Posts filed under 'TV/Radio/Media'
The first one I can understand, and that is that they only report on details of a small minority of things which the police deal with each day. They probably have some very good reasons for not reporting on a lot of their activities, and I fully accept that, none-the-less, it still annoys me that a lot of newsworthy stories never see the light of day as a result.
The second one I really can’t get my head around, and that is the general ignoring of regional areas. With occasional exceptions, New South Wales police media in particular, tend to ignore stories outside of metropolitan and coastal areas, and the few areas in between such as the highways. There’s a great example this week.
Here in Deniliquin there was a home invasion on Monday. The local police media rep has obviously talked to the local media about it as the local radio news had the details this morning, so I’d expect the next edition of the local paper on Friday to also have the details, however the main New South Wales Police Media office in Sydney has not said a word about it. It’s funny in a way that if there was a home invasion in Sydney, it would be front page news and be leading TV and radio news bulletins all day, but a home invasion out here in Deniliquin, whilst it should receive some coverage in national news bulletins, has received no coverage outside of the local area due to the fact that the Police Media unit in Sydney couldn’t be bothered to report the story.
It’s not the first time, and it won’t be the last, but it bothers me that the police media unit shows such little regard for the regional areas. I don’t understand why they don’t seem to care about areas outside the urban fringe, and I can’t wrap my head around it no matter what angle I attack it from. Perhaps they suffer from the same problem which many regional people see in the New South Wales government, that in many cases, the government treats areas outside Sydney as being second-class citizens.
Samuel
March 9th, 2011 at 11:00pm
This is quite peculiar. Nine Melbourne have been found to have breached the electoral advertising blackout in the leadup to last year’s Victorian state election, however the Australian Communications and Media Authority has not mentioned anywhere in its findings which ad it was or which party or candidate’s ad it was which aired.
The story, according to ACMA’s press release, is that during Getaway on the Thursday before the election, an electoral advertisement aired due to an error in Nine’s traffic scheduling which was in the process of being moved to Sydney at the time. ACMA (as seems to be their usual action) have not done anything about except acknowledge that it happened as, according to them, “there are no previously recorded breaches of this licence condition by a Nine Network licensee” and ACMA will simply just monitor them for future breaches.
The identity of the person or group who made the complain to ACMA is unknown as ACMA have not published this detail, however the complainant does make a good point, which is published in ACMA’s investigation report:
The airing of the advertisement gives […] a clear advantage over all other parties into a prime time viewing audience across the whole of Victoria.
With such a close election result 45 seats to 43 and with many thousands of voters making up their mind during the blackout period, airing such advertisement may have influenced the result in one or more seats and potentially impact on whom was ultimately elected to govern Victoria for the next four year[s].
This is an advantage that cannot be undone or matched.
(edits to this quote were made by ACMA in their published report)
With the exception of the claim that the ad aired all over Victoria (no such claim has been made against Nine’s regional affiliate WIN and it is therefore safe to assume that the ad only aired in Melbourne), the point is correct, the airing of this ad may have influenced votes in key seats. The question is though, for whom was the ad spruiking?
While the advantage gained via the airing of the ad should be irrelevant to the investigation of whether the ad aired, the information about whose ad it was, is information which should be made publicly available so that we, the people, can know what the likelihood is that the result of the election may have been different had the ad not aired, and the information may also be useful if such an infringement of the rules occurs again in the future, especially if the same person, party or group is advantaged in the future.
Personally I don’t care for the advertising blackout period, especially seeing as it only applies to broadcast media and not newspapers or the internet, but as long as the rules stands and it was broken, we should be told who was advantaged by the breaking of this rule. At the moment, it’s like having a person convicted of murdering someone after being hired by someone else to do it, without the name of the hirer being released.
I’ll be contacting ACMA about this matter.
Update 8:11am: ACMA have replied to say that they will have answers to my questions shortly. I’ll keep you posted. End Update
Update 1:30am Saturday: ACMA got back to me yesterday afternoon to confirm that the ad in question was for the Labor party, so on the bright side the ad wouldn’t have caused a different party to be in power, but it may have affected the outcome of a seat or two.
ACMA also confirmed that the complaint was about the ad airing in Melbourne, and not all of Victoria as stated by the unnamed complainant. They have not received any complaints about the ad airing outside of Melbourne, but also can not definitely state that it did not air…this is perfectly normal as ACMA can only act on complaints, however given that there has not been a complaint, it’s probably safe to assume that WIN did not air this ad.
ACMA dodged my question about whether, hypothetically speaking, a future similar breach in favour of the same party (bearing in mind that I did not know which party the ad was for when I asked the question) could provide grounds for investigating a potential intentional bias, but I can’t say that I blame them…a direct answer there could have very easily been taken out of context, and the answer to one of the other questions stated that the airing of this ad was a genuine mistake.
The full text of the questions and answers is below, and I thank ACMA for their prompt responses to my questions:
Q: Firstly, I can not find any reference in the press release or the published report as to whose political ad it was. This information seems to be relevant given the complainant’s statement that “airing such advertisement may have influenced the result in one or more seats and potentially impact on whom was ultimately elected to govern Victoria for the next four year[s]”. Does the ACMA know whose political ad it was which aired and, if so, is the ACMA able to release this information?
A: the relevant election advertisement was an ALP advertisement which was not broadcast through any action or fault of the ALP but through an error in GTV 9’s traffic system as stated on page 4 of Investigation Report Number 2526
Q: If not, why not?
A: (not provided, as irrelevant based on previous answer)
Q: If a complaint is made against GTV9 in the future about electoral advertising airing during a blackout period, and if the ad which airs is for the same party, group or candidate, will the ACMA potentially have grounds to investigate whether the airing of the ads shows an intentional bias?
A: as stated in the Media Release, the ACMA will monitor any future complaints to ensure compliance with the rules
Q: If so, and assuming that the name of the group/party/candidate responsible for the ad has not already been released by the ACMA by this time, will the ACMA then release this information?
A: (again, not provided, as the question is irrelevant after the last answer)
Q: The complainant’s statement in the investigation report mentions that the ad aired across all of Victoria, however only GTV9 is mentioned in the report, not their regional affiliate WIN Television. Is the ACMA in a position to confirm whether or not any complaints of a similar nature have been made against WIN Television and, if not, whether the ACMA can clarify that the offending advertisement only aired within the Melbourne broadcast area?
A: the ACMA did not receive any complaints about the broadcasting of this advertisement on Win Television Vic Pty Ltd (VTV)
the ACMA is not in a position to confirm whether this advertisement only aired within the Melbourne broadcast area – this is a matter you may wish to pursue with the broadcaster
End Update
Samuel
March 9th, 2011 at 10:11pm
7Two’s Saturday night screenings of the Inspector Morse series are rating very well, a good sign for the longevity of a series.
Last night Inspector Morse helped Seven to win the night for both secondary channels and the network overall. The Seven Network of stations won the night with 31.5% of the audience, well ahead of nearest rival Nine on 21.7% overall. In the secondary channels, 7Two won the night with 6.3% of the audience, followed by 7Mate on 3.5%, with the nearest rivals being Nine’s Go! (3.2%) and Ten’s Eleven (3.1%).
7Two had the top two shows of the secondary channels in Heartbeat (280,000 viewers nationally, 22nd in overall ratings) and Inspector Morse (246,000 viewers nationally, 28th in overall ratings) ahead of nearest secondary channel shows Peppa Pig (whatever that may be, 210,000 viewers nationally, 32nd in overall ratings) and Air Crash Investigations (which was a great episode last night, 174,000 viewers nationally) 37th in overall ratings.
Ratings, as far as I can tell, are for the capital city markets and don’t include those of us in the “regional” areas like Canberra, but then again regional areas don’t tend to have control over programming.
Source: TV Tonight
So with any luck and a bit of consistent viewing from the devoted fans, we might just get to see the entire series from beginning to end, which would be wonderful.
Samuel
February 6th, 2011 at 01:40pm
Apart from the thousands of people who were listening to Lawsie over the airwaves across the country this morning, his online audience exceeded expectations quite significantly. The 2SM webstream peaked at 523 listeners (well in excess of the original limit of 300) and stayed around that number for most of the final hour of the show.
Lawsie also rattled off a list of countries which had open connections to the webstream. I didn’t jot them down but I did count at least eight.
Lawsie’s signature theme music also accompanied him. Both El Presidente at the top of the show and Roger Miller’s Less Of Me at the end.
I honestly can’t tell you how great it is to have Lawsie back on the air. Since his departure at the end of 2007, the radio landscape has (with no disrespect to anyone else in the industry, because nobody can be expected to replace Lawsie…everyone who has tried has done their own show, but Lawsie is irreplaceable as he is a legend in his own right) had a gaping hole in it. Something just feels right about the world now that John is back.
I know that a lot of my readership is in the US (and I know that some people in the US were listening to John this morning), so to draw a comparison for you, John Laws leaving radio would be like Rush Limbaugh leaving radio. It just isn’t the same without them.
Also a big hello to Frankster who offered to help me out when I wasn’t one of the lucky 300 people on the original 2SM webstream.
Anyhoo, I must toddle off. Much like the day on which Lawsie left 2UE all those years ago, I have to go to work at a different time of the day to when Lawsie’s show is on…and time, right now, is of the essence for me. I have a backlog of other stuff to write about which I’ll try to get to tonight. No promises, except a promise that I’ll try.
Samuel
January 31st, 2011 at 12:26pm
The king of Australian radio, John Laws, is back on the air today, with his new home being 2SM in Sydney. John is being heard on Bill Caralis’ Super Radio Network and a few other stations.
Unfortunately I missed the start of the show as 2SM’s webstream was at capacity for quite some time and I wasn’t one of the fortunate 300 people who had tuned in to their stream at that time. 2SM have since increased the capacity of the stream to 1000 listeners so I am now enjoying Lawsie’s dulcet tones.
It’s a great day in Australian radio. Having Lawsie back on the air proves that sometimes when you lose things which you treasure, you’ve really only misplaced them, and they’ll be just as great when you find them again.
Samuel
January 31st, 2011 at 10:47am
Jim Ball quit 2GB yesterday afternoon. Warren Moore, who is unexpectedly sitting it for Jim right now, delivered the news as an off the cuff “Jim’s decided not to be a part of the program this year” as he threw to an ad break…which is a bit less than Jim deserves. Ben Fordham heaped praise on his predecessor Jason Morrison when he took over the Drive show last week, but Jim only gets a few seconds of “he ain’t here no more”…doesn’t seem fair really.
Jim has put an announcement up on his website, sighting both the overnight hours and the fact that Ben Fordham got the Drive Show gig over him as reasons.
2GB’s popular overnight host Jim Ball, due back on air Monday morning, has resigned from the station, effective immediately.
Ball who has been off on holiday after filling in for Ray Hadley over the summer break was due back on air at midnight. He says he was trying to catch a few hours sleep on Sunday afternoon after prepping his program for Monday and just couldn’t nod off.
It was then, at that moment, after 11 years on overnight radio including 2 years at 2UE, he just decided that he didn’t have another overnight program left in him, rang the program director, Ian Holland and delivered the bad news.
“..The hours are the toughest on the station apart from breakfast. I suppose working Ray’s shift over summer spoilt me a bit. Not only were the hours civilised but also I had a great team of people helping put the program together. On overnights, I do all my own research, writing and prep, panel and presentation and eventually after 11 years you just hit the wall, and think what the hell am I doing this for?”
Ball has constantly produced high ratings for the station in the mid to high twenties and low thirties.
Another factor that pushed him to make the decision was the appointment of Ben Fordham to the Drive program several weeks ago. “..Appointing someone to a prime shift with little or next to no experience in talk radio, except on a fill in basis, or someone without any demonstrated or proven ability, or ratings success in talk radio does seem rather odd to say the least..”
It seems that years of delivering results counts for nothing, and the Fordham decision crystallised Ball’s thinking that he’s wasting his time. The hours, the slog and the sacrifice seemed to have been for nothing.
I hope that this is only a temporary vacation from radio and that Jim pops up on the dial again in the near future (perhaps in a nicer timeslot, eh Jim?). Jim is too good a talent and too clear a thinker for him to not be on the air.
This certainly leaves a gaping hole in my radio listening with both Jim Ball and Mike Jeffreys absent from the overnight shift this week. Jeffreys is on the 8pm to midnight shift on 2UE at the moment and is due back on overnights next week, but that doesn’t really help me this week.
Good luck Jim. I hope to hear you on the air again soon.
Samuel
January 31st, 2011 at 12:34am
Mainly for the benefit of people overseas, here’s some information about live online coverage of the devastating floods.
The Seven Network’s coverage, having finished for the night at midnight Eastern Daylight Time, resumes at 5am Eastern (4am Brisbane/6PM UTC/1pm US Eastern/10am US Western) in time for the expected peak of the flood in Brisbane. I’m of the view that Seven’s coverage has been the best of the bunch, and they’ve been streaming from their website http://yahoo7.com.au/news.
ABC News 24 are also streaming and have apparently unlocked their stream for international viewers. http://www.abc.net.au/news/abcnews24/. Their content has been good, but as I noted yesterday, I find the graphics package quite distracting and hard on the eyes, and fairly difficult to watch for any length of time.
Others may be streaming, these are just the ones I’ve noticed. Hopefully this is of some help to people.
Samuel
January 13th, 2011 at 03:21am
This certainly is a country of extremes. Floods in parts, fires in others. It’s the country we love and the country we have come to expect, and yet somehow when dreadful natural disasters like these strike, we all not only feel the pain and the shock, but seem to band together for the greater good.
My role on this blog is not to keep you updated on the flood crisis, or the bushfires near Perth. There are many news agencies working around the clock to do that. If you are coming here for updates on the crisis, then I strongly urge you to instead turn to your local TV and radio services. If you are in an affected area, you have my thoughts and prayers.
My role outside this blog is with a commercial television network, working behind the scenes to keep the network going. I hope that this helps people who not only want, but need information about the unfolding crisis. There are hundreds, maybe thousands of other people who are also working in various parts of the media to ensure that information gets to the people who need it. To those people, I salute you.
And to the people who bravely work through the crisis in our emergency services, government agencies, volunteer organisations, and other groups too numerous to name, we all thank you from the bottom of our hearts for your service.
So, my role on this blog in this crisis. I feel compelled to offer some analysis of the coverage of, and reaction to, the floods by both the media, and the elected officials who are in charge of responding to this crisis.
Radio, across the board, as I understand it, has done what radio does best…provide immediate local information to their broadcast area.
Television has been a bit of a mixed bag. I thought Seven did a great job yesterday, especially with bumping the Tennis over to 7TWO so that they could continue with news on the main channel and on their only analogue channel. Larry Emdur once again proved that he is perfectly capable of anchoring coverage of a crisis and did an outstanding job on Sunrise. The rest of the team also did an outstanding job from what I saw.
Nine did a pretty good job too from what I saw. Apparently they were putting giant “first on nine” watermarks on footage (I didn’t see this, but have been reliably informed that this is what happened) which is a very low act during a crisis, but other than that I was impressed with their coverage. They seemed to have a higher number of phone crosses than Seven which probably allowed them to be a tad more immediate with news, at the expense of the pictures which really rammed home to those of us outside the flood zone just how bad it really is up there.
I’m told that WIN did a special bulletin of their own which is commendable…but I would kindly ask WIN to do something about the offputting “WIN News” square which just feels intrusive and wrong over the top of the current Nine graphics.
ABC TV was an interesting one. In terms of content, they did a stellar job. I need not say more about that as they did a great job. The trouble I had was with the graphics on ABC News 24 which just hurt my eyes to the point that I found it unwatchable…I’m not a fan of the look of that station to begin with as I think the whole design is downright ugly, but when the yellow “live” block is up as well, it’s nauseating. The ticker is the only thing I like about the design of that station…if they bring back the old look or rebuild based on the ticker and less oddly shaped supers, then I’ll be able to deal with it.
Outside of the distracting look of ABC News 24, I must commend them for staying on overnight (even if it’s a looped set of stories), and for dropping regular programming on ABC1 in Queensland for the ongoing news. I do wonder if, at least until analogue television is phased out completely, the main ABC channel should have taken the rolling coverage nationally…but seeing as the other networks were catering for the analogue audience, I’ll let it slide.
Ten however get a smack to the head. For a network which is trying to position itself as a powerhouse of news, yesterday’s lack of effort was embarrassing. I know they were busy with the launch of Eleven, but failing to enter rolling coverage until 5pm is simply unacceptable from any network which wants to be taken seriously when it comes to news.
On to our elected political leaders. The aim here is not to politicise the floods, but to check on the performance of the people in whom we have invested out trust.
I’m normally not a fan of Queensland Premier Anna Bligh, but she gets a very large tick in my books today. She has shown her genuine concern and empathy, while remaining somehow composed and in control, and remaining as a strong and calm voice for her people. She is doing very well.
The various Mayors of flood-affected areas are clearly distraught and doing whatever they can to help co-ordinate a response. Many of these people appear to me to be understandable overwhelmed, and I hope that they are receiving all the support they need from larger bodies such as the Queensland government.
Julia Gillard however, has disappointed me. This is the type of event in which I thought her usual calculating approach would serve her and us very well. Alas it hasn’t…at least not in public. I was shocked when I saw her interview on ABC TV last night in which she looked and sounded happy about the floods…she was trying to hold back her smile and came across as if she really did not care. It was embarrassing quite frankly, and I hope that the interview is not seen overseas as it will only serve to make other countries think that we’re a cold and uncompassionate bunch who don’t deserve their support.
Maybe she is doing some good behind the scenes…I truly hope that she is…but if she can’t show even a shred of empathy in public, then she should be sending a minister out to represent the federal government. It’s not whether she cares or not that I care about right now, it’s the message that her body language sent to the people of Queensland last night…if I was in a flood zone right now, I would feel like the federal government did not have my back and that I was reliant on the limited resources of the state government. The federal government needs to instil confidence in Queenslanders, and if Julia can’t do that, then a minister should be doing it instead.
Anyway, I must go and get ready for work. Once again my thoughts and prayers are with those who are ravaged by floods and fires at this time. May you all get through this safely.
Samuel
January 12th, 2011 at 03:39am
From Britain, via the printing presses of The Australian, comes the news that the British authorities taking bloggers, tweeters, and presumably perpetrators of other online activities to court if they make a sponsored comment without noting the fact that it was paid for. The penalty, interestingly, is an “unlimited fine”.
CELEBRITIES who endorse products on Twitter without declaring that they are paid to do so may face court action, the Government’s consumer watchdog said yesterday.
Britain’s Office of Fair Trading (OFT) has already clamped down on one PR firm which was secretly paying bloggers to talk about products. Now actors, pop stars and TV presenters who “plug” luxury goods to thousands of fans could face similar action under consumer protection laws.
[..]
Although the OFT refuses to discuss specific cases, an official said research showed that people were “very concerned” about the “rules on blogging”, including paid-for adverts masquerading as personal recommendations.
“People shouldn’t be misled,” the official added. “If someone has been paid to advertise a product they should declare it. It’s not specific to celebrities.” If warnings are ignored, the OFT can seek an order that could lead to a criminal prosecution and an unlimited fine.
I’m not convinced that this should be a criminal act. I really think that this is a matter of personal ethics. If I was paid to promote a product, I would want to disclose that the promotion is an advertisement, either through a disclosure or through the nature of the promotion making it blatantly obvious that it’s an advertisement. To the same extent, a paid endorsement is something that I would only be willing to do if I actually liked the product enough to endorse it. As it happens, there are a number of things that I’m happy to endorse without payment…now if the people who are in charge of those things were willing to pay me, that’d be great, but I’d be endorsing their product mainly due to the fact that I like the product, and the payment’s only purpose would be to make the endorsement more regular.
That’s the way I look at it…but I don’t expect anyone else to agree with me or follow those standards. I’m also not sure where you draw the line on this if you do go down the route of regulation. For example, from the article:
Peter Andre, the singer with 669,000 followers, was paid by Costa Coffee to launch their Flat White coffee last year. “At BBC Studio,” Andre wrote in October. “Yeay [sic] they have a Costa Coffee here. Need an espresso.” A spokeswoman for Costa Coffee denied that the company had asked him to tweet.
In this case, the fact that he was paid by Costa Coffee is public knowledge, but tweeting was not part of the contract. That said, he was under contract at the time, so does the tweet count as an advertisement? And if so, how do you fit a disclosure in to a character-limited tweet?
What if Woolworths were to pay a group of shoppers to write on Facebook about the specials in the local store. Sure you’d expect a disclosure from them under these rules, but what if one of their friends notices that apple juice is being given away for one hour only at the local store and notes it on her Facebook page moments before the paid-for Facebookers note it? The unpaid one doesn’t have a disclosure on her page, but has written something which looks identical to the ad written by the paid-for people, so a nasty person goes and dobs her in to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) and she, although completely innocent, gets hounded by OFT for days, maybe weeks, due to a coincidence.
And then if this is successful in the online world (note: OFT’s idea of “successful” may differ from mine), why stop there? Why not take the next logical step and apply it to the real world? It’s simple really…the people who absolutely fascinate Today Tonight, the walking-talking advertisement in the shops who recommends products to you as if he or she was a real customer…make them wear tags with fine print on them saying “I am being paid to talk to you about these products”. Defeats the purpose of hiring the person…in fact, it just killed a job.
And in the broadcast world, I’m reminded of the week that I filled in on the breakfast show on 2QN in Deniliquin and the Ford dealer had his live spot discussing a featured car of the day. It was painfully obvious that it was an ad, but it was unscripted and I saw it as my job to try and make it as interesting and compelling as possible, so I tried to have a brief chat with the Ford dealer…add some personality to the spot. As far as I’m concerned, it still seemed like an ad, and was quite obviously an ad, but was a tad more interesting as a result. Under these rules, if I added some personality to the spot rather than just letting the dealer rattle off some car specifications, then I’d expect that I’d have to top and tail the spot with disclosures such as “the following is a paid advertisement for…” and “a brief reminder the what you just heard was a paid advertisement for…” which not only takes up extra air time unnecessarily, but it as boring as the proverbial winged-creature’s droppings and seriously detracts from the effect of the ad.
It would also probably prevent the friendly chat because I wasn’t being paid any extra for it, and nor was the station, so it would be a waste of time and effort if it required the disclosure.
Now I’m not going to argue that people shouldn’t disclose that they’re being paid to promote something, but I believe it’s a matter of personal ethics and depends on the nature of the advertising. I’m personally sceptical of anything that a celebrity endorses unless the “celebrity” is someone that I trust enough to know that they are endorsing a product because they believe in it, not just because they’re being paid to endorse it. But despite this, I think there are times when a disclosure is warranted and times when it is not. The only time that I think the government should be involved is when the claims are fraudulent or deceptive…and ultimately in such a case the person who endorsed the product would have their reputation tarnished just as much as the product.
I just can’t see a good reason to regulate endorsements or advertisements, beyond the existing classification of advertisements such that they can only be broadcast at certain times of the day. But then again, I don’t really see a good reason for our onerous “cash for comment” regulations in this country.
Samuel
January 11th, 2011 at 02:06pm
This time it’s SBS’ three-part documentary “Immigration Nation” which premiered on Sunday night.
The main aim of this show appears to be to make Australians feel inadequate or guilty for the actions of previous generations, and as usual, the method for achieving this is to re-write history in some rather bizarre and alarmist ways.
My favourite claim from the tripe which aired on Sunday was that the White Australia policy made Japan jealous because they saw themselves as a great power and didn’t like the idea of some insignificant little country stopping them from freely immigrating to said country (question: if Australia was so insignificant and Japan was so great, why would they have wanted to immigrate to Australia?), so over time their jealousy grew and then, as a direct result, World War Two occurred. Yes that’s right, according to this “documentary”, Australia’s immigration policies caused World War Two.
When this documentary, as SBS documentaries tend to do, gets shown in high school classrooms, it will be interesting to see the brighter kids pick up on its direct contradictions with the rest of the curriculum…and then be labelled as “inconsiderate” or “racist” by teachers (welcome to my high school experience, where it was “wrong” to believe anything that the “racist” John Laws said…although I did find one teacher who, whilst disliking John Laws, did agree with him on a number of things…I think he was a closet listener who wouldn’t acknowledge it for fear of alienation by his peers.)
I wasn’t expecting much from a “documentary” which has been running radio ads for some time now which have been doing their best to paint the country as racist…but even I was astounded by this complete revision of history.
There were a number of other pearls of tripe, including some nonsense about Australia being the same as South Africa (there were similarities in legislation, sure, but the two countries were far from being the same) and that restricting immigration from Asia somehow created more of it. There was more, but I can only think of so much of it before I want to start screaming.
I haven’t decided whether I want to watch it next week or not. It would be an interesting exercise in torture, so it will probably depend on whether I am in the mood for some torture by the time it airs next week. If it were on tonight, I’d definitely be giving it a miss.
Samuel
January 11th, 2011 at 04:22am
It’s funny how some days thing just seem to fall in to place. Yesterday was one of those days where everything just seemed to work the way it should. On that note, it is no surprise then that I stumbled across this blog post by lawyer Brendan Scott which perfectly describes The Sydney Morning Herald.
Every week I read it and think “well that had no information in it/that has no impact on my life, why did I waste my time reading that?” (the reason is because it is there at the table.)
[..]
Moreover, they have recently shifted the format of their additional sections to be wholly tabloid. Maybe I’m just being an old fogey, but I hate it, particularly the overbusy colourful design and the oft-times content free infographics. This is on top of the typos that now dot the paper following their decision to get rid of copy editors.
With the exception of some of their media stories and their Monday TV guide (yes, my household still likes the printed weekly TV guide), I wholeheartedly agree with Brendan. The paper is a joke. It’s no wonder, considering its close ties with The Age and The Guardian.
If you’re wondering which paper is my paper of choice, it is The Australian. A paper which is more interested in the truth than most of the rest of them combined. Sure, they all have their good and bad moments, but when you weigh it all up, The Australian is the indisputable king of the Aussie newspapers.
Now, I should really compare The Weekend Australian’s TV guide with that of the Monday SMH…if I can rid this household of a regular SMH purchase, that would be beneficial.
Samuel
October 28th, 2010 at 08:00am
If, like me, you missed some (or unlike me, all) of Casey and Heather’s first show on KDOX, then fear not because they have been kind enough to post it online for everyone to enjoy.
I personally missed bits of it because I was not at all well overnight and I’m still not feeling great right now…in fact I had to take my first sick day in many months today (arguably I should have done this a few weeks ago…but today was much worse than I was a few weeks ago). I did manage to hear most of the show though, and that which I heard was great…it’s almost as if they were never off the air as they really were firing on all cylinders. I was even pleased to note that there were no accidental half-mentions of their previous station’s call sign or phone number…something which tends to plague radio people for a few days when they start at a new station.
So, if you missed it, here it is, enjoy!
[audio:http://www.mypodcast.com/fsaudio/caseyhendrickson_20100816_1817-675579.mp3]
Download MP3
The podcast URL is likely to change in the near future, so if you subscribe, please note that you may have to change URL soon.
Casey and Heather can be heard on Fox News 1280AM and 102.3FM KDOX, weekdays from 9am to 11am in Las Vegas, (Tuesday-Saturday 2am-4am Canberra time on the current time difference). Streaming at foxnews1280.com
Samuel
August 17th, 2010 at 11:55am
In just under ten minutes, streaming at foxnews1280.com, Casey Hendrickson and Heather Kydd will make their triumphant return to the airwaves.
Live from 9am-11am Las Vegas time, 2am-4am Canberra time.
Samuel
August 17th, 2010 at 01:52am
Or for those of us on this side of the world, Tuesday at 2am. I’ll be up, and I hope that you will be too!
As noted last month, former KXNT hosts Casey Hendrickson and Heather Kydd have found a new home on rival station Fox News 1280 KDOX. Since then, the details of their new show have been announced. They will be occupying the 9am-11am timeslot Monday to Friday, up against Rush Limbaugh on KXNT and a tape-delayed version of Glenn Beck on KDWN.
Casey noted in a podcast last month that, while the competition will be tough as they are two of the biggest names in American talk radio, the duo are confident that they will be able to overtake at least one of their competitors in the ratings fairly quickly. The podcast makes for quite interesting listening if you’re interested in the state of the Las Vegas radio market.
[audio:http://caseythehost.podbean.com/mf/web/nfyxx/kdox.mp3]
Casey also noted in the podcast that one of the reasons for him and Heather choosing to go with KDOX instead of some of the other stations which made them offers, is that KDOX have a viable plan to launch themselves to the top of the talk ratings. One of the parts of this plan came to life rather spectacularly yesterday.
Until yesterday, all talk stations in Las Vegas were on the AM band. In other markets, some talk stations have launched FM simulcasts which have helped to improve their ratings. KXNT announced a few weeks back that, from this coming Monday, they would launch a simulcast of their 840AM signal on 100.5FM, and have been promoting this as Las Vegas’s first FM talk station…well, very quietly, KDOX have been planning the same thing for a while and bought an FM translator a few months back for the tiny price of $100. Yesterday, they launched their FM simulcast on 102.3FM, beating KXNT by a matter of days, and making KXNT’s promotion of being the first FM talk station redundant.
KDOX promotional graphic featuring station personalities (L-R) Dr. Laura Schlessinger, Laura Ingraham, Jeremy Wayne, Roger Hedgecock, Rusty Humphries, Heather Kydd and Casey Hendrickson. It is the first time Casey and Heather have appeared in a KDOX promotional photo, having previously appeared at a handful of KDOX events and outside broadcasts. Image credit: Summit Media Broadcasting.
Having an FM translator is arguably more beneficial for KDOX than it is for KXNT as KDOX, being a Class D AM station, is virtually inaudible at night when its daytime 5,000 watt signal is reduced to a mere 28 watts. The FM signal will broadcast at a rate of 99 watts 24/7. KXNT on the other hand will be aiming to increase their weekend audience by running sport coverage on their FM station instead of their current programming, which will continue to air on their AM station.
The battle for dominance of the talk market in Las Vegas appears to be hotting up considerably…and I’m looking forward to Casey and Heather’s return to the airwaves from 9am-11am Monday (2am-4am Tuesday Canberra time) which, with any luck, will bring the majority of their existing audience with them. The show will stream live from the KDOX website.
Samuel
August 14th, 2010 at 06:34am
Graham Cole, the actor who portrayed PC Tony Stamp in The Bill will be on Open House tonight. According to the Open House website Graham will discuss “the show’s highs and lows and share how his Christian faith has shaped his life”.
That should be interesting, so I’ll be tuning in to that…assuming that the Leaders Debate (about which I will be live blogging) has finished.
Open House is on-air from 8pm to 11pm on Canberra’s 91.9 and 94.3 1WAY FM, Sydney’s Hope 103.2 FM and many other stations across the country.
Samuel
July 25th, 2010 at 02:50pm
Next Posts
Previous Posts