Newstalk Megathread 22/08/16 to date

[Deleted User]

Mayson Gifted Kindle wrote: »

And replace it with what, though?

A quiz show, whether with comedians and public figures, or callers. Better still, a mix of both.

It's very engaging, and people love quizzes. The BBC does some very good daytime quiz shows which we could take inspiration from.

There's a big market out there for this, I really believe so.

Realistically, it could only be one day a week. I admit that is a flaw in my plan.

meeeeh

hamburgham wrote: »

I liked it with George.

They tried couple of phone ins with him and they were excruciating. They dropped them till Ciara took over and she was miles better talking to people. It's an awful format and Hook was brutal at that, he was OK when he was doing the Right Hook at Lunchtime. However as a format it's not comparable to the show now.

hamburgham

meeeeh wrote: »

They tried couple of phone ins with him and they were excruciating. They dropped them till Ciara took over and she was miles better talking to people. It's an awful format and Hook was brutal at that, he was OK when he was doing the Right Hook at Lunchtime. However as a format it's not comparable to the show now.

You’re right, I’d forgotten that.

Probably not a popular suggestion but I think Alan Shatter could be an interesting presenter. He’s very intelligent and no doubt well informed on a wide variety of topics. I somehow doubt he’s an Instagram addict.

I like to listen to shows where I can either learn something or be entertained (Moncrieff).

mzungu

Mayson Gifted Kindle wrote: »

But Liveline is very popular, which is why i assume they want to run a similar show at similar time. Some people may like the format, but not the presenter, so this gives them an alternative option.

Liveline is part of the public consciousness at this stage. But, IMO, it does the whole phone-in show shtick it a lot better than Lunchtime Live. A superior product, if you will.

NT can do better than trying to copy Liveline.

hamburgham

mzungu wrote: »

Liveline is part of the public consciousness at this stage. But, IMO, it does the whole phone-in show shtick it a lot better than Lunchtime Live. A superior product, if you will.

NT can do better than trying to copy Liveline.

Yes, they do it better. I can’t stand Joe but I was trying to figure out what is it that makes it better than Lunchtime. Is it that Joe is much smarter or genuinely interested so can make more out of the material?I bet he reads a lot and I don’t get the impression Andrea does.

[Deleted User]

hamburgham wrote: »

You’re right, I’d forgotten that.

Probably not a popular suggestion but I think Alan Shatter could be an interesting presenter. He’s very intelligent and no doubt well informed on a wide variety of topics. I somehow doubt he’s an Instagram addict.

Shatter was great on the airwaves. Very intelligent guy, quick to think on his feet from his experience of legal practice. His political career is clearly finished, I bet he'd take a gig at Newstalk. Maybe a breakfast show with himself and Mary O'Rourke.

Imagine waking up in bed beside that pair.

hamburgham

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Shatter was great on the airwaves. Very intelligent guy, quick to think on his feet from his experience of legal practice. His political career is clearly finished, I bet he'd take a gig at Newstalk. Maybe a breakfast show with himself and Mary O'Rourke.

Imagine waking up in bed beside that pair.

Don’t give me nightmares.

leath_dub

Leo clearly doesn't believe a word coming out of his own mouth on the NT breakfast show

hamburgham

hamburgham wrote: »

Yes, they do it better. I can’t stand Joe but I was trying to figure out what is it that makes it better than Lunchtime. Is it that Joe is much smarter or genuinely interested so can make more out of the material?I bet he reads a lot and I don’t get the impression Andrea does.

I find Joe to be very blatant about picking sides and, especially in the recent case of the Bank of Ireland "reverse mortgage" loans episodes, made it far too clear that the show is about encouraging people to whine and moan, than to acknowledge anything factual. Really annoyed me.


One thing I will say about Andrea, is that she at least makes an effort to try to be unbiased, or not make her bias as blatant as Joe.

EmmetSpiceland

Mayson Gifted Kindle wrote: »

One thing I will say about Andrea, is that she at least makes an effort to try to be unbiased, or not make her bias as blatant as Joe.

She’s also good at announcing when she’s got “skin” in the game, usually when the topic is hospitality lockdown.

whisky_galore

Andrea's spot turned into a magnet for phone-in whingers today.

mzungu

hamburgham wrote: »

Yes, they do it better. I can’t stand Joe but I was trying to figure out what is it that makes it better than Lunchtime. Is it that Joe is much smarter or genuinely interested so can make more out of the material?I bet he reads a lot and I don’t get the impression Andrea does.

It's multifaceted. But one reason would be that Liveline has always (to this listener) run the gauntlet between serious and silly. Joe has a way of prodding his guests in a direction that works for both. He ups the ante on the serious / misery when needed, and at other times, he does a Columbo when some caller phones in with a bizarre theory. It's the tried and tested formula. When Lord Boucher Hayes* fills in, he does pretty much the same thing, albeit in a different accent. While some might argue it allows the everyday Joe and Jane their chance to participate in the public sphere, it's usually a case of the great unwashed getting a chance to vomit out whatever thought happens to be in their head at that particular time. However, this is offset by the fact that no matter how neutral JD and LBC come across, you just know they are thinking of how to prod the caller in the right direction for maximum effect.

On the other hand, I think Andrea is simply too nice for that kind of schtick. I honestly think she feels for a lot of her callers, so even when they come out with absolute drivel, she has zero desire to gently up the ante like they do on Liveline. This means you can get some good segments where sometimes the commentary is insightful (it is rare, though) but there is never the feeling that things might kick off like they often do on Liveline.

This is why NT need to change the format. Andrea is good, they just need to take a few risks and try something different whilst at the same time catering to her style of presenting.


*Although, he would not go as deep into the misery as Joe.

Mr.CoolGuy

Is this a potential career ender by Mick Wallace? He's comparing the Uigher situation to us giving out about Mícheál Martin

meeeeh

It always surprises me who people vote for...

whisky_galore

Wallace gobbling like a startled turkey when challenged.

2smiggy

Moncrieff on a Thursday afternoon used to be great. TV on the radio. Looked forward to it every week. Not sure what monstrosity has replaced it or who thought it was a good idea

meeeeh

2smiggy wrote: »

Moncrieff on a Thursday afternoon used to be great. TV on the radio. Looked forward to it every week. Not sure what monstrosity has replaced it or who thought it was a good idea

They just rejigged the running order. I think it's now on Mondays.

whisky_galore

2smiggy wrote: »

Moncrieff on a Thursday afternoon used to be great. TV on the radio. Looked forward to it every week. Not sure what monstrosity has replaced it or who thought it was a good idea

A pair of idiots giving poor advice.

BPKS

whisky_galore wrote: »

A pair of idiots giving poor advice.

Its a brutal slot and the two regular contributors are really dislikable.

I never used to tune into Moncrieff on a Monday but would always turn over from 3 to 4 on a Thursday to enjoy the TV slot.

Any idea what time the TV slot is on a Monday as its not 3-4 anyway.

whisky_galore

BPKS wrote: »

Its a brutal slot and the two regular contributors are really dislikable.

I never used to tune into Moncrieff on a Monday but would always turn over from 3 to 4 on a Thursday to enjoy the TV slot.

Any idea what time the TV slot is on a Monday as its not 3-4 anyway.

The odd time it's funny when they violently disagree on each other's advice.

2smiggy

BPKS wrote: »

Its a brutal slot and the two regular contributors are really dislikable.

I never used to tune into Moncrieff on a Monday but would always turn over from 3 to 4 on a Thursday to enjoy the TV slot.

Any idea what time the TV slot is on a Monday as its not 3-4 anyway.

I believe it's moved to 2-3 pm on a Monday , clashing with the Joe Show

[Deleted User]

I think Esther McCarthy is sufficient as a single film-reviewer, they don't need two reviewers in Movies and Booze. And no offence to the second reviewer, but every review is always a bit OTT. Today, Michael Gandolfini's resemblance to his father James Gandolfini was so uncanny (??? it's his father) that it was described as "scary" and "unnerving".

I love that Movies and Booze slot, never had to switch the station before.

Del.Monte

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

I think Esther McCarthy is sufficient as a single film-reviewer, they don't need two reviewers in Movies and Booze. And no offence to the second reviewer, but every review is always a bit OTT. Today, Michael Gandolfini's resemblance to his father James Gandolfini was so uncanny (??? it's his father) that it was described as "scary" and "unnerving".

I love that Movies and Booze slot, never had to switch the station before.

I catch the movies and booze segment occasionally and the booze element is so pretentious - they probably all grew up on Blue Nun like the rest of us.

[Deleted User]

Del.Monte wrote: »

I catch the movies and booze segment occasionally and the booze element is so pretentious - they probably all grew up on Blue Nun like the rest of us.

There was a woman reviewer who used to do the booze aspect, she was fun. You're right, though, I'm not keen on the wine reviewers either. Could be nice if they had a chef on, instead, and still do a booze review, but with dinner ideas; that would especially have been helpful during the worst of lockdown.

4Ad

I catch the movies and booze segment occasionally and the booze element is so pretentious - they probably all grew up on Blue Nun like the rest of us.

I used to love Tomas Clancy, so intelligent and a lovely voice..

https://www.newstalk.com/podcasts/movies-and-booze-on-moncrieff/movies-booze-tomas-clancy-special

Moncrieff also had a food/cooking section with Paolo Tullio (RIP), it was brilliant, occasionally he even mentioned food !! He had so many great stories...

Moncrieff was very upset after both men died..

EmmetSpiceland

Am I the only one who likes Fionnuala Jones’ input?

4Ad

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Am I the only one who likes Fionnuala Jones’ input?

Yes...

BPKS

Del.Monte wrote: »

I catch the movies and booze segment occasionally and the booze element is so pretentious - they probably all grew up on Blue Nun like the rest of us.

I like the beer nerd.

His laugh makes me laugh.

EmmetSpiceland

4Ad wrote: »

Yes...

I’m just not too “into” the wine parts. I’ve only, ever, enjoyed one recommendation, the Bellows Rock Shiraz 2013.

I just find Fionnuala breaks it up a bit. She’s funny enough and doesn’t take it too seriously. I, actually, think she should have her own “segment”.

whisky_galore

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I’m just not too “into” the wine parts. I’ve only, ever, enjoyed one recommendation, the Bellows Rock Shiraz 2013.

I just find Fionnuala breaks it up a bit. She’s funny enough and doesn’t take it too seriously. I, actually, think she should have her own “segment”.

Is this the girl with all the "goss?"
Best in small doses.
I really couldn't care less what famous people do.