vilifying of the teachers and their unions he used the term "lavish" to describe their benefits. Diane questioned what he meant by "lavish" and floundered, unable to provide examples; this, mind you, is a man who makes a profession of "researching" to unearth verbal weapons of mass destruction for use against those whom his organization opposes.

My points about Diane are these: first (as she usually does) she asked the kind of question that is rarely asked by other interviewers, who let questionable assertions just slide by - watch any of the Sunday morning TV interview shows to see loads of examples. Secondly, in keeping with her typical demeanor, she posed the question in a polite but firm way, without stumbling and with no evidence of any vocal disability. If she is not fit for radio, I'm still in my teens. (Trust me, I'm old enough to remember hearing and understanding reports of D-Day on the radio).