What You Think | radioinfo

What You Think

User Opinion Story
Anthony The Koala
27 August 2019 - 12:07pm
I fully agree with Jason that Alan Jones "...made an art form of ensuring his listeners understand his point of view by using frustration and passion to get his point across....".

The device Alan Jones uses is called "rhetoric", a communication method that aims to persuade the listener. Alan is not the first person in the world to use that technique. It's a technique that is over 2500 years old and comes from Ancient Greece and is used by "...training orators, lawyers, counsellors, historians, statesmen, and poets..." including radio commentators.

source: https://rhetoric.sdsu.edu/resources/what_is_rhetoric.htm
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhetoric

Justin Gleeson, SC, former Solicitor General to the Commonwealth wrote a book about rhetoric. In the blurb for his book, rhetoric the art of "...persuasion is also a professional technique that must be perfected properly ..."

source: https://www.federationpress.com.au/bookstore/book.asp?isbn=9781862877054

In the context of broadcasting, applies research with the technique of persuasion. One need not agree with his narrative, but it has been consistent. For example the current issues on his program are climate change and the supply of base-load power. It is a very reality that coal-fired power stations are closing down, but are not replaced with the like-equivalent power capacity of a reliable source of energy. I don't want to debate climate change and coal-fired power stations, suffice to say that Alan Jones rightly speaks in the language of urgency. What Alan says is very valid.

While Alan Jones does not have to completely reduce his tone of 'urgency' and how wrong a politician or decision maker is he does need to reduce rather insulting language such as "...put a sock down her/his throat...." Since insults are a very small proportion of the 'rhetoric', they can be deleted from the discourse.

Thank you,
Anthony from the exciting town of Belfield, home to Australia's first Pizza Hut in 1970 and Belinda Green, Miss World 1972.

On commercial radio Money Talks...
Anthony The Koala
27 August 2019 - 9:18am
I just had a look at survey 5 for Sydney's radio ratings, at https://www.gfk.com/fileadmin/user_upload/dyna_content/AU/Documents/Share_Summary_Reports/Metro/2019/Survey_5/GfK_Summary_Report_Sydney_Survey_5_2019.pdf

I prognosticated that Steve Price may do well and he did, at 11.6%, a small drop from 11.9%. Similarly, John Stanley's move to the evening shift 2000-0000, his ratings were 13.4%, a drop of 0.9%, but ahead of 702 ABC (2BL) at 9.3%.

Yes there was an overall drop at 2GB, but it remains market leader.

Nevertheless, I still hold the decision for Chris Smith's removal is WRONG.

Thank you,
Anthony of exciting and dynamic Belfield
After 7 years in darkness, Steve Price sees the light
27 August 2019 - 9:07am
Jones has made an art form of ensuring his listeners understand his point of view by using frustration and passion to get his point across. This triggers an emotive response.

Those who like him call it passion, those who don’t call it offensive.

In the past, those who don’t were the minority, social media made them stronger. Now they are being heard loud and clear.

However, if Jones was to tone down his comments, would those who love him still do so? They are rusted on because they like what they hear.
On commercial radio Money Talks...
Anthony The Koala
26 August 2019 - 7:01am
It is not the first time that social media conducted a campaign against Alan Jones' program. The "Destroy The Joint"/"Sack Alan Jones" were social media campaigns conducted against the Alan Jones program in 2012. It was reported then that 2GB lost $80000 in revenue as a result of the social media campaign:
Source: https://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article/only-rationality-will-destroy-alan-jones--joint#
Source: https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/revealed-the-faces-behind-the-alan-jones-pursuit/news-story/31b8cb3c8e55f0335cf1a4337e72fa1e?

After a few weeks of 'ad-free' programming, the advertisers returned to 2GB. The current social media campaign appears to have more bite with half the advertisers withdrawing their custom from 2GB. The advertisers may well resume their sponsorship in a few weeks. Time will tell.

These advertisers are not there for charity. They're out there to attract customers to their business against others in the same category of product or service. If for example Mercedes Benz ('MB') withdraw their advertising, does that mean people will buy an Audi or BMW because of the absence of MB's advertising? MB or any advertiser will want to tout for business by advertising somewhere else. Or it could resume advertising on 2GB.

It is not what you say, rather how you say it. This includes behaviours within the employ, "...put the person in a chaff bag", "....Juliar" outside the employ but identifying with the employer, "....her father died of shame..."

The behaviours are like the school behaviour discussion I made elsewhere on this site. It was where I said that student's behaviour of a (private) may well affect the reputation of the school within and outside school hours. It follows that an employee's behaviour affects the reputation and turnover of a business entity within and outside working hours.

Thus I agree with the author that if a particular politician or policy maker is WRONG, you can still say that the person is wrong without inflammatory remarks. If a commentator disagrees with a leader by saying "....sock...it...down her throat" or by hounding and humiliating a CEO for not publicising a horse race on a public building then the commentator deserves a rap on the knuckles and deserves a loss of advertising revenue.

Instead, the above examples could have been dealt with the commentator saying "....the NZ Prime Minister was wrong in this policy.....and other explanations" and ".....what is the policy of projecting a commercial event such as a horse race on the Opera House....who is responsible for this policy not projecting a horse race....." respectively.

However it is inconsistent of management of wanting to dismiss Alan Jones in for further 'transgressions' of tact in 2019 when it was not dismissing Alan Jones for the same conduct in 2012. It is management policy on the fly. I mentioned that in another posting the inconsistent attitudes towards Arch Tambakis (RIP) for calling the Opposition Leader Mr John Howard a liar and Alan Jones calling the Prime Minister Julia Gillard "..Juliar". The former lost his job, the latter kept his.

On the other hand, should the whim of the crowd of social media be the 'high moral ground' of what goes to air and what does not go to air. The current 2019 social media campaign by the "Sleeping Giants" of 2019 as well as "Destroy The Joint" of 2012 may well be valid.

BUT just because opinions of social media does not accord with the political views of the commentator, should the radio station and/or commentator be boycotted because the commentator does not agree with global warming/climate change/climate emergency or any social or moral issue decided by the social media activists?

The result is that the social media activists could just as well be guilty of bullying as the commentator.

Thank you,
Anthony of exciting Belield
On commercial radio Money Talks...
Anthony The Koala
24 August 2019 - 11:45am
Although MMM dominates overall ratings in Newcastle, there is a distinct pattern Monday to Friday between 0900 and 1200. 2HD's highest rating program is the John Laws show at 8.6%. That is 2HD is the highest rating talk station in the weekday 0900-1200 period. Either side, of this timeslot, the ratings resemble the rest of the day.

While not privy to the ratings, there should be a breakdown of the ratings on the weekends in the afternoon between 1200-1800. There is continual irregularity to the format: sometimes its sporting coverage and sometimes it's talk.

Source, first table of this article, magnified at

Anthony of exciting Belfield
Triple M consolidates its lead in Newcastle : GFK survey 2
23 August 2019 - 8:13pm
Dear TK
There are only a handful of comments in the history of our site that we didn't publish and that was because they were abusive or defamatory.
We don't moderate comments for editorial bias reasons, so we are happy to publish your comment without alteration.
Comment any time, your views are just as valid as others.
SCA's Grant Blackley talks programming and business strategies
23 August 2019 - 1:52pm
Wow! More music and a single presenter in breakfast! How innovative. (What, you mean what it was like in the 70's? Oh.)

The reason the station wasn't hitting targets in breakfast was simple: crap 'talent'.

Oh yeah, lots of programming strategy here. Play more music, talk less. How ever did he come up with this idea. Just amazing! Ha!

(of course this comment will not likely be 'published' due to editorial bias, but hey, maybe you could just send it to Brad for a laugh!)
SCA's Grant Blackley talks programming and business strategies
Anthony The Koala
22 August 2019 - 5:16am
Dear StJohn,

E-Waste: It reminds me of the 'warning' on many electrical goods "no user-serviceable parts inside".

Reducing CO2: In the context of broadcasting, the biggest emitter of CO2 are the ABC who use transmitters of 50kW for metropolitan MW stations when commercial stations' transmitters are 5kW. The same could be said of some rural ABC transmitters at 100kW when the local commercial station is on 2kW. That is for AM transmitters only. That does not take account that ABC's FM transmitters consume more power than its commercial counterparts especially in rural areas.

HF DRM-capable transmitter: StJohn, when you mentioned that BA have at least one DRM-capable HF transmitter. Since 2017 the ABC has abolished SW transmissions via Radio Australia ('RA'): transmissions are delivered by satellite and IP streaming. With the DRM-capable HF transmitter, would DRM HF transmissions resume? That would be a matter of ABC policy. Consideration should be made especially for our Asian and Pacific neighbours in regards to the cost of DRM receivers. The corollary is that with DAB+ receivers still more expensive than the ubiquitous AM/FM despite 10 years of DAB+. Similarly how much is a DRM+ will it cost for a DRM receiver for citizens of our Asian and Pacific neighbours compared to the ubiquitous AM/FM/SW receiver?

StJohn, thank you again for informing us,

Anthony of exciting Belfield
Commenting on digital radio
Wendy Jane
21 August 2019 - 12:05pm
What a fabulous and life-affirming story. Well done to Hope 103.2 for bringing hope to so many. Sydney’s Hope 103.2 listeners restored sight to more than 8000 people
21 August 2019 - 12:26am
Yesterday, I have written to the ACMA to bet them to publish on their website when they will publish the submissions for "The future delivery of Radio in Australia".

Analog TV were ubiquitous and we switched to digital, why not radio? Just remember that there is a lot less electronics in a radio than a TV. Remember that analog radio particularly AM radio is causing lots of carbon dioxide to be produced in Australia except Tasmania, who use hydropower.

The reason e-waste is recycled is the value of the recovered metals. Remember that many phones are replaced not only to change the generations, remember that CDMA, 2nd generation phones have been recycled because the telco's stopped running those networks as well as fashion.

As far as upgrading transmitters is concerned, there are still plenty of old transmitters which use a lot more electricity than new ones even in analog modes. Also old transmitters it is hard to get parts. So compare the damage to the environment of carbon dioxide caused by increased electricity consumption over many years.

The through the air loss of a signal for DAB+ is 12 times that for band 1 DRM+ The comparison between DRM+ in the FM band is 4 times that for band 1.

Remember that the patent cost decreases per receiver, depending on the number of receivers produced by a company. This is why an analog switchoff date needs to be set to get the public to buy many receivers quickly.

The patent has runout on COFDM modulation so the CSIRO no longer gets payments from manufacturers including Wifi manufacturers. The CSIRO sued computer manufacturers for not paying patents, and were paid more than $400 million.

Commenting on digital radio


radioinfo ABN: 87 004 005 109  P O Box 6430 North Ryde NSW 2113 Australia.  |  All content © 2012. All Rights Reserved.