Sean Moncrieff - Newstalk

quintana76

jooksavage wrote: »

Ok I'll say it. I'm not a fan of Movies & Booze. Couldn't give a toss about beer or wine and Esther isn't the most engaging or knowledgeable film critic.

I think you're completely wrong on everything else though, 80% of the time his show is the best thing on radio.

Agree with both statements with the qualification that he can be very sneery sometimes with people who have different opinions to him. He is also a media luvvie and is so right-on in his views that he is almost left-on. (Matt Cooper for some reason seems to have recently decided to compete). Allowing for that it is an excellent show.

Say Your Number

The piece he did today on the dancing plague of 1518 is the reason why it's my favourite show on radio.

Call me Al

Say Your Number wrote: »

The piece he did today on the dancing plague of 1518 is the reason why it's my favourite show on radio.

I love his show. It's great listening with random interesting segments and interviewees, especially when you've got curious children in the car for the school run or whatever who like listening to stuff. The kids and I listened to that dancing plague section in the car earlier and we had a great chat about it as a sketch about it had been on an episode of Horrible Histories they'd watched.

CatFromHue

humberklog wrote: »

Sean having a good pop at the Traveller advocacy lady there (Senator Collette Kelleher). Fair play to him.

She didn't want to, and didn't, answer any of his questions.

She just repeated her press release piece.

alaimacerc

jooksavage wrote: »

Ok I'll say it. I'm not a fan of Movies & Booze. Couldn't give a toss about beer or wine and Esther isn't the most engaging or knowledgeable film critic.

Esther's just terrible. We generally learn whether she likes a movie... and that's honestly about it. Though she does continue talking, to be sure. Maybe she should try doing it sober? Arena's film reviews are considerably better, if only because we get two people that have actually watched it, and are able to chuck their poorly constructed thoughts at each other, rather than one person opining in a vacuum. Though there's hardly a Kermode among the lot of them.

The booze segment is a bit of a mixed bag, depending on who's on, and whether I'm of a humour for their multifarious nonsenses. The usual "beer" guy is semi-OK. Tomás is a full-scale parody of a wine "expert", which does sometimes work strictly at a comedy level. (I'm more grain than grape, to declare my own bias.) The various others we get are points in between.

alaimacerc

Pussyhands wrote: »

And someone should tell Moncrief that reading out listeners text doesn't make you funny, the person sending the text was funny!

As a semi-regular listener, here to say the person sending the text is almost always not funny. It'd make my worry about his listenership... if I didn't already have this thread for that.

I find his voice terribly grating aswell.

He does have a bit of a Sarcastic Resting Tone quality to him.

alaimacerc

quintana76 wrote: »

He was speaking as if maintaining the burka was on an equivalence with gay rights or similar.

Setting aside the general gist of the Weekly Right-Wing Post on this segment -- in this case almost a complete do-over of the week before -- can't help but notice how much work the word "maintaining" is doing here.

evolving_doors

• Stop saying 'apropos'... and especially 'apropos of nothing'.
• Most of his material is just ripped straight out of Reddit's TIL, especially fact of the day.
• The movie reviewer nearly always reviews s**t blockbuster superhero movies then slates them for being far fetched:rolleyes:, ya thanks for that.
• Stop questions coming in about non-alcoholic wine and non-alcoholic beer, they're all just pi55. Everyone should know that.
• Stop getting annoying yanks on who drone on for 30 minutes for Sean to have a snooze.
• Enough of the sarcastic retorts from people's texts. Either respond to them or don't read them out.

alaimacerc

evolving_doors wrote: »

Stop getting annoying yanks on who drone on for 30 minutes for Sean to have a snooze.

Not a very reality-based gripe. He's a pretty interactive and engaged interviewer, and he's certainly not shy about cutting people off if he reckons they've overstayed their interest-to-be-had. Your attention span may of course vary!

Enough of the sarcastic retorts from people's texts. Either respond to them or don't read them out.

I'm guessing this is one of those "oops, have just said the exact opposite of what I meant" demands. Or is making some very unclear distinction between a "response" and a "sarcastic retort".

i71jskz5xu42pb

alaimacerc wrote: »

Setting aside the general gist of the Weekly Right-Wing Post on this segment -- in this case almost a complete do-over of the week before -- can't help but notice how much work the word "maintaining" is doing here.

I always wonder the mental gymnastics the supposed "small government"/"anti nanny state" brigade have to do to be OK with the government telling people what they can/cannot wear when they're nipping down to LIDL.

alaimacerc

Ahmad Kind Pasteboard wrote: »

I always wonder the mental gymnastics the supposed "small government"/"anti nanny state" brigade have to do to be OK with telling people what they can/cannot wear when they're nipping down to LIDL.

Slightly reminds me of the proverbial Libertarian Incel, who believes the only job of the government should be to issue him with a a girlfriend.

I suppose "government should do all the things I find especially convenient at present, and no other things at all" might qualify as "small", relatively speaking, but seems to struggle badly on the Categorical Imperative front.

Ahwell

quintana76 wrote: »

Agree with both statements with the qualification that he can be very sneery sometimes with people who have different opinions to him. He is also a media luvvie and is so right-on in his views that he is almost left-on. (Matt Cooper for some reason seems to have recently decided to compete). Allowing for that it is an excellent show.

Couldn't referring to someone as a "luvvie" with views "so right-on" that he is "left-on" be considered quite sneery? Plus, wouldn't someone who "is so right-on in his views that he is almost left-on" be a person that you, personally, would have "different opinions to"? So aren't you, in this post, doing exactly what you are accusing Moncreiff of doing on his radio show.

alaimacerc

Sean making a bit of a basic error, there. "It's not one of those whataboutery situations."

If he spent any time here, he'd realize that all situations were whataboutery situations!

2smiggy

i know it's been said before, but there has to be someone better than the woman who reviews the movies nearly every Friday. Woeful !!

Alicano

2smiggy wrote: »

i know it's been said before, but there has to be someone better than the woman who reviews the movies nearly every Friday. Woeful !!

Yep. I've caved and have to say she is not commercial radio standard at all. I heard her last effort. Very very poor and almost amateur stuff. Uhms and eh's and stop-start unsure of herself presentation. Unlike many of the other contributors who have all the prep done, just wait for Sean's link and they're up and running with prepared content. Don't care much for movies, but her presentation/contribution is very poor. Especially highlighted if the booze guest is well prepared and knows their topic (which is more often than not).

quintana76

That girl on "what's going on in the World" has got everything the wrong way around. It is a cruel thing to ask refugees to return to Syria and their homes with the war over she says. Would have thought refugees were not immigrants. She seems to think so. Boris's "rant" on the burka was insulting to the woman themselves even though the burka was vile.Dont get that. not really surprised though I'll bet that was Shona with her SJW logic ( which means no logic)

skylight1987

Alicano wrote: »

Yep. I've caved and have to say she is not commercial radio standard at all. I heard her last effort. Very very poor and almost amateur stuff. Uhms and eh's and stop-start unsure of herself presentation. Unlike many of the other contributors who have all the prep done, just wait for Sean's link and they're up and running with prepared content. Don't care much for movies, but her presentation/contribution is very poor. Especially highlighted if the booze guest is well prepared and knows their topic (which is more often than not).

I agree with your post .in fact I now change to another station when she is on, which is a pity as i love movies but she is unprofessional has an annoying voice along with very limited knowledge of the subject she speaks about.

delaad

skylight1987 wrote: »

I agree with your post .in fact I now change to another station when she is on, which is a pity as i love movies but she is unprofessional has an annoying voice along with very limited knowledge of the subject she speaks about.

I'm on board with that:D

kunst nugget

skylight1987 wrote: »

I agree with your post .in fact I now change to another station when she is on, which is a pity as i love movies but she is unprofessional has an annoying voice along with very limited knowledge of the subject she speaks about.

As bad as she is, she's not half as bad as Jennifer Gannon on the Last Word.

5555555555

skylight1987 wrote: »

I agree with your post .in fact I now change to another station when she is on, which is a pity as i love movies but she is unprofessional has an annoying voice along with very limited knowledge of the subject she speaks about.

You should switch over to BBC5 if movies are your thing. Mark Kermode and Simon Mayo do a movie review show on Fridays from 2 to 4.

Snake Plisken

5555555555 wrote: »

You should switch over to BBC5 if movies are your thing. Mark Kermode and Simon Mayo do a movie review show on Fridays from 2 to 4.

Yes I usually watch his reviews on YouTube every Friday night, it just goes to show how inept Esther is on the movie slot. The chap from the Indo who does the movie reviews on Dave Fanning's weekend show is pretty good and knows his stuff.

BPKS

Sean can be a tool sometimes.

Read out a text where somebody mentioned a SJW.

Sean pretended first he didnt know what it stood for. Then went onto say that if it stands for a social justice warrior, then that is something that the alt right call people who are not in the alt right.


Like I said, he can be a tool sometimes.

Grolschevik

BPKS wrote: »

Sean can be a tool sometimes.

Read out a text where somebody mentioned a SJW.

Sean pretended first he didnt know what it stood for. Then went onto say that if it stands for a social justice warrior, then that is something that the alt right call people who are not in the alt right.


Like I said, he can be a tool sometimes.

What he said sounds bang on to me.

jooksavage

BPKS wrote: »

Sean can be a tool sometimes.

Read out a text where somebody mentioned a SJW.

Sean pretended first he didnt know what it stood for. Then went onto say that if it stands for a social justice warrior, then that is something that the alt right call people who are not in the alt right.


Like I said, he can be a tool sometimes.

Jesus do people still use that term? Not sure it's the exclusive preserve of the alt right but it certainly used to be a go-to for boring, unimaginative arseholes when they had already exhausted the rest of their vocabulary in a wearingly predictable text about "tree-hugging snowflakes".

BPKS

jooksavage wrote: »

Jesus do people still use that term? Not sure it's the exclusive preserve of the alt right but it certainly used to be a go-to for boring, unimaginative arseholes when they had already exhausted the rest of their vocabulary in a wearingly predictable text about "tree-hugging snowflakes".

I suppose its a lot easier saying something like snowflake or SJW rather than expanding the theory about how the Political Correctness movement has ended up with its proponents now essentially becoming more "fascist" in their own way than the dictatorial, right wing, fascist movement they rallied against.

This theory was brilliantly explored in one of my favourite songs almost 25 years ago. I think of that song during practically all non-music radio programmes I listen to.

quintana76

BPKS wrote: »

Sean can be a tool sometimes.

Read out a text where somebody mentioned a SJW.

Sean pretended first he didnt know what it stood for. Then went onto say that if it stands for a social justice warrior, then that is something that the alt right call people who are not in the alt right.


Like I said, he can be a tool sometimes.

That is the only problem I have with him. He has stereotypical right-on media luvvie views and sneeringly dismisses anyone who slightly veers from his peer dictated consensus. It is a pity he is so narrow minded and unoriginal in his views as his show can be excellent. It is his only failing.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

He handled that interview with the woman who'd done the maths for the Friends "pivot" bit with very bad grace today, I thought.

alaimacerc

Cameron Sharp Equalizer wrote: »

He handled that interview with the woman who'd done the maths for the Friends "pivot" bit with very bad grace today, I thought.

She was a pretty bad interviewee, to be fair. Not only does she suffer from the usual mathematician's vice, of "in order to solve this problem, let us first make it vastly more complicated", she did a poor job of explaining it. And worst of all, was dull with it.

Aoibheann O Sullivan might have managed to do something with her; most interviewers would struggle.

alaimacerc

jooksavage wrote: »

Jesus do people still use that term? Not sure it's the exclusive preserve of the alt right but it certainly used to be a go-to for boring, unimaginative arseholes when they had already exhausted the rest of their vocabulary in a wearingly predictable text about "tree-hugging snowflakes".

The alt-right isn't all that "alt" any more, really.

You'd think that a Bush-era type trying to brand themselves as a "compassionate conservative" might have thought twice about using it.

alaimacerc

quintana76 wrote: »

Boris's "rant" on the burka was insulting to the woman themselves even though the burka was vile.Dont get that. not really surprised though I'll bet that was Shona with her SJW logic ( which means no logic)

I thought her segment was pretty poor, personally. The regular guy is a lot better, just at the level of being able to construct sentences, and broadcast them in a listenable manner. The chap with the hyphen that you complain about every single week, and twice when this is the issue, mind.

But her point there was entirely reasonable. You can think the burqa is a bad thing, and be opposed to criminalising it -- as for example Borinson himself supposedly was arguing. And likewise, you can disagree with the wisdom of people's clothing choices, without resorting to dehumanising and denigrating slurs aimed at them.