Offline
Interesting Toronto Daily Star column from September 9, 1967, showing how music directors were taking over the musical programming from the jocks:
Offline
now THAT's a newspaper!
Offline
That was the turning point for me.
Started as a jock in 61 and we picked all of our own music.
Anything in the library was playable on air and new product was played almost immediately or discarded.
When I went to my second station in 67, there was a "music director" and a playlist.
We were permitted to choose 3 records an hour, the rest had to be from the playlist.
The problem was, the "music director" also owned the local record store and wouldn't allow us to play any new releases until he had them in stock for sale.
I became very bored and hated some of the stuff we were forced to play and moved into news, both radio and tv and engineering full time.
I ended my DJ days in 68.
Offline
Just scanned this article and stopped when I came to "CHUM's program director Bob McAdorey..." If the writer can't get that right, then what else did he screw up on? Mac was a great CHUM DJ and Music Director. He was NEVER CHUM's Program Director.
Offline
Mike Cleaver wrote:
The problem was, the "music director" also owned the local record store and wouldn't allow us to play any new releases until he had them in stock for sale.
What an ass...
Offline
Doug Thompson wrote:
Just scanned this article and stopped when I came to "CHUM's program director Bob McAdorey..." If the writer can't get that right, then what else did he screw up on? Mac was a great CHUM DJ and Music Director. He was NEVER CHUM's Program Director.
I'm guessing that the writer was actually a woman, given that her name is Marci. I can also understand someone who isn't in the business getting music director mixed up with program director ... I used to work for a high-profile organization that is often in the news, and tried to be understanding of mistakes like this that the media would make about us. It happens very easily.
Offline
Didn't bother to check for the name of the writer as she screwed up on Mac's title, so it was tainted as far as I'm concerned...even if it was 1967.
The only 'things' we couldn't pick for years after I got in were the current/rotating new 'hits'. All the gold? We picked form the category up next on the clock. Specials? Yup. Features? You betcha? Timely songs for the artists birthday or if they were in the news for any number of reasons? A given.
When that stopped. ... When dumb in/dumb out computers came into play it was FAR less compelling for music lovers. Given that at least 85% of the [music stations] programming is music...it HAS to be right. Computers and music/program directors who can't tell original recordings from same artist but new version songs are killers for a station's credibility. It simply HAS to be right.
Offline
Doug Thompson wrote:
Didn't bother to check for the name of the writer as she screwed up on Mac's title, so it was tainted as far as I'm concerned...even if it was 1967.
And I'd say that similarly, she didn't bother to check to see that she had gotten McAdorey's title right, plus she might have been working to a deadline. Never worked in the media other than doing the news at my high school radio station, but I sure understood how that could easily happen to anybody and in any era. Don't even think that The Stickler would find fault with this one.
Last edited by Lorne (May 13, 2017 8:54 pm)
Offline
Sorry, The Stickler be damned. An error is an error. A reporter's job is to get it RIGHT. With all the various interviews in this article, I doubt there was a short deadline. It was a feature piece that would have taken a while to compile. It's a simple thing to call CHUM and ask for Mac's title. Would have taken 30 seconds if that.
Offline
Same one?
Offline
Doug Thompson wrote:
Sorry, The Stickler be damned. An error is an error. A reporter's job is to get it RIGHT. With all the various interviews in this article, I doubt there was a short deadline. It was a feature piece that would have taken a while to compile. It's a simple thing to call CHUM and ask for Mac's title. Would have taken 30 seconds if that.
Agreed. Either the writer or the editor should have checked.
ig wrote:
Same one?
She has been looking after herself all these fifty years; a regular Marilyn Denis
Offline
ig wrote:
Same one?
Yes, I would imagine so. I realized long ago (I think back when I was in my 20s, which is when I started working for the TTC), that it was easy for media people to get mixed up when they were reporting about things that they didn't really know about, and that I should be understanding about this. Ironically, I eventually ended up assisting the TTC's media relations staff in helping make sure that they got things right ... the TTC is a complicated organization, and it was easy for us to get things wrong about ourselves. So re the article, I can very easily understand how a young reporter who didn't understand the distinction between PD and MD could get them mixed up, without thinking that this invalidated her entire article.
Offline
Lorne, you continue to make excuses for a reporter's work.
I disagree. Facts NEED to be checked.
Like I said earlier, it would have taken less than 30 seconds to check McAdorey's title. It soured the entire article for me. Who knows what quotes or other facts she got wrong if she got a simple thing like a title wrong.
Offline
Doug Thompson wrote:
Lorne, you continue to make excuses for a reporter's work.
I disagree. Facts NEED to be checked.
Like I said earlier, it would have taken less than 30 seconds to check McAdorey's title. It soured the entire article for me. Who knows what quotes or other facts she got wrong if she got a simple thing like a title wrong.
As a long-time reporter and editor for The Canadian Press and now an author, I agree with Doug 100 per cent.
I've made my share of mistakes, and it just kills me every time I do so. If I was this writer, I'd be quite unhappy with myself. Nothing against this particular writer, who I don't know, but it's so easy to check facts. Back then, all you had to do is pick up the telephone, nowadays you've got the web. But really, fact-checking is just as important in writing as the writing itself.
Last edited by Dale Patterson (May 17, 2017 12:52 pm)