«--Previous Post | Blog Index | Next Post--»

World, Shut Your Mouth: The Horror of Public Radio Call-In Shows

Much of the time, public radio is a calm, thoughtful oasis in the fart-joke maelstrom of commercial FM broadcasts. But at a certain point in the daily schedule, most public radio stations suddenly turn from interesting to irritating, filling time with that most lazy and obnoxious of programs: the call-in show. It's a high-minded ideal, letting the actual public on to "our" radio stations, but unfortunately, in every case, the public that presents itself is yammering and paranoid, either astonishingly bigoted or pathetically whiny, and the shows are unlistenable embarrassments. Why do public stations waste 1/6 of their day on them?

The other day, NPR's long-running Talk of the Nation attempted to address the issue of gays in the military. One caller drawled that "those people" knew the rules when they joined, so they deserve what they get, while another sobbed through an endless, baffling story about breaking up with her girlfriend or something, and I never figured out if she was actually in the military or not. All these shows are like this: hosts seem frazzled and nervous, dreading each call, stammering interruptions when the monologues get too crazy. And why hasn't anyone figured out how to signal a caller that they're now on the air without 60 seconds of am-I-on-yes-you're-on-do-you-mean-me-yes-go-ahead back-and-forth?

Granted, I'm being a little selfish because of my, er, lifestyle. Here on the West Coast, our NPR live feeds are a little early, and my typically late-night DJ gigs means I often wake up just in time to miss All Things Considered. But why are there so many call-in shows? Local stations have their own versions of the national programs, and let me tell you, there ain't no conspiracy theorist shut-in like a Bay Area conspiracy theorist shut-in. But the phenomenon crosses all borders: if you thought only Americans could be ignorant and grammar-challenged, check out the BBC's "World Have Your Say." A recent topic, a "debate" between the concepts of justice and peace, seemed designed specifically to incite screaming tirades from all corners of the globe.

As a former radio employee, I learned the hard way that callers to the request line were generally, shall we say, a "less erudite" subset of the station's audience. If I had a nickel for every time a slurring caller requested a song that was already playing at that very moment, and when informed of this seemed unable to comprehend it, I'd have, you know, maybe 40 cents. I suppose it should be obvious: smart people don't usually want to bellow their opinions on radio call-in shows. So, what should public stations do with those long mid-day hours that they need low-budget programming for? How about they take KCRW's lead and throw on some Beck? I'd rather listen to his conspiracy theories any day.

Photo used under a Creative Commons license from Flickr user Katiebate.

Comments

Wait, let me guess, You work for Clearchannels Communication? Only a DJ with such contempt for the general public could work for that soul-less, home-town enterprise destroying monopoly.

Posted by: Franklin Grimes on 08/15/08 at 2:27 PM Respond

It might be interesting to see how many listeners the radio call-in shows get. You have to keep in mind that the world certainly isn't built around keeping smart folks entertained and in fact the call-in show might be the audio equivalent of 'Cops', disoriented guy with the mullet included.

That said, I have to admit that I list to Rush Limbaugh's show solely for the call in section. It's a fine collection of muddled bigots and closet sociopaths, and it goes pretty well with any lunch.

Posted by: Mockingbird on 08/15/08 at 2:27 PM Respond

*Former* radio employee, Mr. Grimes, of CBS/Viacom, a slightly lesser evil than Clear Channel.

I'll restrain myself from pointing this out: http://www.theonion.com/content/news/local_idiot_to_post_comment_on

@Mockingbird: Public stations generally aren't included in the publicly-viewable ratings at places like Radio & Records, but you're right, if these shows' listener figures are high, maybe stations feel obligated to continue them.

Posted by: Party Ben on 08/15/08 at 2:49 PM Respond

I know right?! It's totally like when I try to read progressive news sites, and every other story is some dj's music opinion, but they get to talk inanely about politics too. I know someone has to write for the common person, but it still frustrates me and I wish they wouldn't *hint* =P

Posted by: Justin on 08/16/08 at 5:33 AM Respond

Cheap programming, that's what drives talk radio especially on the local level. Music & the DJ would have higher costs and unlikely any better ad income or in public radio sponsorship appeal.

I'm a TV producer [commercial] with a national show, have a "cast & script show" which has much greater costs than if I were a game or reality show with contestants. Hugely different,

Posted by: Maxx on 08/16/08 at 10:36 AM Respond

i listen to talk radio all the time. and i do have to say that NPR has some good programming it has it's share of progressive biased shows and guests, and some times is less than honest about not being political. i often reffer to National Public Radio as "National Public Bunghole"!

Posted by: tommy fuller on 08/17/08 at 8:46 AM Respond

Of course it's cheap programming : the stations just let the listeners make the show for them.
But what about the ranters and the ravers? I rarely listen to these shows, but I do have to express some sympathy for them, the downtrodden masses.
Those are people who wind up in this world with even less than when they came in it.
They are usually poor and it sometimes seems the whole world is out to get them. The housing debacle is just another example of this. And what can they do about it? Vote? Come on...
Those people always are going on about "THEY". But who are "THEY"?
The businessmen, financiers and politicians who are constantly looking for new ways to exploit the poor, of course.
Social history 101.

Spitfire

Posted by: Spitfire on 08/18/08 at 2:35 PM Respond

NPR might not be perfect but it's still the best radio available in the US.

Posted by: Fair Trade on 08/18/08 at 2:43 PM Respond

I totally agree. I love NPR and even listen to KQED's stream at work (I'm local, and I am a member). Every once in a while, I have to switch streams because I just get overwhelmingly embarrassed for the people who call in thinking they have something to share. It's rare, but when it happens, it just sends chills down my spine. However, I love to hear Neal Conan nonplussed.

Posted by: Summer on 08/18/08 at 4:25 PM Respond

I think Diane Rheem (is that how she spells her name) does an excellent job of policing the occasional crazy who calls in to her show. Many of the callers actually have some expertise in the subject of the show, and the discussions are enlightening. On Fridays she does the news roundup and the panel often responds to caller questions and comments with "the caller has a good point" or "the caller is right on the mark." Although some may say she is part of the "liberal news media," she always makes a point of balancing her guests to reflect various points of view. Sometimes they get a bit rowdy, but at least you get various sides of an issue presented.

Posted by: lawyerfan on 08/18/08 at 6:40 PM Respond

I want to load my gun and pull the plug everytime I hear, "Thank you for taking my call."

Posted by: dadpasadena on 08/18/08 at 9:55 PM Respond

Talk about a whiner. And you feel that this opinion is worth sharing because -- you had a deadline and it was the first thing that came to mind, or, you're sure 60 Minutes is auditioning for the next Andy Rooney, or, just why, exactly?

Posted by: Looseleaf on 08/19/08 at 9:34 AM Respond

I would love Andy Rooney's job, actually. I'm prematurely curmudgeonly!

Posted by: Party Ben on 08/19/08 at 2:44 PM Respond

Franklin's comment sounds EXACTLY like the kind of thing the author was writing about!

Posted by: Stosh on 08/20/08 at 2:07 PM Respond