bilky asko wrote:cityprod wrote:Again, that's in your head and your head alone. I'm not trying to patronise you, that isn't even close to where my head's at. It genuinely seems like you have no earthly clue about where my thinking is, you just assume things based upon what you would think in that situation. I'm making serious points here. If you're still dealing with work stuff out of work hours, then you aren't helping the business, or yourself. In the end, it's gonna cost your health, and maybe even cost the small business its survival. Again, I have some degree of experience here.
Leave work stuff at work, and let your mind and body recharge whilst home.
You don't know what sort of work I'm doing out of hours. In fact, it's something I'm actually greatly enjoying doing - it's not catch-up work or e-mails at 10pm, and it is something (despite your assertion) that will be of great benefit to the business.
It doesn't matter what you're doing and whether you're enjoying it or not. This is medical fact I'm talking about not some random supposition. If you want to fight the medical community on this, you go ahead. All I'm saying is don't be surprised if your health suffers some years down the road, or maybe even sooner than that.
Your delivery is awful and full of gaps, your traffic/travel/weather/shipping segments are far too long and made even longer by the constant gaps in your speech (which even the bed underneath your speech couldn't bridge without it sounding very awkward)
I'm not going to disagree that at times some of my delivery wasn't perfectly slick and commercial radio-like, but that's not what we're going for, and that's not what our audience wants. I will also say there were times when I wasn't happy with my own delivery, but there are plenty of legitimate reasons for that, such as translating colour coded maps into spoken words. Can it be improved? Oh yes, but if you're expecting commercial radio slickness all the time, then you're going to be permanently disappointed, because that's not what our audience wants. Even if we did try to be, we've got Pirate FM and Heart as competition, and they can do that far better than we can.
there is very little spoken content that's going to be of any interest to anyone,
Just because it might not be of interest to you, doesn't mean it isn't going to be of interest to somebody else. This is a fairly constant thing, people make the claim that something 'isn't of interest to anyone', and what they're really saying is that it isn't of interest to them, so they think that nobody else will be interested in it. Most showbiz stories hold no interest for me at all, but I don't assume that because I don't like them, nobody else will.
you make constant, overly-accurate time references for no particular reason;
Now this I find to be just bizarre. The time references are no different to what you hear on any other station at that time of day. I'm going to suggest that you are being hyper-critical here, just for the sake of criticising something. I can't see a legitimate criticism here.
your latest edition includes a pointless comment (which you admit is pointless) about the Orlando terrorist attack and then tastelessly read out lyrics from the next song you tenuously link to.
Lots of just plain old wrong here. First, I didn't even say the comment was pointless. I said there wasn't a lot I could say that hadn't been said already, but it wasn't pointless. You made a leap of logic there that you had no business making.
As for your assertion of tastelessness about quoting the lyrics, that's just plain old wrong. There's nothing tasteless about referencing somebody else's words who are saying what you are saying as well. That's not tasteless, that's being practical. It was why that song followed from that comment, it was why I deliberately referenced those lyrics. Also, the slow pace of the comment, that's a stylistic choice. It's meant to convey an image of thoughtful, considered. Obviously to you, it doesn't convey that image, cos you're only considering the superficial, and believe it or not, that piece was never ever meant to be superficial.
What little interesting content there was in the latest edition languishes near the end of your programme bunched together.
So you follow the same idea that a lot of people do that community means local and local only. That's not something I believe, and I look for other things such as is it relevant, is it useful or is it just interesting to someone. But this idea that local stations, of any kind, should only do local content is something I think is just just plain wrong.
From the last edition, the show being live only seemed necessary for the travel updates.
Again, that is an odd statement to make. You're implying that I could have pre-recorded a lot of my links, and could have taken the time to edit them to make them sound slicker, again, that's not what we're trying to do. Community radio should not try to be a copy, a bad copy at that, of commercial radio. I know plenty of stations do do that, and have legitimate reasons for believing that it works for them, and maybe for those going for under 35s only, there is a workable case for that, but if you have an audience that's more towards the older end of the audience spectrum, that kind of slickness is just not that important to them. It's superficial, and therefore, less important to them, than the actual content.
and I can't see anyone enduring the first hour to hear the acts at the non-alcohol event that was being promoted. There were tracks played from artists at the event, but I wonder precisely how many people would have made it that far, seeing as it was barely trailed.
Right, you do realise that the event concerned was at the time of the show, almost 2 weeks away. You don't go heavy promotion on an event until 1 week before hand. We've been doing these events in the park since 2012, I think we have a pretty good handle now on how to promote them.
Other community radio programmes I've listened to have people speaking at a normal speaking pace, not obsessing over irrelevant details in local information, and actually engage with listeners. They don't speak in a soporific tone, mistakes are not particularly noticeable, and they create a programme you can actually listen to for a length of time.
And again, you make the classic assumption, that just because you find it difficult, that everybody else will too. Well not everybody is as superficial as you are, stop it. You do yourself and your opinions no favours by your constant projection of them as facts or as things everybody believes in.
In what way is traffic, travel, and weather not served by other radio stations in the area? It's hardly distinctive.
Fair point. It's a way of raising money for the station, it's as simple as that. And by the way, that goes for commercial radio too. They wouldn't do it if they couldn't make money from it.
cityprod wrote:
Discovering new talent in terms of music
Lovely words, but very difficult to actually do with any degree of consistency
reflecting the local music scene (especially in innovative genres) - wonderful
.
Innovative genres? Jeez, you're only asking for the moon... on a stick.
When you got a music scene that goes from Choirs and Brass Bands, through folk and jazz, acoustic pop and electronic music to hard rock and punk, it's a really difficult thing to do, and it takes many programmes covering the different aspects. Heck, I do part of it in my own show from time to time, but I can't cover all that ground every week on a 2 hour show. I do what I can, but it's part of a team ethic, a key part of our programming over the course of a week.
Again, you misinterpret. I didn't say it had to be 100% new talent/local music, or even a large amount. It's the one and only thing that was interesting in your show to any degree.
And again, you make an assumption, a thought that you projected onto me, that wasn't in my head at all. I wasn't thinking that you had said it had to be 100% new talent/local music. That was in your head, not mine. Stop projecting your thoughts onto me, that doesn't make you sound better, it makes you sound worse every time you do that.
