The Pat Kenny Show

Historybluff

Some of the texts from listeners read on air are very silly.

During a Brexit discussion this morning, Pat read a text from a listener saying that we should get over Brexit, that the British people voted for it and that was that. Apparently this listener thinks that a divorce agreement is unnecessary and the UK should simply be allowed to walk away unilaterally from the EU and damn the consequences. An utterly stupid opinion, it added nothing to the discussion and Pat should not have read it out.

Newstalk presenters really should be more discriminating in the texts and tweets from listeners they read out on air. Too many are stupid, ignorant, trolling or sarcastic.

serfboard

Historybluff wrote: »

Some of the texts from listeners read on air are very silly.

During a Brexit discussion this morning, Pat read a text from a listener saying that we should get over Brexit, that the British people voted for it and that was that. Apparently this listener thinks that a divorce agreement is unnecessary and the UK should simply be allowed to walk away unilaterally from the EU and damn the consequences. An utterly stupid opinion, it added nothing to the discussion and Pat should not have read it out.

Newstalk presenters really should be more discriminating in the texts and tweets from listeners they read out on air. Too many are stupid, ignorant, trolling or sarcastic.

There are three possibilities here:

1. Stupid, ignorant, trolling or sarcastic texts are all (or mostly what) they get.

2. They get other texts but, like clickbait, texts that annoy make people engage more (and you're proof of this yourself! - you're engaging here) and so that's why they read them out.

3. They don't get any texts at all (or very few), and so they make up this stuff (again for engagement purposes). That is a common enough practice in some radio stations - particularly at quieter times.

Historybluff

serfboard wrote: »

There are three possibilities here:

1. Stupid, ignorant, trolling or sarcastic texts are all (or mostly what) they get.

2. They get other texts but, like clickbait, texts that annoy make people engage more (and you're proof of this yourself! - you're engaging here) and so that's why they read them out.

3. They don't get any texts at all (or very few), and so they make up this stuff (again for engagement purposes). That is a common enough practice in some radio stations - particularly at quieter times.

1. If this is true, it's a damning indictment of the audience. You would hope that the Pat Kenny Show would attract an intelligent audience and that Pat himself and his team would encourage intelligent discourse and ignore the ignoramuses.

2. While there is something to be said for being provocative in order to spark discussion, I don't think the listener sent the text in this spirit or that Pat read it out for that reason. It seemed to me that the listener was motivated by boredom or annoyance with the show's ongoing coverage of Brexit and just lashed out. And Pat read it out to chastise the listener. (And if programme makers count listeners critiquing their programmes on forums like this as a form of 'engagement', then the radio industry needs to take a good look at itself.)

3. I hope this isn't the case on flagship current affairs shows. These need informed discussion, not trolling texts from fake listeners designed to annoy genuine listeners.

Tell me how

Historybluff wrote: »

Some of the texts from listeners read on air are very silly.

During a Brexit discussion this morning, Pat read a text from a listener saying that we should get over Brexit, that the British people voted for it and that was that. Apparently this listener thinks that a divorce agreement is unnecessary and the UK should simply be allowed to walk away unilaterally from the EU and damn the consequences. An utterly stupid opinion, it added nothing to the discussion and Pat should not have read it out.

Newstalk presenters really should be more discriminating in the texts and tweets from listeners they read out on air. Too many are stupid, ignorant, trolling or sarcastic.

serfboard wrote: »

There are three possibilities here:

1. Stupid, ignorant, trolling or sarcastic texts are all (or mostly what) they get.

2. They get other texts but, like clickbait, texts that annoy make people engage more (and you're proof of this yourself! - you're engaging here) and so that's why they read them out.

3. They don't get any texts at all (or very few), and so they make up this stuff (again for engagement purposes). That is a common enough practice in some radio stations - particularly at quieter times.

Historybluff wrote: »

1. If this is true, it's a damning indictment of the audience. You would hope that the Pat Kenny Show would attract an intelligent audience and that Pat himself and his team would encourage intelligent discourse and ignore the ignoramuses.

2. While there is something to be said for being provocative in order to spark discussion, I don't think the listener sent the text in this spirit or that Pat read it out for that reason. It seemed to me that the listener was motivated by boredom or annoyance with the show's ongoing coverage of Brexit and just lashed out. And Pat read it out to chastise the listener. (And if programme makers count listeners critiquing their programmes on forums like this as a form of 'engagement', then the radio industry needs to take a good look at itself.)

3. I hope this isn't the case on flagship current affairs shows. These need informed discussion, not trolling texts from fake listeners designed to annoy genuine listeners.

I think there is little chance that a show such as this, on a national station needs to make up texts. Particularly in todays world where the public want to get involved so much.

I think they read out such messages as they often get accused of being biased so they read out this to at least show that they are not trying to silence some voices.

You wouldn't be surprised what some people think. A recent poll on Prime Time indicated 88% preference for Ireland staying in the EU. That still means that one in 9 people out there think we should leave...

I always think that some people adopt a position purely on the basis that they think it is against the 'machine' Doesn't matter the topic, if someone who they perceive is in authority is telling them what to do, they ignore the evidence and go with the opposing position.

serfboard

Historybluff wrote: »

if programme makers count listeners critiquing their programmes on forums like this as a form of 'engagement', then the radio industry needs to take a good look at itself.

Radio stations take heed of the JNLR - that's all that counts to them.

Programme makers, however, of course keep an eye on social media - and that includes boards.ie. And you could mark activity on this thread as a measure of engagement - the old cliche of the only thing worse than being talked about, is not being talked about, most certainly applies to media. How do you think Katie Hopkins makes her money?

Tell me how

serfboard wrote: »

Radio stations take heed of the JNLR - that's all that counts to them.

Programme makers, however, of course keep an eye on social media - and that includes boards.ie. And you could mark activity on this thread as a measure of engagement - the old cliche of the only thing worse than being talked about, is not being talked about, most certainly applies to media. How do you think Katie Hopkins makes her money?

If Irish media companies paid attention to the threads on boards about the respective stations, they really have nothing better to do. Most threads have 10-20 frequent posters and the majority of posters seem to be negative about the show in a way which is not reflective of real life.

The OTB thread reads like it is a disaster of a show and the top 3 sports presenters at the Irish radio awards last year were all from the show. And JNLR figures released this week indicate that every show on newstalk from breakfast until 22:00 has increased its numbers and still the threads read like no one is listening any more.

Historybluff

Tell me how wrote: »

I think they read out such messages as they often get accused of being biased so they read out this to at least show that they are not trying to silence some voices.

I agree that this is probably a motivation. But it tells you how far we have fallen when the use of reason in an argument is dismissed as 'bias' and outright nonsense is allowed on air in order to provide 'balance'. The idea that everyone's opinion matters equally is incorrect; only informed opinions matter.

Tell me how wrote: »

You wouldn't be surprised what some people think. A recent poll on Prime Time indicated 88% preference for Ireland staying in the EU. That still means that one in 9 people out there think we should leave...

Yes, there are a lot of ignorant people out there.

Tell me how wrote: »

I always think that some people adopt a position purely on the basis that they think it is against the 'machine' Doesn't matter the topic, if someone who they perceive is in authority is telling them what to do, they ignore the evidence and go with the opposing position.

I totally agree with this. There's a cohort who think that they see through the 'propaganda' spouted by the 'mainstream media', that they are more intelligent than the 'sheeple' etc. etc. Still, I don't think reading out snarky texts from these people is going to persuade them of the error of their ways. Overall, I find these type of texts - stupid, ignorant, trolling or sarcastic - ruin the listening experience and should be ignored.

splinter65

Historybluff wrote: »

Some of the texts from listeners read on air are very silly.

During a Brexit discussion this morning, Pat read a text from a listener saying that we should get over Brexit, that the British people voted for it and that was that. Apparently this listener thinks that a divorce agreement is unnecessary and the UK should simply be allowed to walk away unilaterally from the EU and damn the consequences. An utterly stupid opinion, it added nothing to the discussion and Pat should not have read it out.

Newstalk presenters really should be more discriminating in the texts and tweets from listeners they read out on air. Too many are stupid, ignorant, trolling or sarcastic.

You’ve been listening too long to the carefully selected texts/tweets/emails read out on every RTE radio show that only reflect the Liberal agenda at Montrose.
Wether you think this persons opinion is stupid or not is irrelevant. It’s an opinion being read out on a show that asked listeners for their opinion.
Part of the big problem in this country right now is people thinking that anyone who disagrees with them should be barred from speaking. Ridiculous.

Roger_007

splinter65 wrote: »

You’ve been listening too long to the carefully selected texts/tweets/emails read out on every RTE radio show that only reflect the Liberal agenda at Montrose.
Wether you think this persons opinion is stupid or not is irrelevant. It’s an opinion being read out on a show that asked listeners for their opinion.
Part of the big problem in this country right now is people thinking that anyone who disagrees with them should be barred from speaking. Ridiculous.

Another part of the problem is people listening to Newstalk and they think it's RTE. Ridiculous!

Historybluff

splinter65 wrote: »

You’ve been listening too long to the carefully selected texts/tweets/emails read out on every RTE radio show that only reflect the Liberal agenda at Montrose.
Wether you think this persons opinion is stupid or not is irrelevant. It’s an opinion being read out on a show that asked listeners for their opinion.
Part of the big problem in this country right now is people thinking that anyone who disagrees with them should be barred from speaking. Ridiculous.

I'm not advocating the suppression of views I disagree with. And liberal or conservative agendas are beside the point.

splinter65 wrote: »

Wether you think this persons opinion is stupid or not is irrelevant.

What a bizarre comment. Whether I think this person's opinion is stupid is relevant. It's stupid because they didn't provide a reasonable argument to back it up. Without a reasonable argument, an opinion - be it liberal or conservative - is worthless. And even to follow your own logic, sniping, sarcastic comments like that sent by the texter are hardly going to undermine the media's 'Liberal agenda'.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

I heard him on a podcast with An Irishman abroad last year where he discussed his life and career.

He said that around the time of the financial crash (I think), he offered to Minister for Education (at the time) Ruairi Quinn that he would be willing to speak to inner city school children about how he had grown up in that environment and yet was very qualified academically and had had a successful career. He said that he offered to do so as he felt that many in some areas do not believe that they could be successful because they don't see anyone from their area being so.
(be clear, he wasn't saying the should be ashamed of their origins or roots but just that if they had a desire to be successful, that it was possible)

This tells me that he recognizes that he is a long way from where he was brought up.

That's genuinely lovely. Just when I thought I couldnt love Pat more, you bring this.

I'm not crying, you are

Uncharted

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

That's genuinely lovely. Just when I thought I couldnt love Pat more, you bring this.

I'm not crying, you are

If only he could be convinced to move into a smaller house,he might even run for the Aras.

:pac:

Stargazer7

ButtersSuki wrote: »

Is he overpaid for what he does? Yes IMO, and vastly so.

But I’d rather give Pat €1m a year than Joe Duffy €50k for his output, or to put it another way about a euro for each of his mispronunciations.

Amen. And you can add a lot more presenters to that list.

splinter65

splinter65 wrote: »

You’ve been listening too long to the carefully selected texts/tweets/emails read out on every RTE radio show that only reflect the Liberal agenda at Montrose.

what is the Liberal "agenda"?

I would describe most presenters of radio programmes at RTÉ as being centrists. Furthermore, I don't believe anyone broadcasts with an 'agenda'. Broadcasters (perhaps even subconsciously) may behave in a way that is consistent with their worldview, but they're hardly walking into studio every day with a list titled 'My Liberal Agenda' and laughing maniacally.

RTÉ Radio still has the highest listenership figures in the land, so it's presenters and producers are obviously doing something that most listeners seem to like.

Tell me how

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

what is the Liberal "agenda"?

I would describe most presenters of radio programmes at RTÉ as being centrists. Furthermore, I don't believe anyone broadcasts with an 'agenda'. Broadcasters (perhaps even subconsciously) may behave in a way that is consistent with their worldview, but they're hardly walking into studio every day with a list titled 'My Liberal Agenda' and laughing maniacally.

RTÉ Radio still has the highest listenership figures in the land, so it's presenters and producers are obviously doing something that most listeners seem to like.

Newstalk are simultaneously accused of being the ultra-liberal snowflake SJW station and the voice of the far right fascists.

People hear Kieran Cuddihy express a view or George Hook previously and think that they are saying something purely because Denis O'Brien has given them a script (not withstanding how anyone could think that DOB is inclined towards liberal ideals)

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

Newstalk are simultaneously accused of being the ultra-liberal snowflake SJW station and the voice of the far right fascists.

People hear Kieran Cuddihy express a view or George Hook previously and think that they are saying something purely because Denis O'Brien has given them a script (not withstanding how anyone could think that DOB is inclined towards liberal ideals)

The accusations levelled at Newstalk are even more baffling. The idea that a station that employs Ivan Yates and Pat Kenny, and previously had on its payroll Paul Williams and George Hook, is a platform for Liberal snowflakes is... astonishing.

And as you say the idea that He Who Shall Not Be Mentioned is a liberal, snowflake or otherwise, is laughable.

The fact is that most irish people who would be classified as 'middle class' and have a degree would probably have a 'liberal' outlook. It isn't an agenda, it isn't a conspiracy.

Technocentral

Listening to shows by people you despise then moaning about them is a bizzare Irish trait!! I only listen to/watch shows by people I like, there are other ways to catch up on current affairs affairs. Bizzare!!

Tell me how

Technocentral wrote: »

Listening to shows by people you despise then moaning about them is a bizzare Irish trait!! I only listen to/watch shows by people I like, there are other ways to catch up on current affairs affairs. Bizzare!!

This topic absolutely baffles me. I think the trait is actually seeking to complain about something more than actually not liking the show but still watching.

One of two things is going on. Either, like you said, people watch/listen to shows they hate or that they enjoy them but seek to complain about it for some reason. I think it is the latter, the former doesn't make sense.

The late late thread every Friday night is bewildering purely on the persistence of some to actually look forward to saying how bad it is going to be and then that it was worse than usual.

Technocentral

Tell me how wrote: »

Technocentral wrote: »

Listening to shows by people you despise then moaning about them is a bizzare Irish trait!! I only listen to/watch shows by people I like, there are other ways to catch up on current affairs affairs. Bizzare!!

This topic absolutely baffles me. I think the trait is actually seeking to complain about something more than actually not liking the show but still watching.

One of two things is going on. Either, like you said, people watch/listen to shows they hate or that they enjoy them but seek to complain about it for some reason. I think it is the latter, the former doesn't make sense.

The late late thread every Friday night is bewildering purely on the persistence of some to actually look forward to saying how bad it is going to be and then that it was worse than usual.

The odd comment about a presenter is understandable but saying how terrible that person is constantly and still listening is what I dont get.

Tell me how

Technocentral wrote: »

The odd comment about a presenter is understandable but saying how terrible that person is constantly and still listening is what I dont get.

You and me both.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

You and me both.

we have to allow it here on the Radio Forum because it's important to allow a variety of opinions on radio programmes, but yeah, it's a bit baffling. If you hate it so much don't tune-in? Simple.

Technocentral

Serious 80s synths there!

Technocentral

New New England!

meeeeh

Technocentral wrote: »

The odd comment about a presenter is understandable but saying how terrible that person is constantly and still listening is what I dont get.

In fairness sometime people have to listen to radio in the office. I worked with someone who listened only one thing on the radio - Joe Duffy. Oh the joy!

Anyway the children's hospital coverage seems to be going well for Newstalk because they barley cover anything else these days. Brexit? What Brexit? (saying that when you score 11/11 on The Times Brexit quiz aimed at Brits maybe that's a good thing ).

Tell me how

meeeeh wrote: »

In fairness sometime people have to listen to radio in the office. I worked with someone who listened only one thing on the radio - Joe Duffy. Oh the joy!

Anyway the children's hospital coverage seems to be going well for Newstalk because they barley cover anything else these days. Brexit? What Brexit? (saying that when you score 11/11 on The Times Brexit quiz aimed at Brits maybe that's a good thing ).

You must be one of the few people who think there isn't much coverage of Brexit?

Pat certainly has the childrens hospital between his teeth. He is not giving any credence to the explanations/excuses which have been issued on it.

Tell me how

Tell me how wrote: »

You must be one of the few people who think there isn't much coverage of Brexit?

Pat certainly has the childrens hospital between his teeth. He is not giving any credence to the explanations/excuses which have been issued on it.

I think Pat's diatribes on the Children's Hospital is a bit like Vincent Brown's crusade against the Bank Guarantee, before he retired.

I think both have been attempting to use their position to argue against a foolish decision which will be proven to be unreasonable, shoddy, and perhaps idiotic in the years to come.

I sometimes get tired of Pat's crusade against the St James's site, but in the long run, I dare say he will be proven correct. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there eventually a Tribunal to investigate this.

Tell me how

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I think Pat's diatribes on the Children's Hospital is a bit like Vincent Brown's crusade against the Bank Guarantee, before he retired.

I think both have been attempting to use their position to argue against a foolish decision which will be proven to be unreasonable, shoddy, and perhaps idiotic in the years to come.

I sometimes get tired of Pat's crusade against the St James's site, but in the long run, I dare say he will be proven correct. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there eventually a Tribunal to investigate this.

Yeah, I agree with the comparison. Maybe 'diatribe' is too strong a word but he certainly is not giving them any leeway.

I do think presenters (and certainly those of Kenny's and Brown's ilk) have a right to force an agenda in this respect. We would be pillorying them if they said that the government line had to be accepted without question.

A tribunal? For this? Oh, hell yes. Maybe the only thing which will prevent it is that a lot of information is coming out very quickly.

Remember the furore about the price of PWC's audit at 450K?
Even more jaw-dropping is the realisation that that figure is just 0.026% of the projected cost of the hospital.

Technocentral

meeeeh wrote: »

Technocentral wrote: »

The odd comment about a presenter is understandable but saying how terrible that person is constantly and still listening is what I dont get.

In fairness sometime people have to listen to radio in the office. I worked with someone who listened only one thing on the radio - Joe Duffy. Oh the joy!

Anyway the children's hospital coverage seems to be going well for Newstalk because they barley cover anything else these days. Brexit? What Brexit? (saying that when you score 11/11 on The Times Brexit quiz aimed at Brits maybe that's a good thing ).

Ask them to turn it off, unless there is staff consensus disruptive things like this should not be on.

meeeeh

It's not just Pat. Newstalk advertised coverage of the issue through all programmes and I think they consciously decided to dedicate a lot of programme space to it.

Ahwell

Just heard an ad for the "Peter Casey report" starting on the Pat Kenny Show next Tuesday. It's not very clear from the ad what the format of this report is going to be, we'll see I suppose.