Sean Moncrieff - Newstalk

quintana76

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

Could have sworn I heard him on the radio last Saturday.

Yes.Prerecorded and neutered.

Yer Da sells Avon

quintana76 wrote: »

Yes.Prerecorded and neutered.

I read somewhere that he prefers to prerecord the show because he doesn't like getting up early.

quintana76

Hapax Legomenon wrote: »

I read somewhere that he prefers to prerecord the show because he doesn't like getting up early.

Suits all agendas then.

bertsmom

I agree I think Sean is becoming too much to be listening to theese days. I always used to love the quirky nature of his show but I feel now he has just become an insufferable bore.
One thing is for sure he won't lose his job for NOT being pc. He just makes every topic so bland lately. I am a 36 yr old woman but for God's sake he just goes on the same agenda every day about how women are not treated/paid fairly in a different industry every day Or Donald Trump. It's too bloody much it's almost like he is disappointed to be a middle class white male and he thinks all women are just unfairly treated heroes. His behaviour on the radio is a bit odd now but every now and again there is a flash of the brilliance of the old style of the show.
I do like Sean I just wish he would leave the preachy pc crap to Ciara Kelly at lunchtime when I don't have to listen.

Irish Wolf

I haven't listened in a good few months, just wondering if there's any timing correlation to the "downhill slide" on his NT show, with Sean's column in the IT, and Communicorp's ban on IT journos?

Maybe, perhaps, maybe, he's not getting the guests he would have usually got? Maybe?

bertsmom

Irish Wolf that could be a possibility but for me it's more his oh so socially acceptable personality blended with his condescension towards any guests or texts with different views on immigration or politics etc.

Irish Wolf

Mother of God! Listening back on his show. The most offensive thing so far is Henry McKean!

jooksavage

Irish Wolf wrote: »

I haven't listened in a good few months, just wondering if there's any timing correlation to the "downhill slide" on his NT show, with Sean's column in the IT, and Communicorp's ban on IT journos?

Maybe, perhaps, maybe, he's not getting the guests he would have usually got? Maybe?

Don't think so. I listen to Moncrief most days and dont think the type of guest has changed much. Theres a perception now that the presenter has become a boorish agenda-pusher but he's worn his liberal credentials on his sleeve as long as ive been listening (12 years) - he even had a proper go at me for a clumsily-worded tweet in 2009 so I dont think thats particularly new.

If the show is on a "downhill slide", his JNLR figures aren't - book-on-book up 2000 listeners in October and another 3000 in Feb. (Before anyone says it - yes the figures were higher in 2016 but that was when his show was 50% longer)

anthonyjmaher

The ads for Moncrieff encapsulate everything I hate about the show.
"We'll be covering the Royal Wedding - CONDOMS" shock !
"We're all off to worship the devil during the break" shock !
The most ironic thing is that Moncrieff is the least likely man to say ANYTHING that unsafe or un-PC. I understand that a lot of people like him, but I wish they'd get rid of him so that I had a bit of choice in the afternoon.

jooksavage

anthonyjmaher wrote: »

The ads for Moncrieff encapsulate everything I hate about the show.
"We'll be covering the Royal Wedding - CONDOMS" shock !
"We're all off to worship the devil during the break" shock !
The most ironic thing is that Moncrieff is the least likely man to say ANYTHING that unsafe or un-PC. I understand that a lot of people like him, but I wish they'd get rid of him so that I had a bit of choice in the afternoon.

His show ia followed a 3 hour slot presented by a liberal-bating, proudly chauvinistic, self-proclaimed Trump fan. I think youre being adaquately catered for.

Akrasia

Moncreiff is plenty 'offensive' enough to the right kinds of people, like trump fans and religious zealots who are given an uncritical platform on plenty of other radio shows.

The kinds of people who are offended by others not being offensive are the funniest to offend.

Ol' Donie

It always amuses me when "he never says anything un PC" is a criticism, as if he's up to something.

Shows how daft boards can be at times.

Richard Hillman

You'll know Moncriefs opinion on something before he even opens his mouth. He is very predictable, very creepy, bordering sinister.

mrsdewinter

anthonyjmaher wrote: »

The ads for Moncrieff encapsulate everything I hate about the show.
"We'll be covering the Royal Wedding - CONDOMS" shock !
"We're all off to worship the devil during the break" shock !
The most ironic thing is that Moncrieff is the least likely man to say ANYTHING that unsafe or un-PC. I understand that a lot of people like him, but I wish they'd get rid of him so that I had a bit of choice in the afternoon.

I hardly ever get to listen to Moncrieff. Is he still doing that thing of coming out with some oh-so-outrageous line? Honestly, it's so forced. It feels like a teenage boy trying to shock one of the nuns back when I was in school in the Eighties.
Condoms??? Where are my smelling salts...

humberklog

I've said it plenty of times on here before- the half hour opening interview/chat is badly missing.
The show starts off too quickly into a more disjointed and essentially tougher listen. Even though he has regular segments and contributors the dye is already cast and can feel a bit lost.

I know a lot of the first half hour guests were regular contributors- O'Doherty, Brunker, Courtney, Mullins etc. But that familiarity mixed with one off guests set a more stable tone for the rest of the show.

I find it a harsher, less familiar and less likeable show these days.

Akrasia

Richard Hillman wrote: »

You'll know Moncriefs opinion on something before he even opens his mouth. He is very predictable, very creepy, bordering sinister.

sinister?

Can you give me an example of a non sinister broadcaster who I can compare him to?

Conservative

Post #22 In this thread is a gripe with how Sean responds to texters he disagrees with. It's hardly a recent thing..

I disagree with him on a lot of things but some of the texts he receives are idiotic.

Probably still my favourite show on Newstalk overall.

BarryD2

bertsmom wrote: »

I do like Sean I just wish he would leave the preachy pc crap to Ciara Kelly at lunchtime when I don't have to listen.

+1

quintana76

He doesn't really preach like the insufferable Ciara Kelly. He sort of infers that this is what all the cool kids are doing and you are an outsider or a bit slow if you don't get it too. Ergo: his dismissal of any dissenting texters etc as either moronic or malicious. Suggests a severe case of living in the famous "media bubble" to me.

Akrasia

quintana76 wrote: »

He doesn't really preach like the insufferable Ciara Kelly. He sort of infers that this is what all the cool kids are doing and you are an outsider or a bit slow if you don't get it too. Ergo: his dismissal of any dissenting texters etc as either moronic or malicious. Suggests a severe case of living in the famous "media bubble" to me.

But a lot of the dissenting texters are in fact, moronic or malicious so that's ok

2smiggy

Ester seems to like anything with ethnic minorities or female directors.

Ya it's strange the amount of films she has not seen, for a movie critic !!

quintana76

Akrasia wrote: »

But a lot of the dissenting texters are in fact, moronic or malicious so that's ok

So you are saying that it is therefore ok to treat the rest of the dissenting texters who do not fit in with your definition of "moronic and malicious" as if they were below contempt scum ?
Go meet Sean you should get along famously.

quintana76

2smiggy wrote: »

Ester seems to like anything with ethnic minorities or female directors.

Ya it's strange the amount of films she has not seen, for a movie critic !!

The surprise is that anyone is surprised by this. She is just reflecting the ethos of the narrow circle in which she resides.

Richard Hillman

Akrasia wrote: »

sinister?

Can you give me an example of a non sinister broadcaster who I can compare him to?

Bob Hope.

Akrasia

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Bob Hope.

A dead American comedian?

anthonyjmaher

jooksavage wrote: »

His show ia followed a 3 hour slot presented by a liberal-bating, proudly chauvinistic, self-proclaimed Trump fan. I think youre being adaquately catered for.

I cant believe that anybody would think that that describes Yates. He is even safer than Moncrieff at this stage. Probably cos he needs the money. Everything he says is in that same facetious, jocose, dramatic tone, so that he can always argue that he wasn't being serious. I used to like Ivan when he was with Chris, and I think he really does need somebody else with him on this show. Will be interesting to see his ratings.

ShagNastii

humberklog wrote: »

I've said it plenty of times on here before- the half hour opening interview/chat is badly missing.
The show starts off too quickly into a more disjointed and essentially tougher listen. Even though he has regular segments and contributors the dye is already cast and can feel a bit lost.

I know a lot of the first half hour guests were regular contributors- O'Doherty, Brunker, Courtney, Mullins etc. But that familiarity mixed with one off guests set a more stable tone for the rest of the show.

I find it a harsher, less familiar and less likeable show these days.

It was a real palate cleanser and I think that's exactly what it was suppose to be.

It was always "light chat". Often about little or nothing. Something reletively trival or fluffy plucked from the papers. "I see Chris Evans has been named spectacle wearer for the year. You're a spectacle wearer Brenden (Courtney). Do you like your glasses?" or "We have Amanda Brunker hot off her Oxegen apperance at the weekend. What the feck was that Amanda?" etc etc.

I remember one week Andrea Gilligan (I think) was filling in for Moncrieff and Ronan Mullen was the guest for the first half hour. She was instantly out the traps ready to give it to him in the neck about his well reported stance on abortion. He rowed her back and explictly stated "that's not what this segment is about" or something to that line.

quintana76

jooksavage wrote: »

His show ia followed a 3 hour slot presented by a liberal-bating, proudly chauvinistic, self-proclaimed Trump fan. I think youre being adaquately catered for.

Just proves it's all in the eye of the beholder. This is Ivan Yeats you are talking about? You make him sound like Rush Limbaugh or Alex Jones. Ivan Yeats? Liberal baiting? Scourge of the PC brigade? We must be listening to a different show or live in an alternate universe.

Flighty13

Ivan has clearly had some voice training while he was away that now makes me cringe when I hear his voice, not like the bit of reparti we used to get in the good old days

jooksavage

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Bob Hope.

I think youre joking so im only reluctantly going to point out that BH would be 115 years old if he was still alive.