I complimented Gary Radnich Tuesday for his one-on-one with Lowell Cohn on KNBR. It was old-school Gary. Vintage Gary and all the reasons why some of his more long time observers were suddenly once again glued to the radio.
Radnich won't like to hear this, (maybe) but his forte on radio, at least from this vantage point, is the most basic broadcast pedigree: the interview technique. He's always been very good on that front and its a shame he didn't do a lot more, whether on TV or radio, where his acumen works the best.
His ten-minute bit with Cohn was one of his best in recent months. He can elicit some fairly funny, spontaneous, candid, and yes, blunt assessments from guests, (like Cohn, for example;) better yet, he brings out same from those unlike a Cohn, (who doesn't need a cue to speak his mind) who may give the usual banal, boring responses, but will open up big time if prodded well by Radnich. On that front, Gary delivers and, to use his words, "it's good radio."
It's the "other stuff", the endless wink-wink, false-humor banter/shtick with Dan Dibley, who seems to think that the fake-seriousness-bit is funny, that wears on you. The repeated reliance on "sidekicks" Dibley and Patrick Conner, at times, funny, but of late, forced and maddeningly devoid of any semblance of humor, that ruin the pace of the show and adds nothing to the program.
This is not a knock on Radnich' players, merely an honest assessment of what works and what doesn't work. The tone of the show is dictated by the interviews and occasional Tony Bruno segments, not the banter with Dibley and Connor. They don't add anything, they detract. It's quite evident if you listen.
Callers are good, but too often they destroy the pace of the proceedings and that's not good. Of course, guests like Cohn are hard to produce on a daily basis, but then again, any decent writer or personality is better fodder for Radnich than "Joe from Livermore." That part of the program has run its course.
Of course, coming from this corner, the idea that Gary is better with the interviewing tool might be met with significant indifference, but the reality is I'm right. And everyone, including Radnich himself, knows it.
I dont think he's nearly the likeable person he wants people to think. He treats callers like cattle unless they are effusive with admiration and praise..but those who dont agree with him-he couldnt give a damn. He cant hang up fast enough on those who have anything honest to say.
ReplyDeleteThen theres that weird thing he does to boost his self esteem-he takes adavantage of his loyal audience by going into subjects only he has any real interest in. And it seems to make him feel better if he does that to flaunt a big win of a local team by launching into his stream of consciousness and word association to open his show-on Orlando basketball or the Kardashian girls.
Its his way of saying "Im such a bigshot I can talk about cow dung for an hour and get paid and have worshiping fans"
I've seen Radnich talk as sincere as any actor-and I knew the real facts and can tell you Gary can lie right through his teeth and never blink while passing the Maury Povich lie detector with flying colors.
And that is all why I dont see much of his show anymore. He just rotates what I wrote 9-12.
But,thanks to Comcast-you cant avoid the guys mug. A match made in hell.
I think one fo the big reasons that callers muck up the proceedings is that Gary doesn't allow a lot of discourse. The callers are his foils, in much the way that Conner and Dibley are. All Gary wants is the callers to be entertaining, shich seems to take precedent over everything. However, with Gary forcing his humor and the callers trying to keep up, it is repetitive, boring and unfunny at times.
ReplyDeletePhoto Caption:
ReplyDelete"You see this? That's how much credibility I have left in this Market. If that..."
The problem is that Gary’s formulaic approach is tired. He does not seem able nor willing to become “serious”. He is preoccupied with dumbing down the show in order to attract the “younger demographic”. He is under the impression that in order to survive he needs to conduct the show in a loud, obnoxious and juvenile way which is a shame because he can do very good interviews as you noted. I’m not saying he needs to turn into the sports version of William F. Buckley but he needs to balance the show. I think he could take a cue from Bruno’s who who is a master at balancing his act. He can be funny but he is also very good at placating the serious sports fan. Hell he even knows about wine, I’ll never forget last year when he made a reference to a “fine and flinty Chablis”. The guy is a connossieour!
ReplyDeleteRadnich is way too old to be juvenile and boorish 95% of the time on the show. I’ve been tuning out as of late because I’ve grown tired of his act. I only tune in for the Bruno segment and then it’s Bye bye Salinas!
I agree that the 'shtick' of playing up the good cop/bad cop routine with Dibley, and constantly 'wink-wink, nudge-nudging' his way through several segments of semi pop-cultural bloviation gets a bit tiring, but I'd say that it's his over reliance on it, not the mere use of it, that is the problem. Before, when these tongue-in-cheek moments would play out, they added color to his interviews and more meaningful talking. Now, they are the main substance, with the sports and the interviews being the all-too infrequent break from the norm.
ReplyDeleteI don't see the point of constantly targeting Radnich, though, as if his failure to produce riveting radio daily is an affront to the genre. Most people who write on blogs (or comment on them) engage in shadenfreude, so it's not surprising to see many in here taking pot-shots at him as being "irrelevant" and "out of touch." That's not to say those comments are lacking accuracy, but I'm sure he has a fair amount of fans who enjoy what he does in the media. If they didn't, he wouldn't continue to have such a presence on the broadcast airwaves.
Would I like to see him do more interviews like he did with Cohn? Absolutely. But I'd also like to read stuff about him and the industry without the sense that there is some sort of animosity or disdain towards him. He has his flaws. We all do. But, unless something has changed dramatically in how he's handling things, I don't need to be reminded it at every turn.
2:34- But we are talking KNBR where they insist Bob Fitzgerald and the other guy get high ratings. Yet,I havent seen a post of support for that show anywhere. Heck,I saw a post on KNBR's own twitter where a close friend of an employee remarked how obnoxious those two were that day.
ReplyDeleteSo, with KNBR its not popularity as much as selling the local teams. Just as Fitz was found out to have his KNBR salary paid by the Warriors and not KNBR,I wouldnt doubt Radnich gets some Giants money,or Comcast the way he shills..who knows where under the table he's being paid? or by whom?
The juveniles that work with Radnich must have been having their diapers changed during the Cohn interview because the sound drops were non existent.
ReplyDelete6:04 -
ReplyDeleteI don't doubt that there's a fair amount of influences from local teams, especially since KNBR and CSN Bay Area are partly owned by the Giants, but what does that have to do with Rich constantly jabbing at the yammer-fest between Radnich and his young 'producers'?
I get that it can be annoying, and even said as much. My point is that constantly complaining about the same thing over and over again is equally annoying in its own way. It's not critical, in the academic sense, at all. I think Rich makes a great point that the interview is a strength of Radnich, and that he would be better off doing that. To me, Rich sort of shoots his own foot by then resorting to the same, tired 'criticisms' of how annoying Dibley and PCon are.
I like this blog for the moments of insight into the media world, and the pertinent news. While it's Rich's prerogative to keep beating the same dead horses with his sidebar commentary on the likability or crappiness of certain programs, I don't think those types of posts give him an edge so much as they sound like he has axes to grind. That's all I'm saying.
As Lowell Cohn noted, this is still a must read for those with a real interest in the local media market, but I'm just commenting on what I feel makes it must read vs. what I think detracts from that quality.