nepotism in state broadcaster..

Mobile Dj

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

I am sure they are my friend...but Gogan and Byrne are tippin eighty years old..respected or not they should be retired.

Fanning is well in his fifties but tries to look like he is in his thirties...dosn't work pal.

And I never said that these people didn't deserve their jobs in RTE...just that they are now past it....normal retiring age is 65....move on lads make room for some younger folk.

Do I not have a point ....?

Remember that most presenters are sole traders/self employed with contracts so the 65 age limit (I think) does not apply.

touts

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

I am sure they are my friend...but Gogan and Byrne are tippin eighty years old..respected or not they should be retired.

Fanning is well in his fifties but tries to look like he is in his thirties...dosn't work pal.

And I never said that these people didn't deserve their jobs in RTE...just that they are now past it....normal retiring age is 65....move on lads make room for some younger folk.

Do I not have a point ....?

Say they did have a cull of every presenter over 65 in RTE and hired new graduates to replace them that would fill what, 3 or 4 slots? So extend it to cover all national stations and force out the likes of Pat Kenny and George Hook. Now we might get up to 7 or 8 jobs for the new graduates. Still won't solve the problem. So lets we sent in the guards to purge everyone over 65 from every local radio station in the country and that will probably just about get the whole class of 2013 jobs.

But what do we do next September when the class of 2014 start looking. Do we shoot every presenter over 60?

The fact remains we are talking about an industry with a small employment base in this country and low turnover of staff. Unless you have a real passion for the industry and a proven exceptional talent in say podcasting and local DJing then I'm afraid setting your heart on a career in Radio presenting is foolish and bound to lead to a high level of frustration.

P. Breathnach

touts wrote: »

Say they did have a cull of every presenter over 65 in RTE and hired new graduates to replace them that would fill what, 3 or 4 slots? So extend it to cover all national stations and force out the likes of Pat Kenny and George Hook. Now we might get up to 7 or 8 jobs for the new graduates. Still won't solve the problem. So lets we sent in the guards to purge everyone over 65 from every local radio station in the country and that will probably just about get the whole class of 2013 jobs....

The problem with accommodating all graduates is that some of them don't have a great deal of talent.

Neither do I think that all of those currently employed in broadcasting have sufficient talent.

I am very disappointed at how poor the major broadcasters are at discovering talented broadcasters, and then using them correctly. In a way, I get more cross about good broadcasters being wasted on the wrong sort of programme: it makes for worse programmes, and can ruin the reputation of a good broadcaster.

end of the road

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

why in the freek are the likes of Larry Gogan ,Dave Fanning and Gay Byrne still getting airtime on National airways

because their experienced compitent broadcasters, you don't have to listen to them if they bother you that much

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

so many talented and eager presenters cannot find a slot

while unfortunate, maybe some of them aren't what RTE is looking for.

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

Fcukin disgrace !

no its not

end of the road

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

I am sure they are my friend...but Gogan and Byrne are tippin eighty years old..

who cares, the BBC have broadcasters older and hey, they get huge listenership

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

respected or not they should be retired.

no they shouldn't, their pulling in the listeners.

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

Fanning is well in his fifties but tries to look like he is in his thirties...dosn't work pal.

what are you on about?

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

I never said that these people didn't deserve their jobs in RTE...

nobody knows what you said.

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

they are now past it....

yet their on the radio and your not

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

normal retiring age is 65....

and yet these lads are still working because they bring in listeners.

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

move on lads

i'm sure they will when their ready to.

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

make room for some younger folk.

why should they, if RTE finds some young presenters who will fit they will be given a chance, a, you know, some have been all ready

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

Do I not have a point ....?

no, it just sounds like the whining of someone who applied and was unsuccessful

Loafing Oaf

P. Breathnach wrote: »

I am very disappointed at how poor the major broadcasters are at discovering talented broadcasters, and then using them correctly.

I wonder about this too, but apparently it's not a commercially viable strategy to give a broadcasting gig to talented but unknown kids. Look at the way Newstalk keeps giving presenting jobs to middle aged and older people who have already made a name for themselves, sometimes in a totally different field. When Yates left because of his bankruptcy they were casting round for months before they came up with...Norah Casey. Presumably their market research had told them x thousand more people would tune in to the Breakfast Show just because yer one from Dragons Den was on it.

Mobile Dj

..

Mobile Dj

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

When Yates left because of his bankruptcy they were casting round for months before they came up with...Norah Casey. Presumably their market research had told them x thousand more people would tune in to the Breakfast Show just because yer one from Dragons Den was on it.

Come on.. Norah Casey on air because of the dragons den, doubt it as this lady is well established and respected in the business world,

I did hear her present and I found her to be worth listening to as she was well able take charge and debate any topics that came up.

Evan DietrichSmith

end of the road wrote: »

who cares, the BBC have broadcasters older and hey, they get huge listenership

no they shouldn't, their pulling in the listeners.

what are you on about?

nobody knows what you said.

yet their on the radio and your not

and yet these lads are still working because they bring in listeners.

i'm sure they will when their ready to.

why should they, if RTE finds some young presenters who will fit they will be given a, you know, some have been all ready

no, it just sounds like the whining of someone who applied and was unsuccessful

Eh... It doesn't mate.


To me it's a fair statement of what's happening on broadcast media, be it radio or television.

Other people with fresh outlook could well pull in listeners too.

Surely it's a corporate strategy from the service provider, stay stuck in the past,hold on to the tried and trusted performers and take no risk with newcomers.

Most people in management as I am would baulk at that strategy Nd form the opinion that they will run out of road in the long run.

Look at aviation.

Tried to hold the industry in a cartel and national carriers,but along came O'Leary and Ryanair who turned the whole setup upside down.

Same will happen with the broadcasting industry if the Neanderthals don't pull their heads out of the sand.

end of the road

Evan DietrichSmith wrote: »

Look at aviation.

Tried to hold the industry in a cartel and national carriers,but along came O'Leary and Ryanair who turned the whole setup upside down.

Same will happen with the broadcasting industry if the Neanderthals don't pull their heads out of the sand.

will it, how exactly, i don't see it happening, look at the UK, had many different radio stations (still do to an extent) but along came the big groups and started networking stations, then when global came a load of heritage brands would disapear forever to become heart or capital which provides mass market pap to the masses and provides nothing exciting and engaging to anyone, its just background music to listen to at work or in the car and thats it, if anything thats how the broadcast industry will end up here, the schedules for both stations include "celebrity" presenters, some who probably have no radio experience but are well known to some of the listeners at least, tried and trusted is the way the broadcast industry is now days, its **** but its not going to change.

A.J.Plumb

end of the road wrote: »

who cares, the BBC have broadcasters older and hey, they get huge listenership

no they shouldn't, their pulling in the listeners.

what are you on about?

nobody knows what you said.

yet their on the radio and your not

and yet these lads are still working because they bring in listeners.

i'm sure they will when their ready to.

why should they, if RTE finds some young presenters who will fit they will be given a, you know, some have been all ready

no, it just sounds like the whining of someone who applied and was unsuccessful

I find the tone of your post unnecessarily aggressive my friend.

I am entitled to my point of view as you are to yours.....

You harp on about "pulling in the listeners" and they do pull in the listeners, but somebody in a prime slot will always have listeners !

I can assure you my friend that I have no wish to be on radio...no ambitions in that area at all.

What i am concerned about is that a public body funded with my taxes is operating an unfair recruitment policy and rife with nepotism.

And lastly I am not "whining" as your post suggests...just putting a valid point of view

Loafing Oaf

Mobile Dj wrote: »

Come on.. Norah Casey on air because of the dragons den, doubt it as this lady is well established and respected in the business world,

I did hear her present and I found her to be worth listening to as she was well able take charge and debate any topics that came up.

But would she have got the gig if she was 'merely' a successful businesswoman who had never been on da telly? I thought she was ok on the Breakfast Show but I doubt any better than dozens of recent journalism graduates who, unlike her, really need the job.

As I said, there must be a solid commercial reason why NT keep hiring 'names', but their failure to groom in-house talent ultimately comes back to bite them: if, as rumoured in another thread, Chris is gonna take off to travel the world soon, they'll likely have the same scramble to replace him as they did when other presenters left the show.

end of the road

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

somebody in a prime slot will always have listeners !

not always

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

I can assure you my friend that I have no wish to be on radio...no ambitions in that area at all.

fair enough

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

What i am concerned about is that a public body funded with my taxes is operating an unfair recruitment policy and rife with nepotism.

it maybe unfair but their not going to axe their older presenters who pull in listeners to "give young people a chance" i'd imagine many of the commercial stations are reluctant to do the same, yes it may be unfair but we need to be realistic here.

A.J.Plumb

end of the road wrote: »

who cares, the BBC have broadcasters older and hey, they get huge listenership

no they shouldn't, their pulling in the listeners.

what are you on about?

nobody knows what you said.

yet their on the radio and your not

and yet these lads are still working because they bring in listeners.

i'm sure they will when their ready to.

why should they, if RTE finds some young presenters who will fit they will be given a, you know, some have been all ready

no, it just sounds like the whining of someone who applied and was unsuccessful

end of the road wrote: »

not always

fair enough

it maybe unfair but their not going to axe their older presenters who pull in listeners to "give young people a chance" i'd imagine many of the commercial stations are reluctant to do the same, yes it may be unfair but we need to be realistic here.

You certainly have a way with words Buddy !

Name me ant presenter in a primetime slot who does not pull in the listeners ?

Never wanted the to axe their "older presenters" merely cull 70/80 somethings like Gogan and Byrne.

And 50 somethings like Fanning trying to look edgy and grungy and act as he were thirty.

end of the road

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

Never wanted the to axe their "older presenters" merely cull 70/80 somethings like Gogan and Byrne.

but why should they axe Gogan and Byrne if their bringing in the listeners, Byrne is on lyric anyway and is well known, i'm sorry but their not going to axe well known presenters to give an unknown a chance unless their very very good.

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

50 somethings like Fanning trying to look edgy and grungy and act as he were thirty.

i don't think he's acting anything at all, he's a rock dj and is well known and respected for what he does

Evan DietrichSmith

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

You certainly have a way with words Buddy !

Name me ant presenter in a primetime slot who does not pull in the listeners ?

Never wanted the to axe their "older presenters" merely cull 70/80 somethings like Gogan and Byrne.

And 50 somethings like Fanning trying to look edgy and grungy and act as he were thirty.

I'd have to agree there AJ and pursue the point that you are making.

Any company which stands still and relies on tried and trusted output will ultimately fail.

Why?

Because not the presenter or broadcaster will change,but the audience profile will.

Look at it this way would the output of the 1980s and presentation style and format be acceptable today.

Don't think so even though Fab Vinnie was ahead of his time.

You have to think ahead especially when all is going well

That much maligned organisation the GAA are a case in point.

They could have stood still, their headquarters,Croke Park was fine ,held 75 000 and everything was kosher. Nobody was complaining.

But they thought ahead,sank huge amounts of money into building a 'world class' stadium and are now reaping the benefits.

So whilst the various analogies may not be totally analogous,the strategy is ,in my opinion,valid.

You gotta move with the times however comfortable the present may be

Mobile Dj

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

But would she have got the gig if she was 'merely' a successful businesswoman who had never been on da telly? I thought she was ok on the Breakfast Show but I doubt any better than dozens of recent journalism graduates who, unlike her, really need the job.

As I said, there must be a solid commercial reason why NT keep hiring 'names', but their failure to groom in-house talent ultimately comes back to bite them: if, as rumoured in another thread, Chris is gonna take off to travel the world soon, they'll likely have the same scramble to replace him as they did when other presenters left the show.

First point, Hard one to call she moves in big circles and would attract listeners.

Second point, NT by hiring names allow the show to hit the ground running, peak times would not be a good starting point for a newbie.

Loafing Oaf

Mobile Dj wrote: »

Second point, NT by hiring names allow the show to hit the ground running, peak times would not be a good starting point for a newbie.

Well Chris was pretty much thrown in at the deep end - was it when Conor Brophy left? - and that worked out ok. The broader point is, they don't seem to be making any sort of effort to groom new presenters in-house: whenever Yatest or Hook or PK is off its invariably Shane Coleman filling in. Surely they could give one of their reporters or researchers a crack at it, even just for a day? Have they any sort of plan for the not too far off day when Hook packs it in?

roran

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

I am sure they are my friend...but Gogan and Byrne are tippin eighty years old..respected or not they should be retired.

Fanning is well in his fifties but tries to look like he is in his thirties...dosn't work pal.

And I never said that these people didn't deserve their jobs in RTE...just that they are now past it....normal retiring age is 65....move on lads make room for some younger folk.

Do I not have a point ....?

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

Look ! It's not what you know it's who you know !

This is particularly prevalent in the world of broadcast media..why in the freek are the likes of Larry Gogan ,Dave Fanning and Gay Byrne still getting airtime on National airways..when so many talented and eager presenters cannot find a slot .

Fcukin disgrace !

You're right about the 'disgrace' element there AJ...only one word for your viewpoint - ageist!!

roran

Evan DietrichSmith wrote: »

Eh... It doesn't mate.


To me it's a fair statement of what's happening on broadcast media, be it radio or television.

Other people with fresh outlook could well pull in listeners too.

Surely it's a corporate strategy from the service provider, stay stuck in the past,hold on to the tried and trusted performers and take no risk with newcomers.

Most people in management as I am would baulk at that strategy Nd form the opinion that they will run out of road in the long run.

Look at aviation.

Tried to hold the industry in a cartel and national carriers,but along came O'Leary and Ryanair who turned the whole setup upside down.

Same will happen with the broadcasting industry if the Neanderthals don't pull their heads out of the sand.

I'm really behind you to use the system and acquire your own broadcast licence, implement your beliefs and sit back and laugh at the 'Neanderthals' as your listenership rockets...:-)

roran

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

I find the tone of your post unnecessarily aggressive my friend.

I disagree, when I read back over this thread, 'end of the road' only makes firm, logical points. Words like "fcuking disgrace" strikes me as a tad aggressive

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

I am entitled to my point of view as you are to yours.....

Agreed.

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

You harp on about "pulling in the listeners" and they do pull in the listeners, but somebody in a prime slot will always have listeners !

(!) I'm a bit lost of this one...

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

I can assure you my friend that I have no wish to be on radio...no ambitions in that area at all.

Understood.

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

What i am concerned about is that a public body funded with my taxes is operating an unfair recruitment policy and rife with nepotism.

Please provide plenty of examples if this 'rife' practice is as widespread as you infer.

A.J.Plumb wrote: »

And lastly I am not "whining" as your post suggests...just putting a valid point of view

Hmmm.....

More Music

goose2005 wrote: »

But surely it would be fairer, and better for the station and the listeners, to hire someone with proper experience, someone who had served their time and built their skills at a local/Internet station or in nightclubs and actually had the knowledge and ability to be a really good radio presenter? Rather than just the last guy's daughter.

Fairer yes, but stations want a ready made audience that a known name would pull in.

I don't know if Lottie is any good because I've never heard her, but the name would initially pull in more listeners than an unknown. They would then hope to hold and ultimately grow the listener base.

More Music

Liam92 wrote: »

Lottie Ryan has featured on RTÉ several times in the past and don't even deny this was not down to her surname. There are so many talented people out there who could attract listeners on radio/viewers on tv, yet they'll never receive the same opportunities. It's a pity.

Not disagreeing with this at all. That's my point, she's an unknown talent who got the gig because of her connection with RTE.

An unknown would not get an unadvertised gig like that unless they know somebody.

Loafing Oaf

More Music wrote: »

but the name would initially pull in more listeners than an unknown.

The surname yes. But then the asinine first name (is her actual name Charlotte?) would put as many off again...

More Music

Evan DietrichSmith wrote: »

.......That much maligned organisation the GAA are a case in point.

They could have stood still, their headquarters,Croke Park was fine ,held 75 000 and everything was kosher. Nobody was complaining.

But they thought ahead,sank huge amounts of money into building a 'world class' stadium and are now reaping the benefits.

Nobody could say the GAA stood still. They jumped for joy while sinking over €100 million of taxpayers money into the world class stadium.

Now to be fair it is class, and I love watching games for free in the media section while eating the free food. All at the taxpayers expense.

PS. I am working though.

Evan DietrichSmith

More Music wrote: »

Nobody could say the GAA stood still. They jumped for joy while sinking over €100 million of taxpayers money into the world class stadium.

Now to be fair it is class, and I love watching games for free in the media section while eating the free food. All at the taxpayers expense.

PS. I am working though.

Don't quite know what this has to do with the topic under discussion

touts

Loafing Oaf wrote: »

I wonder about this too, but apparently it's not a commercially viable strategy to give a broadcasting gig to talented but unknown kids. Look at the way Newstalk keeps giving presenting jobs to middle aged and older people who have already made a name for themselves, sometimes in a totally different field. When Yates left because of his bankruptcy they were casting round for months before they came up with...Norah Casey. Presumably their market research had told them x thousand more people would tune in to the Breakfast Show just because yer one from Dragons Den was on it.

Looking back at the sort of names that have been highlighted for replacement by new fresh college graduates and thinking about their radio shows and the content they normally cover it leads to an obvious question. Does anyone really think the listnership who tune in to the likes of Pat Kenny, Ivan Yeates, George Hook, Marian Finuchane, Cathal McCoille, Bobby Kerr, Norah Casey, Rachel English, Aine Lawlor, Matt Cooper, John Creedon, Gay Byrne etc etc give a flying **** what some talented 21 year old has to say about Crimea or their opinion on the latest Daft Punk MP3 download?

You're targetting the wrong presenters and the wrong shows to make your case. You need to be focused on the stations and shows that target a younger listnership but I suspect you'll find the hosts there are all considerably younger than the ones you are targetting.

Evan DietrichSmith

touts wrote: »

You're targetting the wrong presenters and the wrong shows to make your case. You need to be focused on the stations and shows that target a younger listnership but I suspect you'll find the hosts there are all considerably younger than the ones you are targetting.

Not true ,what I see as being targeted are people in their 80s and such still being used.
That doesn't mean replace them with 20 year olds.

Move the 30/ 40 year olds up the chain and thus make room for the younger ones.

What serious discussion shows on what stations target a younger listenership,as a matter of interest?

touts

Evan DietrichSmith wrote: »

Move the 30/ 40 year olds up the chain and thus make room for the younger ones.

So you would move someone who has spent 10 or 15 years playing music on 2fm into a news/talk slot on RTE1 based purely on the fact that they are 30/40 and need to make room for young presenters?

Mobile Dj

touts wrote: »

So you would move someone who has spent 10 or 15 years playing music on 2fm into a news/talk slot on RTE1 based purely on the fact that they are 30/40 and need to make room for young presenters?

Welcome to the real world of entertainment .. past it when you hit mid 30s...

Twentysomethings write you off at mid 30s and laugh at you in your forties, will be interesting when they hit this age themselves..