Newstalk Megathread

mike65

As a riposte she was doing quite well until the last para.

Mike.

FlutterinBantam

Yeah true enough Mike.

can't blame O'Brien for wanting to avoid Fisk and McCann though.

Guy obviously wanted balanced objective views,not geezers pushing their own agendas.:cool:

Radio Mad.

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Yeah true enough Mike.

can't blame O'Brien for wanting to avoid Fisk and McCann though.

Guy obviously wanted balanced objective views,not geezers pushing their own agendas.:cool:

If that's the case, he shouldn't have taken Dunphy on in the first place. Like him or loathe him, we all know Dunphy's form. He's always been opinionated. And his radio track record was clear for all to see, as he'd presented the Last Word on Today FM for several years. Therefore, O'Brien knew precisely what type of presenter he was going to get and the style off programme that would be broadcast when he employed Dunphy.

The truth is O'Brien needed somebody to boost his dismal morning ratings. No use trying to compete with the mighty Morning Ireland, so he decided to go the controversial, not entirely balanced and objective, route by taking on Dunphy.

gilroyb

I used to listen to almost all of the Newstalk schedule (other than Brenda Power), but it has annoyed me more and more recently. Every story seemed to be CRISIS in the health service, and then that 'health famine' ad which seemed to be on every five minutes. Recently they've kept their emphasis on health but have managed to annoy the HSE so much that they don't even want the free airtime that Newstalk offer them. It has modeled itself on the Irish Daily Mail, something that no organisation with any self respect should do.

Another thing that really drives me to distraction is the willingness to read anything that anyone texts in about any topic. It's like the part in Anchorman where they change Ron's autocue and he reads it without a second thought. While the odd text is insightful, the majority drag any discussion down towards the gutter. When the texts weren't at a premium rate most listeners were willing to text, now it just seems to be the nutjobs. Also, Dunphy was willing to edit out texts and read only (what he believed were) the quality ones. Every crazy text that is read out brings in an even crazier text from the opposing viewpoint. I'm sure it's good for revenue in the short term, but it makes it impossible for Hook/Gilroy/Byrne to get into any topic when every second thing they say is a listeners' comment along the lines of, "so you think that solving this murder is important, but wouldn't this money be better spent on this countries crumbling health service and let these people just kill each other?".

In the same way as a journalist should be careful about what they will put their name on for advertising purposes, they should be even more careful about what opinions they give voice to. The cost of reading out an unworthy readers text is paid for by the presenter with their own credibility.


I started turning over to Phantom whenever Newstalk would read out listeners texts and trying to go back only for the business news and the regular news. At this stage of the two or three hours of rush hour radio I hear every day Newstalk are lucky to get five minutes of it. So far this week Phantom have gotten the entirety of the time and I so far I haven't missed Newstalk one bit.

raven136

said contributors including Fisk have been on newstalk since Dunphy left,just the love in he had with him,McCann and Wheatcroft doesnt exist anymore.
Dunphy was better suited to an evening show.
Why would the irish times have allowed him to write the piece? as anyone who recently listened to his conversation's with...programme with Fisk would realise they both publicly came out against the takeover and commended O'Reilly on his non editorial interference(in the london independent anyway)

DMC

"Different nation, different station"

I've always hated it, yet I hear they are now using the tag line in different languages, using Polish and Nigerian voices to illustrate their multicultural-ness.

If the station is so different, where can one hear these voices on a regular basis , or are they still the domain of the not-for-profit community stations?

thejuggler

Newstalk has made very little impact outside Dublin since its national launch. I don't know why that is the case - perhaps they need to market the station more. Maybe people feel it has a Dublin bias (don't all national stations!) It must be a money pit to operate as they don't have a huge amountof advertising. I wonder at what stage Denis O'Brien will pull the plug.........

mike65

Well could we see a merger with Today FM? Not sure how exactly though.

Mike.

DMC

I suppose Mike, something has got to give between Matt Cooper and George Hook now that Denis holds both their contracts.

thejuggler raises an interesting point. Local stations mix it up between national and local. Local TD's and councillors discuss local and national issues. They get the balance right and know their audience. People get the news thats important to them.

For Newstalk, you can't appear to do local news specific to, say Waterford, that might make the rest of the country turn off. A fine balancing act.

LostinBlanch

For all the fact that it's gone downhill in a big way over the last couple of years it's still got some shows that are better than anything else in their timeslot.

Moncrieff - no competition worthy of the name, though I think this tends to make him very complacent at times.

Off The Ball - no other station has so much varied sports coverage.

Culture Shock - IMO the best programme that Newstalk have at the mo.

As for the rest. M'eh, it's the same ol same ol but with more ads.

Bum Boy

Have to say I've made the switch ! I used to listen to R1 overnights but now listen to Newtalk at night. Only problem is the audio is far too bassy and the programmes sometimes get stuck on a loop...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and anyone else notice this ?

Profiler

LostinBlanch wrote: »

For all the fact that it's gone downhill in a big way over the last couple of years it's still got some shows that are better than anything else in their timeslot.

Off The Ball - no other station has so much varied sports coverage

I have to disagree with you on that one. Off the ball is terrible, it is dreadful stuff.

I think it only appears good in the sense that there is no other show out there that covers sport for as many hours in the evening as they do.

However I’ve lost count of the number of times they have had a fantastic guest on the show only to have some stuttering mumbling clown ask them stupid amateur questions.

The show could so easily be very very good but no matter how they try the always make a balls of it.

ronbyrne2005

Bum Boy wrote: »

Have to say I've made the switch ! I used to listen to R1 overnights but now listen to Newtalk at night. Only problem is the audio is far too bassy and the programmes sometimes get stuck on a loop...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and repeat...and anyone else notice this ?

Yeah, it's headwrecking, happens a fair bit too, obviously no one checking what's being broadcast through the night.

themont85

Profiler wrote: »

I have to disagree with you on that one. Off the ball is terrible, it is dreadful stuff.

I think it only appears good in the sense that there is no other show out there that covers sport for as many hours in the evening as they do.

However I’ve lost count of the number of times they have had a fantastic guest on the show only to have some stuttering mumbling clown ask them stupid amateur questions.

The show could so easily be very very good but no matter how they try the always make a balls of it.

What you mean interviews like with Mike Spitz last week, personally thought it was one of the best sport interviews i've ever heard on the radio. They have the best guests, wide vareity of topics which nobody else does and presenters who seem to have a passion about sports. What kind of 'stupid amateur questions' qs are you talking about? I always find they have excellent qs and are the complete opposite to what your saying tbh.

Utopia Parkway

berliner wrote: »

Imagine working with a babe like claire byrne every morning.Jammy git gilroy!

I still find her annoying but I admit she is rather fine in a hot school teacher kinda way.

Profiler

themont85 wrote: »

What you mean interviews like with Mike Spitz last week, personally thought it was one of the best sport interviews i've ever heard on the radio. They have the best guests, wide vareity of topics which nobody else does and presenters who seem to have a passion about sports. What kind of 'stupid amateur questions' qs are you talking about? I always find they have excellent qs and are the complete opposite to what your saying tbh.

I have to admit I didn't catch all of the Mark Spitz interview but what came across was how good at speaking Spitz was. So while it might have been one of the best you've heard that IMO as was more down to Spitz than it was to Eoin McDevitt.

What I mean by stupid & amateur would be for example they arguably had the greatest swimmer of all time on your show in an Olympic year and all you can do is is ask him the same 10 questions he has been asked hundreds if not thousands of times. WHy not try and get something new from SPitz as opposed to hearing the same tales that are out there already?

One thing that stuck out to me was it appears that it was Spitz who mentioned Michael Phelps first and it was towards the end of the interview, I get the impression that had Spitz not mentioned him McDevitt would not have.

Like I said I didn't hear all the interview, but in an Olympic year for McDevitt to not mention Phelps was just sports journalism at its lowest common denominator.

They also have some country pages bit with the presenter from Galway whose name escapes me and half of what he reads out is about non sports incidents, why do they do that on a Sports show? that to me shows a lack of planning and a dearth of research.

I do agree they have some great guests, but those they have are criminally underused, and while they do cover a wide range of sports they barley scratch the surface, why do everything poorly and in a shallow way when you could do a few things well? they do so because it's commercially clever to do so, cover lots and get more listeners but only do the bare minimum on each sport.

Off the Ball is the Sun or the Star of radio shows, all hype and little real content.

mike65

OTB suffers from the obvious - 3 hours to fill every night. Even fivelive don't do that and they have live matches to broadcast.

Mike.

connundrum

themont85 wrote: »

What you mean interviews like with Mike Spitz last week, personally thought it was one of the best sport interviews i've ever heard on the radio. They have the best guests, wide vareity of topics which nobody else does and presenters who seem to have a passion about sports. What kind of 'stupid amateur questions' qs are you talking about? I always find they have excellent qs and are the complete opposite to what your saying tbh.

Apologies for going off topic, but does anyone have a link for the Spitz interview? Missed it first time around

Stylo

If all you guys and gals, have so much to offer on how things should be done, why aren't YOU working in radio - get a bloody grip will ya and turn around and do it yourselves - sheesh, you'd imagine it was that easy - put yourselves in front of a live mic and tell us how it should be done - and then we'll bitch on you f*^ked it up

mike65

Ha! Another Newstalk employee? Must get Dev to run an IP check

Mike.

Toto Wolfcastle

Stylo wrote: »

If all you guys and gals, have so much to offer on how things should be done, why aren't YOU working in radio - get a bloody grip will ya and turn around and do it yourselves - sheesh, you'd imagine it was that easy - put yourselves in front of a live mic and tell us how it should be done - and then we'll bitch on you f*^ked it up

I actually think that a good few people posting here have some experience on live radio. (myself included)

Not that it makes a difference. People are entitled to their opinions.

Personally, the first think I learned when I started doing radio was that I should speak clearly (as in not slur), and not make those awful dry mouth noises. There are one or two on Newstalk who have yet to learn this.

Also, saying 'emmm' every second word isn't great either. (I'm looking at you Eamonn Keane!)

These are basic things that need to be addressed before you can even begin to think about interviewing people.

Profiler

Stylo wrote: »

If all you guys and gals, have so much to offer on how things should be done, why aren't YOU working in radio - get a bloody grip will ya and turn around and do it yourselves - sheesh, you'd imagine it was that easy - put yourselves in front of a live mic and tell us how it should be done - and then we'll bitch on you f*^ked it up

Right I'm going to guess that as it is way past Ger's bed time then that has to be Ken... get a hair cut man for the love of god! you look like Worzel Gummidge's less talented cousin :eek:

themont85

Profiler wrote: »

I have to admit I didn't catch all of the Mark Spitz interview but what came across was how good at speaking Spitz was. So while it might have been one of the best you've heard that IMO as was more down to Spitz than it was to Eoin McDevitt.

What I mean by stupid & amateur would be for example they arguably had the greatest swimmer of all time on your show in an Olympic year and all you can do is is ask him the same 10 questions he has been asked hundreds if not thousands of times. WHy not try and get something new from SPitz as opposed to hearing the same tales that are out there already?

One thing that stuck out to me was it appears that it was Spitz who mentioned Michael Phelps first and it was towards the end of the interview, I get the impression that had Spitz not mentioned him McDevitt would not have.

Like I said I didn't hear all the interview, but in an Olympic year for McDevitt to not mention Phelps was just sports journalism at its lowest common denominator.

They also have some country pages bit with the presenter from Galway whose name escapes me and half of what he reads out is about non sports incidents, why do they do that on a Sports show? that to me shows a lack of planning and a dearth of research.

I do agree they have some great guests, but those they have are criminally underused, and while they do cover a wide range of sports they barley scratch the surface, why do everything poorly and in a shallow way when you could do a few things well? they do so because it's commercially clever to do so, cover lots and get more listeners but only do the bare minimum on each sport.

Off the Ball is the Sun or the Star of radio shows, all hype and little real content.

Well when your interviewing a guy like that its pretty obvious that you'd ask some of the routine qs. But then they covered an array of subjects surrounding swimming i.e. his opinion on drugs and new technologies in swimming. I highly doubt they're the kind of routine qs one would ask. And Btw as regards same old storys told, you can't expect the entire audience to know these stories just because you've heard them before, not to ask about stories about about the worlds greatest swimmer's storys would be bad journalism imo.

These are the kind of guests they have football-Graham Hunter, Sid Lowe, Gabriel Marcotti ect, all of whom are highly venrable journalists offering topics such as Italian, German and Spanish football which are hardly discussed a lot on normal sport shows. Then there's rugby-Gerry Thornley one of the most respected in Ireland, GAA all Indo and IT journalists. Then there's the likes of Paul Kimmahe and Walsh from the ST, on drugs in cycling. These are hardly stories covered in the Sun or other tabloid papers who devout 50 bloody page mags to the english league. They covered Balco extensively. They always give stories a good run, if fact things such as the country pages thing show they maybe have too much time.

Could I ask if you presented a sports programme how would you do it, what guests are criminally underused. I have to say I lived in england for a while and BBC 5live and talksport were ,considering the resources, on a par with OTB.

Profiler

themont85 wrote: »

Well when your interviewing a guy like that its pretty obvious that you'd ask some of the routine qs. But then they covered an array of subjects surrounding swimming i.e. his opinion on drugs and new technologies in swimming. I highly doubt they're the kind of routine qs one would ask. And Btw as regards same old storys told, you can't expect the entire audience to know these stories just because you've heard them before, not to ask about stories about about the worlds greatest swimmer's storys would be bad journalism imo.

These are the kind of guests they have football-Graham Hunter, Sid Lowe, Gabriel Marcotti ect, all of whom are highly venrable journalists offering topics such as Italian, German and Spanish football which are hardly discussed a lot on normal sport shows. Then there's rugby-Gerry Thornley one of the most respected in Ireland, GAA all Indo and IT journalists. Then there's the likes of Paul Kimmahe and Walsh from the ST, on drugs in cycling. These are hardly stories covered in the Sun or other tabloid papers who devout 50 bloody page mags to the english league. They covered Balco extensively. They always give stories a good run, if fact things such as the country pages thing show they maybe have too much time.

Could I ask if you presented a sports programme how would you do it, what guests are criminally underused. I have to say I lived in england for a while and BBC 5live and talksport were ,considering the resources, on a par with OTB.

Newstalk in general goes the lowest common denominator route almost all of the time, they do that to attract as many listeners as is possible and therefore squeeze as much out of advertising as they can. This is very much the case with OTB.

Oh and "Indo journalists" since when do the Indo employ journalists? Fanning is no more a sports writer then I am a radio journalist.

The Irish journalists are there as much for self promotion rather than to add some class and volume to the show. As for Graeme Hunter, I see him all the time on Sky Sports' Spanish coverage and he isn't great.

5 Live on the BBC is miles ahead of OTB, given the potential audience that it has you are comparing apples with oranges! and I've not heard much from Talksport to be honest.

Dub13

Stylo wrote: »

If all you guys and gals, have so much to offer on how things should be done, why aren't YOU working in radio - get a bloody grip will ya and turn around and do it yourselves - sheesh, you'd imagine it was that easy - put yourselves in front of a live mic and tell us how it should be done - and then we'll bitch on you f*^ked it up

So you have to work in radio to express an opinion on it..?

Dub13

Profiler wrote: »

. As for Graeme Hunter, I see him all the time on Sky Sports' Spanish coverage and he isn't great.

Have to disagree Hunter is one of the best football journalist's around.I hate it when he only gets about 90 seconds on the Newstalk breakfast show.

Imhof Tank

OTB the equivalent of the Sun/ Star?

3 hours radio equivalent of the Sun/ Star sports sections would be 2 and three quarters hours coverage of the premiership, with a few sweeping assumptions and generalisations about foreign teams thrown in. The other 15 mins would be given over to the Dubs.

Whatever about the rest of the station (ie Clare Byrne in particular) I don’t know how anyone could accuse OTB of being dumbed down. Their analysis is absolutely unique and downright hillarious.

For example, they had Martin Lipton on last night, who on the night of the Liverpool Chelsea match on Tuesday stayed at the same hotel as the Chelsea team, Tom Hicks and members of the Dubai consortium, and he was speaking about the scene in the lobby with Hicks signing autographs inside while being barricaded in by irate Liverpool fans outside. He also told of Chelsea fans sarcastically chanting “USA, USA…..” through the game in reference to Hicks and Gillett, and the Dubai guys who were guests of the yanks joining in with middle eastern accents thinking the chant was in support of the Americans.

This stuff might seem like ladish humour, and that is true and its an important part of the show, but the fact remains that you don’t get that approach or the likes of Ken Early reporting fans signing “Stand up if you want Stan out” at CP, anywhere else on radio that I know of and thats what makes OTB unique.

BTW, I thought Fanning was good during the Stan era when he would regularly contribute in the aftermath of disasters eg in San Marino in reation to Robbie Keane celbrating with "a win is a win" and getting slaughtered quite rightly by the fans, and also at CP after the Cyprus game.

Leaving the humour angle aside, there is nothing lacking in class (to the extent that class is a definable quality in the context of this type of show) or volume to the shows output IMO - quite the opposite. In fact I challenge anyone to name a classless/ shallow regular contributor on OTB (who is not asked on the show for comic purposes of course)

Excluding OTB, you do have a point in the case of the breakfast show’s agenda – although Ger Gilroy does occasionally break away from the set agenda to make an unexpectedly original point. Claire Byrne on the other hand basically gets stroppy if guests don’t fall in with the show’s particular line on a topic – eg; for everything bad that happens in the health/ education sectors – there must be a scapegoat; but for stuff like pig racing in Naas during Punchestown week – well sure that’s only a laugh and these animal rights people are crazy tree huggers or whatever.

LordSutch

I've recently given up on Newstalk after listening to it from the very beginning!

I now find the station boring, staid, parochial, & just void of any new ideas or formats, morning, noon, or nights (repeats).

I now have my Roberts Radio plugged into the NTL FM socket and I enjoy all five BBCs, in the morning (Wogan) & at night (Janice Long) on Radio One, or better still Radio Three just before midnight then I have Radio Five for great Sports coverage (newstalk take a feed off Radio Five for the footie) then 'Radio Four' for a bit of culture & News + the World Service should I be in the mood.

I still have Newstalk on a DAB Pre-set, and I still put it on sometimes in the morning, but God Almighty its such a relief to get away from the (30c Text messages) & Claire Byrne's Quick-fire 'Hard ball' style of interviewing, and Moncrief 'Stuck' in a Rut, Hookie opinionated as ever, & then the repeats at night ~
Jesus Wept!

themont85

Profiler wrote: »

Newstalk in general goes the lowest common denominator route almost all of the time, they do that to attract as many listeners as is possible and therefore squeeze as much out of advertising as they can. This is very much the case with OTB.

Oh and "Indo journalists" since when do the Indo employ journalists? Fanning is no more a sports writer then I am a radio journalist.

The Irish journalists are there as much for self promotion rather than to add some class and volume to the show. As for Graeme Hunter, I see him all the time on Sky Sports' Spanish coverage and he isn't great.

5 Live on the BBC is miles ahead of OTB, given the potential audience that it has you are comparing apples with oranges! and I've not heard much from Talksport to be honest.

Again I'd ask the question if you presented/produced a 3 hour sports show what would you do? BBC have similar guests as OTB, hardly tabloid. I really don't see how you can call there sports coverage 'tabloid'. No offence but IMO you typify the attitude thinking that anyone could present on radio.

I agree that there's been a general dumbing down of there other shows, the 30c and the 'Health Famine' crusade ect. But they look like a managment decision to go that route, they're definately aiming at the 'Joe Duffy' segment of the market. But OTB i think is the best produced/researched show they have.

LordSutch

janeybabe wrote: »

I actually think that a good few people posting here have some experience on live radio. (myself included)

Not that it makes a difference. People are entitled to their opinions.

Personally, the first think I learned when I started doing radio was that I should speak clearly (as in not slur), and not make those awful dry mouth noises. There are one or two on Newstalk who have yet to learn this.

Also, saying 'emmm' every second word isn't great either. (I'm looking at you Eamonn Keane!)

These are basic things that need to be addressed before you can even begin to think about interviewing people.

You might also include Orla Barry & her unusual habit of trying not to breathe after every sentence, in fact it sounds to me like she only breathes after she has squeezed the very last bit of air out of her lungs!

Or maybe she is a heavy smoker? either way, it sounds a bit strained at the end of each sentence for whatever reason.

And as for Marian Finucane ............... :rolleyes:

ateam

The station has potential. It is only relatively new, so I think it does need time, RTE has been around for 80 years. But there are many problems:

Claire Byrne: Too opinionated for her own good. She lacks experience to give her opinion and is rude to guests.

Morning Programme: Too much text messages, not enough time spent talking to the hundreds of guests they have on in the morning. Seems disorganised.

Brenda Power: The Health Famine was a disaster. It did not spark a national debate on the health service or cause a resignation or anything, all it did was bore viewers and lead the HSE to ignore Newstalk. A big mistake. She is an ok presenter though.

Orla: Not sure about this, quite indifferent to her. No real presence either way.

Eamon Keane: Needs to be dropped. He's inexperienced, a terrible interviewer and loves the sound of his own voice. Nuts about text messaging as well. He never properly challenges his guests on many points, not quite sure how he got that programme at all.

Moncrieff: Yes not bad as other people mentioned.

Hook: Text crazy to make money and likes the sound of his own voice. Plus is he a trained journalist?

General stuff: News doesn't start on time on a regular basis and the news in brief section is ridiculous, all news on the radio is news in brief. Also they definitely use "ghost texts" and stick oh that's John from Sligo or that's Ann from Tipperary to say to listeners, we're not just a Dublin station. I doubt many people outside of Dublin text in..yet anyway.

Imhof Tank

ArthurF wrote: »

I have Radio Five for great Sports coverage (newstalk take a feed off Radio Five for the footie

Presume you mean the Saturday/ Sunday shows. OTB doesnt take a live feed off anybody

LordSutch

You might indeed be right, I rang newstalk once about coverage of a match & I commented that their coverage was nearly as good as the Beeb, then they told me that it was the Beeb (courtesy of a live feed)!

Must have been a weekend.

steve927

Like many posters here i have listened to Newstalk from the beginning but as much as i hate to admit it, its gone ****e altogether. I find myself plugging in the ipod much more frequently. The only show of top class quality is OTB. I used to love the breakfast show and i thought that Gilroy did a great job covering for Dunphy at the time, i felt he always asked the questions that i wanted asked if that makes sense. Unfortunately the show has gone seriously downhill since the arrival of Claire Byrne, she's appalling, far too "tough" as another poster pointed out. They rush every guest that they have, get them off air and then spend the next 3 minutes talking to each other instead of using that time on the guest. I think if Ger was on his own again things would improve somewhat.
I think Brenda power's show is planned by whatever she hears on the breakfast show on her way into work, terrible. Orla - brutal but improving, never thought i'd be saying that. Keane, loves himself but covers the main issue of the day fairly well and often gives another angle. Moncrieff has lost the "underground" feel it once had by appealing to kids i.e. poetry competitions etc but i'm still a fan. George - is it just me or does he not cover news issues anymore and has it just become a feature based magazine type show???
I'm truly saddened by Newstalk's descent into rubbish radio and i cant see how things will improve. BTW Stylo, in case you were wondering, i'm actually qualified the have an opinion based on your criteria;)

Gunther_Gloop

I really enjoyed Newstalk on Saturday and Sunday mornings up until recently. Carol Coleman is/was good and fearless and had some good discussions going, but now it's all Claire McKeowan with a panel of D4 chatterers discussing the merits of candy coated toothpicks or the top ten reasons to use a sunblock. What a bunch of twaddle. I think Carol might still be on, but it's all a bit lost in a muddle of McKeowannumbness.

And what's happening with the business show on Saturdays? Before McKeowan there's a business repeat show, then after her there's another business show that basically goes over the same stuff.

Now I mainly just listen to Marion Finucane on Sunday mornings and forget the rest.

As for the rest of the week, I quite like Newstalk.
Orla Barry is one step away from being Claire McKeowan (who she has in once a week I think), but I still like her humour and style.

Eamonn Keane is good when he's not over emphasising and over-hyping what's coming up and over-dramatising the importance of something.

George Hook is good, but I more regularly listen to Matt Cooper at that time.

I like Moncrieff too, although I rarely hear all the show.

In all, it's a good station with a good range of presenters.

Just get rid of Claire McKeowan before it's too late!!

brettmirl

How long has Claire McKeowan (sp?) been on that slot?

Roisin Ingle used to present.

Karen Coleman is still on Sundays.

ronbyrne2005

Obviously Newstalk spent a fortune for first few years on critically acclaimed high quality shows in order to established station and get the national licence from authorities. They were losing money hand over fist doing this and now they are going more tabloidy to boost numbers and keep costs down. Few high quality international guests like they had at start. Claire Byrne is brutal and her show becoming too light and jokey.

LordSutch

What irks me about karen Coleman is her totall unashamed bias on certains issues 'The Israel/Palistinian' question comes to mind.

I wont say which side she 'Supports' but its so blatently obvious, and its this blatent bias that I just cant abide, thank God for Radio4 & Radio5 for proper unbiased & indepth discussions.

dRNk SAnTA

Is anyone else getting pissed off with hook?

What annoys me is the way he "summarises" the issue himself during interviews instead of letting whatever expert he has on speak. He is such a know-it-all.

Also, sometimes he has a suprisingly poor grasp of issues that he probably covers 50-100 times each year. He continues to throw out typical tabloidish opinions.

As an example, I've noticed Matt Cooper (who i don't listen to often) has got quite a good grasp on the issues affecting broadband in Ireland. He knows when he's being waffled to and is willing to get technical. Hook is completely unable to do this.

ronbyrne2005

dRNk SAnTA wrote: »

Is anyone else getting pissed off with hook?

What annoys me is the way he "summarises" the issue himself during interviews instead of letting whatever expert he has on speak. He is such a know-it-all.

Also, sometimes he has a suprisingly poor grasp of issues that he probably covers 50-100 times each year. He continues to throw out typical tabloidish opinions.

As an example, I've noticed Matt Cooper (who i don't listen to often) has got quite a good grasp on the issues affecting broadband in Ireland. He knows when he's being waffled to and is willing to get technical. Hook is completely unable to do this.

Hook can be bamboozled allrite but at least(like him or loathe) he has strong opinions /personality and is open to changing his mind.

Poochie05

mick_irl wrote: »

How long has Claire McKeowan (sp?) been on that slot?

Roisin Ingle used to present.

I'm not sure how long Claire McKeown has been on or if it's permanent but it's been for at least a month. I used to enjoy Roisin Ingle but switch off instantly when I hear her prattling on about nothing.

Poochie05

dRNk SAnTA wrote: »

Is anyone else getting pissed off with hook?

As an example, I've noticed Matt Cooper (who i don't listen to often) has got quite a good grasp on the issues affecting broadband in Ireland. He knows when he's being waffled to and is willing to get technical. Hook is completely unable to do this.

I switched to Hook about a year ago and really enjoyed his show. He seemed to always ask the questions I was asking myself and was generally interested in letting the guests talk. I found Matt Cooper too whiney but I've switched back to Matt Cooper recently, as Hookie is annoying me (he won't even let the regular experts talk in the travel slot or technology slot). I found Matt much improved. He seems to be a bit more upbeat and not as aggressive when he's interviewing. Maybe I've just caught him on a good week though!

More Music

Hook can find it hard to compose a question on the fly, he uses a lot of filler words. He will start asking a question, stop halfway through and ask a different question. Maybe he loses his train of thought if somebody is on talkback into his ear.

He also answers a lot of his own questions before the guest takes over.

However, I do switch between Hook and Cooper depending on who is patronising us with stupid traffic reports from AA. AA asks us to send in reports but please don't do it while driving. I don't think children listen to the shows.

I realised a while back that an hour of these drivetime shows only consist of around 40 mins of actual content. The rest of the hour is full of ads, news, sports and traffic updates. I have never benefited from a traffic report, not once.

Imhof Tank

Hook appears to interview guests from a script. If he gets an answer which cries out for elaboration, 98% of the time he will just say “right” and then move on to the next scripted question without pausing for breath.

I know interviews have to follow a format so to speak, but with Hook its as if he isn’t actually listening to what the guests are saying.

berliner

I won a portable toshiba DVD player on George Hook's show last week so I'm going to have to be loyal to my benefactor from now on.Hookie RULES!!:)

Hardrain

Good station bar Moncrieff, can't stand the guy. Smug as the day is long.

Gunther_Gloop

I used to think Moncrief was smug, but he doesn't come across that way on the radio. Like P.K., he works best on radio I think.

I'd still like to hear from the person who thinks Claire McKeowan is worth hearing or seeing or experiencing in any way. "And for the next hour we'll look into the 50 best foot massages and how best to varnish your underwear after a luxurious bath."

Amz

I got stuck listening to Claire McKeowan interviewing Conor Lenihan a few weeks ago. It was the biggest FF love in I've ever heard on a station. She couldn't get enough of him, it was like the sun shone out of his posterior or something. I know it's meant to be a fluffy show, but that was just crazy.

IRISHSPORTSGUY

Dub13 wrote: »

I like NewsTalk but I do find they always rush topics.The breakfast show goes alone at about 100mph its as if they are trying to fit in way to much.

In saying that I would never listen to Pat Kenny

Agree 100%.

dublinmadyoke

God lads,

Newstalk really is pure rubbish! Take for example they are now interviewing each other ‘as in news presenters’ on the blandest of topics!

I am sick to death of listening to the same voiceover guy with his fecking ‘different nation different station’. It really has become extremely amateur.

Orla Barry does my nut & so does that Brenda wan.. Orla was doing a interview with a person this morning and her phone cracked (for a second- due to coverage) and automatically she said while of course she stuttered ‘AM AM AM AMMMMM ….. your phone isn’t great there so AM AM AM AM AMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM we’ll try and get back to you!!!!!!!!!!! With that you could hear the interviewee saying ‘oh sorry’ demonstrating that her phone was fine and the listeners could hear her.


I actually get annoyed now listening so I have decided that from now on I am turning off!


The end.