As we've noted earlier, there's a big shake-up in the local talk radio market. From the top:
Local politicos Brian Lambert and Sarah Janecek are the latest additions to the programming lineup for Clear Channel Radio's new FM talk station, KTLK-FM (100.3). The pair will host a weekday show when the station launches next month.Let me be the first to say it: the show will go out of the gate with three strikes against it.
Strike One: Talent.
Sarah Janecek is a friend of mine. She also has some radio experience; frankly, I think a Sarah Janecek Show would be a good bet in its own right. If I had a radio station, I'd air her.
However, Janecek will have a handicap right out of the gate; her co-host. I know Brian Lambert, of course; long before he brought comical new meaning to the term "liberal bias" during his hitch as broadcast critic at the Pioneer Press, he worked for the late Twin Cities Reader as a media crit. Several times, in that capacity, one program director or another tried him out on the air; one of my first days at KSTP-AM saw Lambert trying to fill in for Don Vogel; the results were excruciating. OK, it was 20 years ago - but none of his broacast efforts since then have been a whole lot better; his brief stint as TV critic on Channel Five reminded me of Sam Malone trying to be a sportscaster; his time as a weekly sidekick on the late, unlamented Nick Coleman show (anyone remember that?) on the local Air America affiliate (or that?) showed that he's developed into someone who can snark along to someone else's lead; he's a capable heckler, which is damning with faint praise.
So let's just say that Lambert's a "developing" radio talent.
Strike Two: The Concept.
Janecek:
"For a long time I've thought that a person who is right of center, moi, and a person who is left of center, Brian, would make a good talk radio team," says Janecek, co-publisher of the Politics in Minnesota news service.First things first; anything is possible. Twenty years ago, almost anyone would have poo-poohed the notion that talk radio would be a conservative medium. Anything can happen.
Problem is, the "Odd Couple" format has been tried. CNN's "Crossfire" was a groundbreaking experiment when it aired twenty years ago. Back when it starred a couple of genuinely intelligent people who actually had something to say, and could surprise the audience once in a while (like the original cast, Pat Buchanan and Tom Braden), it could be interesting. So it could work, under the right circumstances.
And you don't want to say "nobody else is doing it", because twenty years ago, hardly anyone was doing puerile shock-radio above the local level; today, Howard Stern is just the foremost practitioner of a multi-billion dollar genre.
But look around the country; name a political "Odd Couple" that's remotely successful. Can you?
No. And the limitations of radio militate against such shows. Radio has limited bandwidth, when it comes to perception and cognition; a voice on a tinny speaker is pretty much all you have to go by. What prompts you to listen to that tinny voice?
It takes something you can sink your teeth into; something that provokes a visceral, emotional reaction. The most successful talk hosts pre-Limbaugh (Morton Downey Jr., Joe Pyne, Tom Leykis, Bob Grant) usually pushed the anger button, back in the days when the "Fairness Doctrine" meant politics had to be approached obliquely. The most successful hosts since then - Limbaugh, Hannity, Medved, Bennett, Ingraham - have had their own coherent messages (need I explain?) that the audience could sink their teeth into, pro or con.
On "Odd Couple" shows, the message skitters back and forth, depending on the whims and debating skills of the hosts (Hannity and Colmes, I think, only succeeds because Sean Hannity so completely dominates Colmes; it could as easily be called Sean Hannity and a Hockey Puck); there is no coherent message; it's just a couple of people arguing. And most of the audience is perfectly capable of doing that themselves.
Strike Three: The Mix
Leave aside the individuals involved, or the concept they're working with, for just a moment. Sarah Janecek is female; Lambert is a guy.
Strike three.
In this englightened, PC age, it's considered nekulturny to say so - but on the radio, men and women just don't mix.
Yes, men and women can interview each other - the host-guest relationship is different than host-host. And yes, some of the most successful teams in radio are mixed-gender; Howard Stern/Robin Quivers, Tom Barnard/Teri Traen, Janeane Garofalo/Sam Seder, and others. What do they have in common? The odd-gender-out character goes along with the dominant character in the show; Teri Traen is female, but has developed the ability to work in a locker room totally aimed at 25-50-year-old guys. Ditto Robin Quivers.
But men and women acting as equals in a head-to-head argument-based format never works. Part of it is the "unified message" issue that brought us "Strike Two". Part of it is invisible to the audience; men and women's styles of argument and means of dealing with each others' styles almost always cause problems behind the scenes. It's not inevitable, but it's prevalent.
Not that I don't wish Sarah Janecek the best of luck; I just think the concept is fundamentally flawed.
Which is a great opportunity for the Patriot and Hugh Hewitt, if they play the card right.
More on that later.
Posted by Mitch at December 20, 2005 05:52 AM | TrackBack
I just hope Lambert doesn't get a grooiin injury, a grooiin injury...
Posted by: pATRICK at December 20, 2005 10:53 AMWhat a completely stupid move for the new talk station.
First, Janecek is nothing short of a RINO. When the chips-are-down and you need a conservative voice...she runs for the tall grass.
Next, would it not make SENSE to try and RETAIN the conservative listeners who are going to be listening at 2pm, as Rush finishes? This show is nothing short of two liberals out to attack anything conservative they see. Great idea! Sounds like something that will hold all those listeners!
I'm not saying you need Jason Lewis or anything (...well...maybe I AM!)....
Posted by: Dave at December 20, 2005 12:25 PMNext, would it not make SENSE to try and RETAIN the conservative listeners who are going to be listening at 2pm, as Rush finishes?
Posted by Dave at December 20, 2005 12:25 PM
Up against Medved on 1280 in the 2 to 5 spot? Good luck. Might as well revert to the jazz format for three hours.
Posted by: Kermit at December 20, 2005 01:01 PMKermit:
I'll give you that one. Medved really does lay waste to the competition....including Soucheray, who's schtick has worn thin.
Posted by: Dave at December 20, 2005 01:11 PMOne of the statements made by someone at the soon-to-be KTLK was that they wanted to just get the best hosts they could... and not necessarily stick with one side of the political fence.
I would expect KTLK to want a more liberal-minded show competing against the Souch and Medved.
Posted by: badda-blogger at December 20, 2005 01:24 PMI'm still hopeful that the Jason Lewis rumors are true.
Wasn't Janecek the one who lied or was grossly mistaken about the Wellstone Funeral?
Posted by: Bill Haverberg at December 20, 2005 01:28 PMWasn't Janecek the one who lied or was grossly mistaken about the Wellstone Funeral?
Posted by Bill Haverberg at December 20, 2005 01:28 PM
What? That it WASN'T a Democrat campaign rally?
Posted by: Kermit at December 20, 2005 01:44 PMI can't believe they past up the chance for the Mitch Berg Show. Seriously......
Posted by: rick at December 20, 2005 01:54 PM> But look around the country; name a
> political "Odd Couple" that's remotely
> successful. Can you?
Does the couple James Carville and Mary Matalin count?
Posted by: Matt Abe at December 20, 2005 01:54 PM"Odd Couple" not in the personal sense, but in the context of a program.
Matalin and Carville don't do a show, do they? (I don't watch much...)
Posted by: mitdh at December 20, 2005 02:00 PMAgreed that the concept is a setup for disaster.
I've always thought a good concept would be to take 5-6 bloggers with no radio experience and give them a radio show.
Might be an interesting experiment to try some day.
Posted by: JB Doubtless at December 20, 2005 02:09 PMI've always thought a good concept would be to take 5-6 bloggers with no radio experience and give them a radio show.
But put them at a very obscure time and try not to promote the show. And give them a name that makes them sound like some kind of evangelical tent revival.
Posted by: Kermit at December 20, 2005 02:15 PMMatalin and Carville starred in "K Street", a 10-part HBO miniseries where they played a couple of DC lobbyists. It was created by George Clooney and Steven Soderbergh and the gimmick was that actual DC politicos appeared on the fictional show as themselves, including Sens. Santorum, Schumer, Boxer, etc. Kind of a political "Larry Sanders." Only ran one season.
Posted by: Tim at December 20, 2005 02:23 PMShe looks like a rhino, too. Face made for radio.
Posted by: Kevin from Minneapolis at December 20, 2005 04:36 PMDid you get hit in the mouth with a hockey puck Mitch? It's a little early in the evening to be slurring your name, isn't it? A couple of JB's holiday bracers under the belt already perhaps?
That blogger radio show experiment idea is pure madness JB. It'll never happen.
Posted by: the elder at December 20, 2005 05:05 PMThat blogger radio show experiment idea is pure madness JB. It'll never happen.
Posted by the elder at December 20, 2005 05:05 PM
Lileks tried it. Nick Coleman tried it. Hell, even NORM Coleman tried it. Hell, look what happened to Kathrryn Lampher. The Horrors!!! You just have to leave it to the professionals.
Posted by: Kermit at December 20, 2005 06:57 PMThose of us in the radio consuming population are not interested in anything that takes more than five minutes to present.
That I think Sarah Janecek is a shill liar and you all think she's a RINO suggests one of two or three things...
1. I'm so far out on the left end, I confuse the middle for the right, but as I don't really support any major Democratic politicians, and refute much of their platform because it's mostly an apologist excuse for non-policy, that seems kinda unlikely.
2. She's actually in the middle, but given her unflinching spin of any problem into support for Bushie, that als seems unlikely.
3. She's actually pretty conservative, but you all are a bunch of whack jobs... so she seems liberal when on the scale of 0-100 you all rank about a -473.
I'm voting for 3... I think most rational folks would tooo... Janecek a RINO, yeah, and Kerry was really Dick Nixon.
Seriously, it's a shame that Clear Channel feels it will make money with Limbaugh on FM, it probably will, given he can then be heard indoors, and I have no doubt it is ratings which drives this, but the AM dial is already SOO polluted with this vitriolic crap, it's nice to not run into it on the FM side. Such is the way of the horse and buggy, it must give way to progress in the name of unending propoganda.
Bleh.
PB
Posted by: pb at December 20, 2005 08:03 PMThe fact that so many commenters here tag Janacek as a RINO tells me that she's probably a fairly reasonable person.
Posted by: Tim at December 20, 2005 08:37 PMSarah Janecek is to Republicans what Zell Miller is to Democrats.
Does that help you radical lefties understand? I tell you what....we'll trade you Sarah....straight up for Zell.
Posted by: Dave at December 21, 2005 08:16 AMPB,
I think 1 is your rating.
Posted by: anon at December 21, 2005 08:35 AMSarah Janecek is certainly to my "left"; I think it's fair to say she's much closer to a Carlson Republican than I. Don't know that I'd call her "RINO", since the MNGOP DOES have a long tradition of "moderation". Put another way, she's a Republican, especially in terms of the MNGOP establishment over the past 30 years, but not so much a conservative as some of us.
PB:
"That I think Sarah Janecek is a shill liar and you all think she's a RINO suggests one of two or three things..."
Actually, more than that. To wit:
"1. I'm so far out on the left end, I confuse the middle for the right,"
I don't know that you actually recognize a middle.
" but as I don't really support any major Democratic politicians, and refute much of their platform because it's mostly an apologist excuse for non-policy, that seems kinda unlikely."
Apples and oranges. Knee-jerk reactions about people who differ from you are only tangentially related to your personal beliefs.
"2. She's actually in the middle, but given her unflinching spin of any problem into support for Bushie, that als seems unlikely."
No. Bush is actually a lot closer to the center than I or, especially, you, Peeb. He spends like a liberal.
"3. She's actually pretty conservative, but you all are a bunch of whack jobs... so she seems liberal when on the scale of 0-100 you all rank about a -473."
Great debate tactic; "You're all wackjobs!" Cicero weeps.
Let's add a couple of options:
4. You've become addicted to pushing buttons and getting a rise out of people in my comment section, and you'll say whatever it takes to get it. You have, in fact, become what detractors of talk radio poo-pooh the most.
5. You just don't like it when people are different than you.
"I'm voting for 3... I think most rational folks would tooo..."
Peeb, I can see you as a spokesperson on behalf of lots of groups; "most rational people" wouldn't be one of them. At the least, I'd like to see your proof of employment.
" Seriously, it's a shame that Clear Channel feels it will make money with Limbaugh on FM,"
Why?
" it probably will, given he can then be heard indoors, and I have no doubt it is ratings which drives this,"
What? RATINGS drive radio?
The hell you say!
" but the AM dial is already SOO polluted with this vitriolic crap, it's nice to not run into it on the FM side."
Riiiight. Because FM is such a bastion of reserved sanity and political non-partisanship.
"Such is the way of the horse and buggy, it must give way to progress in the name of unending propoganda."
(see also: Mary Mapes, Dan Rather)
Posted by: mitch at December 21, 2005 11:14 AM100.3 is all over the place ... which is where I will be, all over the dial looking for anything.
Here are more shows coming to 100.3
http://www.thestreet.com/m/radio/stationfinder.html
Posted by: Jim B at December 28, 2005 08:42 PMhttp://www.taxpayersleague.org/issues/pr_display.php?rid=343
http://www.lionelonline.com/
YATES IS BACK
On AM 950 ... he's making it sound like he's a better fit there than when he used to be on 1220 with O'Riley, Snow, Boortz. (But it could be because he's unemployed)
Filling in for Wendy Wild Thurs and Fri.
Posted by: Jim B at December 29, 2005 08:34 AMThanks!!! furniture Very nice site.I enjoy being here.
Posted by: furniture at July 7, 2006 09:33 AM