Showing posts with label radio. Show all posts
Showing posts with label radio. Show all posts

Saturday, July 23, 2016

about the illusion of conversation


Pundits often refer to a national conversation. However, the dominant voices in that conversation still come out of the mouths of elites who codify the perspectives that ultimately form the conventions of American thought. For the most part, the public is only listening in on conversations recorded and aired during news radio and television shows and podcasts. Aren't you sick of hearing yourself talk?

Note:
This may be a tiny note that is part of a larger story, which is still under investigation.


Friday, July 18, 2014

about Artie Lange's "Crash and Burn"


He established himself on the standup circuit, was an original cast member on MADtv, co-starred with Norm MacDonald in the movie "Dirty Work," and sometimes is a guest on late-night talk shows, but most people know Artie Lange from his eight years on Howard Stern's radio show. Too Fat to Fish, Lange's first autobiographical book detailing his (sur)real-life adventures, camped out defiantly on best-seller lists. In Crash and Burn, his latest book, he relives the decent into the drug and alcohol addiction that nearly ruined his career and led him to attempt a violent suicide.

Crash and Burn narrates Artie's debauchery and excess. While this sounds juicy, the repeated confessions of abuse, blackouts, hiding and lying to family and friends makes for a tale that is far more sad than sidesplitting. Though I'm not a Stern/Artie devotee, I'm familiar with some of the characters in the Stern show world, and easily enjoyed this fast read. When the book ends, Artie is sober, engaged, and hosting a sports and entertainment radio show called "The Artie Lange Show" (originally "The Nick & Artie Show" co-hosted by comedian Nick DiPaolo).



Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Radiolab doesn't prepare to conduct an interview


Recently, the annoying folks at Radiolab intended to investigate a phenomenon called "Yellow Rain", an apparently dangerous, mysterious precipitation observed in Vietnam and Laos circa 1981. At the time, the deadly rain attracted some media coverage while cold war tensions escalated between Russia and the US.

The producers and hosts apparently intended to limit the scope of the episode to the question, What was yellow rain? But during the show, the interview between a yellow rain witness, his translator/niece, and the Radiolab host and producer falls apart when the host pursues the witness about ambiguity in the testimony. After being pressed, the witness losses heart and, aided by his niece, implores the interviewers to focus on the death of their people in the proxy wars, and not the yellow rain.

From the get go, Radiolab was oblivious to fact that the story they were investigating was situated in an ongoing struggle with deep political implications. It was only when the witnesses were crying and pleading for recognition of the tragedy within the story that the "story changed" for Radiolab. Host Jad Abumrad explains:
We were all really troubled by that interview. We talked about it for weeks, and we had arguments about it for weeks. What does it mean for the story? What does it mean for us personally?
For the story, and for Radiolab: this is what concerns them. The vision of the show's hosts and producer got even more myopic in the end, somehow. Then the "conversation" ends with Radiolab essentially throwing up its hands at the controversy.



Thursday, March 22, 2012

A manner of speaking (at NPR)


A lot of the hosts and contributors on NPR have acquired that speaking quirk of frequently beginning sentences with the word so. So is now a discourse marker or discourse particle.

Monday, May 30, 2011

Style Guides

I notice a lot of similarity in the style and delivery of the various pieces on NPR, especially among the more entertainment-oriented articles. This phenomenon--which is no doubt also true of content on PRI and other public broadcasting partners--is likely by design, intended to ensure quality and consistency of their standards.

For example, I often hear use of a trope in which a pair of words are stated and then restated in reverse. Thursday I heard the following during a piece on the Dallas Maverick's Western Conference NBA Finals victory over the Oklahoma Thunder:
In the just concluded Western Conference Finals, the oldest team in the NBA played the youngest - once you adjust for minutes played. Exciting basketball for sure, but also an interesting referendum on the age-old old age issue.
Friday I heard this in a review of Terrence Malick's film The Tree of Life:
The Tree of Life doesn't jell, but I recommend the experience unreservedly. You might find it ridiculously sublime or sublimely ridiculous — or, like me, both. But it's a hell of a trip.
Not sure, but this may be called epanados. I wonder how much of this standard-following is enforced from above, how much of it is self-regulating among peers, and how much of it comes from mechanisms of education.