Oct 21st- Stifling the discussion

[schticknz]

Wow, you go away for a couple of days...

I'd like to congratulate everyone in this thread for COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY MISSING THE POINT of my intial post. Well done all, excellent reading skills.

Now here it is again, with subtitles in slow motion: I'm not complaining about David's opinions, or his vocalness, nor am I championing either of the franchises mentioned. What I am saying is, if David is going to throw a fit every time someone even mentions something REMOTELY connected to either franchise, even if it was only mentioned because it was the simplest and most direct corollary (ie beaming, galactic empire, whatever) then that's counter-productive.

The example isn't being brought up just because the person mentioning it is a hopeless trekkie wearing mis-matched spock ears and a uniform his mommy made him (okay it might be but I'm assuming there's SOME kind of screening process for the guests on the show), it's because the recognition is instantaneous and universal, allowing the conversation to proceed. That procession is halted if David has to take a time out for one of his Lucas-fuelled temper tamtrums. On a show like the paracast, which is limited for time, I would think that sort of criticism would at least be understood if not appreciated. That's it, that's all. Everybody clear? Besides, it's a waste of perfectly good Biedny ranting!

Ahhh ... I see what you mean now ... sort of

Oh, and just a quick thought: is the paracast really limited for time?? I kind of thought that the interviews were edited to fit in adverts and things, and that the raw interviews were longer than what we (actually) hear??? Of course, I could be (and am frequently) totally wrong.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Wow, you go away for a couple of days...

I'd like to congratulate everyone in this thread for COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY MISSING THE POINT of my intial post. Well done all, excellent reading skills.

Now here it is again, with subtitles in slow motion: I'm not complaining about David's opinions, or his vocalness, nor am I championing either of the franchises mentioned. What I am saying is, if David is going to throw a fit every time someone even mentions something REMOTELY connected to either franchise, even if it was only mentioned because it was the simplest and most direct corollary (ie beaming, galactic empire, whatever) then that's counter-productive.

The example isn't being brought up just because the person mentioning it is a hopeless trekkie wearing mis-matched spock ears and a uniform his mommy made him (okay it might be but I'm assuming there's SOME kind of screening process for the guests on the show), it's because the recognition is instantaneous and universal, allowing the conversation to proceed. That procession is halted if David has to take a time out for one of his Lucas-fuelled temper tamtrums. On a show like the paracast, which is limited for time, I would think that sort of criticism would at least be understood if not appreciated. That's it, that's all. Everybody clear? Besides, it's a waste of perfectly good Biedny ranting!

Ahhh ... I see what you mean now ... sort of

Oh, and just a quick thought: is the paracast really limited for time?? I kind of thought that the interviews were edited to fit in adverts and things, and that the raw interviews were longer than what we (actually) hear??? Of course, I could be (and am frequently) totally wrong.

Partly wrong. We sometimes slim down an interview a little to fit the time slot, but usually it's a matter of getting rid of long pauses and a rare retake.

 

[schticknz]

Wow, you go away for a couple of days...

I'd like to congratulate everyone in this thread for COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY MISSING THE POINT of my intial post. Well done all, excellent reading skills.

Now here it is again, with subtitles in slow motion: I'm not complaining about David's opinions, or his vocalness, nor am I championing either of the franchises mentioned. What I am saying is, if David is going to throw a fit every time someone even mentions something REMOTELY connected to either franchise, even if it was only mentioned because it was the simplest and most direct corollary (ie beaming, galactic empire, whatever) then that's counter-productive.

The example isn't being brought up just because the person mentioning it is a hopeless trekkie wearing mis-matched spock ears and a uniform his mommy made him (okay it might be but I'm assuming there's SOME kind of screening process for the guests on the show), it's because the recognition is instantaneous and universal, allowing the conversation to proceed. That procession is halted if David has to take a time out for one of his Lucas-fuelled temper tamtrums. On a show like the paracast, which is limited for time, I would think that sort of criticism would at least be understood if not appreciated. That's it, that's all. Everybody clear? Besides, it's a waste of perfectly good Biedny ranting!

Ahhh ... I see what you mean now ... sort of

Oh, and just a quick thought: is the paracast really limited for time?? I kind of thought that the interviews were edited to fit in adverts and things, and that the raw interviews were longer than what we (actually) hear??? Of course, I could be (and am frequently) totally wrong.

Partly wrong. We sometimes slim down an interview a little to fit the time slot, but usually it's a matter of getting rid of long pauses and a rare retake.

Ahh ok ... thanks for that ... and thats fair enough. I just thought I would ponder my thought out loud to no one in particular and see what would happen . I'm glad to have got an answer from the horse's mouth ... so to speak.

 

[Schuyler]

I see, it's all clear now. Who am I to express my opinions on my own show? How DARE I do this, what a complete asshole I have become.
......
Got it. Thanks for clearing that up for me. What the fuck was I thinking. If only I drank beer, I could be like all the other good believers. Fuck the ginger ale, I need beer.

Nope. I don't think you've "got it" at all. I don't think anyone is saying you can't have or express an opinion, especially on YOUR show, a fact we all know and appreciate, and which we are reminded of on a regular basis. Perhaps you are in the Howard Stern camp of journalism where you think expressing yourself as you have above in such a mature manner is totally cool. Your vocabulary of 4-letter words is so impressive! Perhaps your listening audience will grow just so they can hear you swear and act out on YOUR own show. Worked for Howard.

I'm not sure, however, that it is a majority opinion on a show that ostensibly has a subject other than the host. Howard Stern's show is about Howard Stern. the Paracast is about what? David Biedny? I had thought it had content of a serious nature. To hear the show peppered with this immature, egotistical, childish ranting keeps it from being professional, in my opinion, and may very well keep it from growing to any appreciable extent. The real question is, will new people to the show think it is run by grown-ups and stay around for more episodes, or will they think it sounds like yet another kiddie blog where an acne-faced fourteen year old is trying to impress his newly nubile gum-smacking frizzy-blonde girlfriend how much testosterone he has between his ears.

I like the show, mostly, and hope it gets better. If it gets better and attracts more listeners, then advertising revenue can go up to make the show stronger. Whether it does is totally up to the hosts and the hosts' ability to understand and use critcism to make the show better, assuming they want to. Maybe they just see it as a play toy; I don't really know.

So, yeah. It's your bat. It's your ball. It's your playfield. It's your bleachers. It's your microphone. It's your everything. You own it lock, stock, barrel, and key. You're IN CHARGE. It would be too bad if no one wants to play with you, though. If you want to play ball, you need a team and you need spectators. It's not as if the Paracast traffic is burning up the wires, is it?

So do what you want.