Some people actually have wider ranges of experience and knowledge than others. Some have worked in other areas of the business besides programming. Just because someone has worked in a field for 40 years doesn't mean they worked in all aspects of that field. There are lots of other areas, and they all have an impact on the programming. But if you come at it only from the programming side, you miss the rest of the story. I've often felt those programmers who complain about sales just need to spend a week on the sales side. Go to a few client meetings. Make a few pitches and watch as their opinions get shot down. It would be a good experience to have.
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
Message board dentist dying to get noticed by Mike Francesa
- Thread starter TTalkradio1
- Start date
Some people actually have wider ranges of experience and knowledge than others. Some have worked in other areas of the business besides programming. Just because someone has worked in a field for 40 years doesn't mean they worked in all aspects of that field. There are lots of other areas, and they all have an impact on the programming. But if you come at it only from the programming side, you miss the rest of the story. I've often felt those programmers who complain about sales just need to spend a week on the sales side. Go to a few client meetings. Make a few pitches and watch as their opinions get shot down. It would be a good experience to have.
Absolutely true ... and vice versa. It's easy to come at the sales side from a statistical perspective only, and that's just as flawed.
For an extreme example, when a car company knows of a defect that can cause accidents and kill people they've been known to justify the status quo by "proving" statistically that the cost of a recall would far exceed the cost of settling handful of claims. From a bottom-line perspective they're absolutely correct ... until the s**t hits the fan. An immediate statistical solution isn't always forward looking.
I'm not arguing who's right or wrong ... it's the tone of some of the posts over there, (and here to a lesser extent.) When someone makes a programming suggestion, it's immediately followed by an inflexible contradiction with all kinds of facts and figures to back it up. That's not the way to have a conversation. And the reply can be "oh-so-polite" but with a smug tone that suggests a rigid, absolutist attitude.
Being in the business for years in any capacity doesn't guarantee iron-clad knowledge of how things should be done. Ever see the movie, "About Schmidt?
At issue here are often cases where facts and figures alone invalidate another poster's "suggestion".
Without arguing about how much "good" pop music was produced from 1955 to 1970, we know that such music appeals in its vast majority to people now in their 60's and 70's. And we know that essentially all agency buys are for folks under 55. So it does not matter how many singles Elvis charted or how great Buddy Holly was and how he influenced the Beatles. And it does not matter that "radio is not serving the seniors who have the most disposable income".
So often the more impractical suggestions, such as the one in this example, are most easily countered with statistics. The alternative is to argue that songs from one era a "better" than those from another, a rather subjective and ultimately inconclusive process. Or, in a similar vein, "What's missing today are DJs like Cousin Brucie and Dan Ingram and Gary Stevens"... 60's jocks in an Internet world.
That's why so many responses to "suggestions" that are in many ways unrealistic are best answered with facts and figures and not subjective opinion and smileys.
However, at the end of the day, the people who own the stations have the right to run them however they want. If that means the listeners don't like the results, they don't have to listen. What we have are a lot of amateurs without a stake in the game lecturing owners on how to spend their money. Same with advertisers. If the advertisers are wrong in how they spend their money, that's their right. Today, if those amateurs want to spend their own time and money on an online radio station to prove everyone wrong, they're welcome to do it. They need to be willing to put their own money where their mouth is, just like those of us who have. Otherwise, they're just another mouth with an opinion, and we know how that goes. Everybody's got one.
Last edited:
Who cares about him streaming oldies music? Secondly, he's done nothing for talk radio archiving. People have since created radio message boards, and I was pointing out that his being the first or one of the first is the reason those veterans participate on his board. Ted David is one of many who he's had issues with.
He hates Howard, because he's an Imus lover.
You already said this and I responded by saying, "I had some issues myself with Ted David and his monumental lack of understanding of the business side of the industry he worked in for so long. I can't imagine Dr Sniffen not having issues with that individual."
Sure, all that goes without saying. It almost sounds as if you want to see all radio message boards shut down! But hey, nobody is being forced to read any of this, nor to reply.
Actually the opinions on these boards can be a resource for those with a stake in the game -- free research so to speak. Perhaps they are but those insiders with the actual decision-making power have better things to do than to reply to message boards. I've made a couple of suggestions on radio message boards over the years that were actually implemented rather quickly. Could be pure coincidence or maybe management already had the same thing in mind. In either case it shows the suggestions were valid.
Me, a Brooklyn/Long Island boy who once lived in Philly for a few years and then moved to here in Coal Country, have always enjoyed the Radio-Discussion boards. I kind of miss the old posting format on this forum (dare I say modelled after that of the NYRMB?) and some of the posters to here. The Philadelphia board had some terrific writers.
Dave Clarity? Send me an eMail one of these days, son!
In any case, I really enjoy the gives-and-takes here -- agree or disagree. Wadio and David Eduardo and The Big A and Fred Leonard make for daily reads. I personally feel, though, that what happens on a 'rival' forum should be of little concern to the gentry here, and is of personally-oriented origin.
I truly hate all of you, but I enjoy reading your communications stuff.
* * * * * * *
And at this point in his career -- I enjoy him, btw -- Francesa cannot give a flying one about some radio-forum moderator's critiques or judgement. After all, Francesa recently dismissed, instantly, that funny guy, worldwide, who did the Revolutionary War satire video of Francesa, starring 'Mike' and his advancing hairline.
So I have little doubt that Allan Sniffen just found a slow day and decided to comment. It's his model train-set. And it's still * radio *.
So hey -- what's da problimm?
Dave Clarity? Send me an eMail one of these days, son!
In any case, I really enjoy the gives-and-takes here -- agree or disagree. Wadio and David Eduardo and The Big A and Fred Leonard make for daily reads. I personally feel, though, that what happens on a 'rival' forum should be of little concern to the gentry here, and is of personally-oriented origin.
I truly hate all of you, but I enjoy reading your communications stuff.
* * * * * * *
And at this point in his career -- I enjoy him, btw -- Francesa cannot give a flying one about some radio-forum moderator's critiques or judgement. After all, Francesa recently dismissed, instantly, that funny guy, worldwide, who did the Revolutionary War satire video of Francesa, starring 'Mike' and his advancing hairline.
So I have little doubt that Allan Sniffen just found a slow day and decided to comment. It's his model train-set. And it's still * radio *.
So hey -- what's da problimm?
I like his oldies channel ... And also keep in mind he hasn't killed any lions
Another solution is that anyone can start their own message board instead of dumping on someone else for the sake of some sort of animosity.
He's the one who runs his board like a jerk and calls his the biggest board. You don't have to read my thread.
No one is addressing my thread title that it seems like he is on a mission to get Francesa to notice him.
Well, it got you to notice...not that it means anything.
So, we have a message board about radio in market #1 and a Westchester dentist is the most active topic.....Sad.
LCG
maybe there isn't much else going on to talk about?
There's a very interesting thread over there titled, "Let's assume the sky IS falling." It's the moderator's reply to an earlier thread about the paradigm shift away from terrestrial radio and toward digital forms of delivery. It's his refusal to recognize the reality that people born within the last quarter century mostly don't use terrestrial radio. Nobody's saying that FM will go dark tomorrow or next year, but the signs are there. Yet the moderator says FM will never go away. "Ever."
What strikes me is that it's a very civil discussion with lots of well formed arguments -- except for posts from the moderator! He called a brilliant post by Marty Brooks, "ridiculous." He attacked another poster with, "Let me clear it up for you since you seem to be having difficulty understanding," etc. The thread is filled with nasty, demeaning assaults on posters who have done nothing more than express opinions, many based on reliable statistics, devoid of personal attacks. That's how I read it anyway. And for once nobody is sucking up in agreement so maybe that's the reason for the lashing out.
I wish guys like Marty would come over here, but I guess this isn't unlike the die-hards who'll put up with all manner of garbage on terrestrial radio and keep on listening.
What strikes me is that it's a very civil discussion with lots of well formed arguments -- except for posts from the moderator! He called a brilliant post by Marty Brooks, "ridiculous." He attacked another poster with, "Let me clear it up for you since you seem to be having difficulty understanding," etc. The thread is filled with nasty, demeaning assaults on posters who have done nothing more than express opinions, many based on reliable statistics, devoid of personal attacks. That's how I read it anyway. And for once nobody is sucking up in agreement so maybe that's the reason for the lashing out.
I wish guys like Marty would come over here, but I guess this isn't unlike the die-hards who'll put up with all manner of garbage on terrestrial radio and keep on listening.
But that statement is factually false. More than 70% of people born in the last quarter century use OTA radio. They actually use it a lot. But they also use other things.
People can use multiple forms of media. It's not hard to do.
I haven't visited his site since I posted this thread. He's not likable at all. I think that the AM band is not used by people under 40.
- Status