Something That Happened.

For a couple of months now, I've been voluntarily participating in a 'Net radio venture. It's been an interesting project, to say the least; it's a talk radio station run by two fellows, one who comes across as a rather egocentric and cynical fellow (who I'll refer to throughout this post as "The Engineer"), the other gentleman exhibiting a mild-mannered and positive aspect. (I won't be mentioning the latter fellow again in this post, since he's not the subject of this particular rant/venting session.) The Engineer (or cynical fellow) comes across, while "on the air", as a likeably rash though often inconsiderate -- as one listener recently put it -- "asshole". Though the latter moniker may seem rather harsh, I tend to agree with the sentiment. His on-air personality, though often entertaining (and therefore, "likeable"), comes across as assuming, scornful, and intolerant of others. He makes rash assumptions about his guests, his co-hosts (that is, the hosts of other shows on the station, myself included), and -- most surpringly -- about some of his listeners, and then proceeds to deride these folks with sarcastic pronouncements about them. Somewhat like a conservative Howard Stern, but with a less sophisticated comedic manner.



There are many radio personalities who adopt this manner. Rush Limbaugh himself has mastered the persona of the sarcastic neo-conservative broadcaster, and he's built quite a career out of it. The problem with this fellow I'm "working" with -- besides his sarcasm being more transparently hateful than funny at times -- is that he carries his manner everywhere, inserting it into all aspects of the station he's engineered. In other words, he makes rash assumptions about how the station should be run, without seeming to take into account some of the most fundamental details. His presumptuousness directly affects his relationships with the station's show hosts. When something goes wrong, The Engineer is quick to scorn, blaming others rather than taking time to consider the shortcomings of the technology he's working with (or the way he's engineered the station). While professing on-air that the station is actively being developed by the station's community of show hosts, and that we are all "building this station together", off-air he rarely takes into account his associate's suggestions. While his style may be entertaining on-air, his intolerance of other's opinions introduces a level of instability to the operation of the station.



I'll give you an example. The Engineer's attitude toward others seems predicated upon their absolute agreement with his views. So if you disagree about a particular way things are handled at the station, or if you make a suggestion about how technology can being used to benefit the station in some manner, or if you state your concern about the station's system for scheduling shows, or if you make just about any attempt to provide some valuable and constructive criticism regarding just about any aspect of the station's engineering, your views will undoubtedly be hastily discarded and scorned. A fellow who is no longer "employed" by the station was unhappy with the lack of appropriate training The Engineer provided him with (a fact I can attest to). The Engineer seemed unwilling to take the time to properly demonstrate how to use the broadcast technology. To most station managers, it would seem fundamental, the need to provide new show hosts with an adequate amount of information about the technologies required to broadcast their programs. It's true that the technologies being used are not all that difficult to employ once you've learned how to repurpose them for broadcast purposes -- yet there are a variety of mishaps that can occur, especially when a technology is not used for its designed purpose. Yet The Engineer seems to assume that all his new show hosts have been using the very same technology for broadcast purposes prior to their stint at the station. This lack of foresight is demonstrative of The Engineer's inability to manage some of the more crucial aspects of running a 'Net radio station.



As for the former show host mentioned in my example above: he was thoroughly derided after his trial run at the station. (Regrettably, I was involved in much of this contemptuous mirth, which I've detailed in a prior post.) Based on my own personal experience with The Engineer, I would guess that the fellow was also jeered at during his tenure at the station, the lack of support probably exacerbating his frustration with the station. It is difficult for me to know for certain, since I was far-removed from the situation, and not yet a show host on the network. Yet, though I don't know exactly how he was treated during the short time he was broadcasting on the station, I do know that the attitude The Engineer has adopted in regards to the situation is one of "some have what it takes; others don't" -- an attitude he prefers to uphold rather than to realize his own shortcomings in providing adequate information to new show hosts.



Perhaps, in the related example, The Engineer exhibited more laziness than scorn. It's possible he doesn't understand that being more demonstrative in certain aspects of the station's operation would be helpful to his associates. What's important to note is that our engineer, who would be quick to point out that "we all wear many hats here at the station", fails to recognize his own shortcomings in some of those areas. It's much easier for him to drop a show host or two (or three, or four...) and to insert replays of his own shows in their time slots than it is to accept his own role in failing to provide all the necessary details to assist them. Failing to provide them with adequate preparation in the first place, he adopts an attitude of disappointment in their presentations, shortly followed by scorn which he then uses as material in his own broadcasts. Sadly, the station's hosts (and listeners) suffer, because while The Engineer is able to continue broadcasting his own program, the station's schedule becomes increasingly saturated with either repeats of The Engineer's own daily show or stale podcasts scraped from around the 'Net.



As I mentioned at the beginning of this post: it's been an interesting project, to say the least.

Technorati Tags: attitudes, behavior, personalities, relationships, work, running+a+business, working+together, something that happened