I got a note from the editorial team at Transom yesterday, rejecting my three Joe to Go readings for placement on their web site. They said:
Bummer. So I wrote them back, asking if I can try again, and the answer was “Of course.” I’ll probably try a longer piece, as that’s what they’ve been putting up on their site.
This rejection is a bit of a bummer since I’m hosting a meeting at my house on Sunday to do some initial brainstorming for a Real Joe radio show. It would’ve been nice to have a little momentum from Transom going into it. Ah well, what can I expect, it’s my first try. They’ve only put up very experienced people’s pieces thus far.
I started giving them a few pointers on their message boards this week since they relaunched them using the same platform I’m using, Web Crossing. I plan to continue to hang out there, as long as I have radio aspirations for Real Joe. They’ve been able to attract some talented and helpful people thus far.
I didn’t post the detailed feedback I got last week from an independent radio producer but I will now to balance what I got from Transom. I don’t wanch’all thinking I’m waaaaay bad. 😉
========
Griff, I liked the CD demo for several reasons. You are a fine writer, you present insights worth sharing, and your conversational style works well on radio. Having said all that, here are some specific reactions:
1) Your readings seemed a bit fast to me, sounding too much like they were being read, without enough emphasis on inflection, pacing, pauses, etc. Maybe you were nervous, maybe this is your Minnesotan understatedness, or maybe your natural style to read quickly. However, I felt that some of the nuance and impact of your pieces were lost because they didn’t receive enough emphasis. I am not talking about a “dramatic” reading, as an actor would make, but just something a little slower and more inflected, as if you were saying these things to a good friend rather than reading them to an unseen audience. The best advice I ever received about radio work was to imagine in my mind that I was speaking to a single person, not a whole bunch of folks. This makes it personal and intimate, which is part of what makes radio so wonderful.
2) I wondered if your second piece, about the two friends of yours who died, really was a good illustration of the “guy” connection inherent in Real Joe. The “scoring points” and “travel lesson from my son” certainly were, but the piece about death seemed to have broad, general appeal in terms of content. Was this your intention? Maybe it was, because I know you don’t want to simply reach “guys like us” with your programming. However, in terms of creating a distinct image/concept for Real Joe, for marketers/underwriters/station, you may want the demo to focus more tightly on stuff that is more narrowly “guy” related. Then again, maybe your feel the piece did that and I’m missing something.
3) Your voice and delivery are especially well-suited for humor, irony, and sly observation. This really came through in the “scoring” piece. The other pieces were a bit more somber and reflective, and I felt a slight change in delivery (as stated above) to convey those differences would have been helpful. You probably tried to do this, but it seemed pretty subtle to me. This is also one of the reasons for having multiple voices on the show: people have different strengths and their voices can be adapted to the material they deliver best.
4) A general observation. People are almost always doing something ELSE when they listen to the radio, even if it is simply driving or washing dishes. This means they are at least slightly preoccupied. So my feeling is that you do well to read slower and be more inflected in order to hold their attention, which is prone to be distracted. The trick is to not go to such an extreme that you sound artificial or forced, but are within your own comfort zone.
I hope this is helpful. My quibbles are just that. Overall, I think you did a fine job and sound good “on air.”