Wednesday, January 31, 2007
BlogTalk: have we a deal, or not?
Tonight begin the very first instalment of blogtalkradio in Ireland on Slugger O’Toole. Each week it will take the form of a hour long programme looking specifically at the complex world of Northern Irish politics. It goes live at 9pm, but will be archived and ready for download within a half hour of its online broadcast.
The first show features Pete Baker, long term slugger blogger and, some say, scourge of the Secretary of State for Wales, etc…(don’t look at me, Peter Hain’s only ever given me good things… scroll down) David Ford, leader of the Alliance Party… talking about whether we have a deal or not… and Alan Levy, CEO of Blog Talk Radio explaining what it’s all about… Hosted by yours truly…
Mick Fealty @ 04:57 PM
Best of luck with this Mick.
Posted by on Jan 31, 2007 @ 06:10 PMIf it works anyway well, we’ll have to have you on!
Posted by on Jan 31, 2007 @ 08:15 PMits a bit like listening in on a phone call, which actually makes it quite interesting!
Posted by on Jan 31, 2007 @ 10:04 PMThe odd weird screeching noise here, but still worth listening to.
Posted by on Jan 31, 2007 @ 10:17 PMI managed to eavesdrop for 15 minutes but the ‘screeching noises’ put me off.
Posted by on Jan 31, 2007 @ 10:18 PMI was quite looking forward to listening to this but was put off by the poor quality of both the sound and the discussion. Perhaps it was as a result of a time delay but both parties sounded nervous and consequently I do not think the discourse had the depth required.
I’ve always thought it rare that someone should be able to be as good a broadcast journalist as a written journalist and perhaps the same applies to bloggers. Slugger O’Toole is a marvellous site, but this just did not work for mePosted by on Jan 31, 2007 @ 10:26 PMThe broadcast is being attacked by Hounds of Tindalos.
Posted by on Jan 31, 2007 @ 10:30 PMThe screeching sounds originated from my poor quality microphone… Apologies to all concerned… But will get that fixed by next week…
As for the quality of the discourse, that might take a bit longer…
Posted by on Jan 31, 2007 @ 11:08 PM‘The screeching sounds originated from my poor quality microphone…’ Mick you’d try anything to get feedback :-)
Posted by on Jan 31, 2007 @ 11:49 PMam really enjoying the show, look forward to being able to call in; and Mick if you’re ever short of guests you could get myself and Andrew McCann on.
I’d relish the opportunity to take him apart on air, as I’m sure he’s like to have a go at me.Posted by on Jan 31, 2007 @ 11:50 PMAs for the quality of the discourse, that might take a bit longer…
Thanks, Mick.
Ash and MPC summed it up for me.
When I was introduced, I had just come in, and had only heard a few words of Sammy as I rang in. It was a bit like intruding on someone else’s call. That probably made my contribution more than usually disjointed. In addition to Mick’s questioning and Sammy’s contributions, I had another unexpected question - from a questioner who hadn’t spoken previously - Pete?
In total, it was a cross between a transatlantic phone call with a friend, slightly gossipy, and a proper interview, never quite sure who was likely to speak.
I was glad to get the chance to take part, but not sure how it sounded to non-participant listeners.
Posted by on Jan 31, 2007 @ 11:55 PMIt clears about half way through, and the show definitely picks up when Sammy comes in. But I think the bit that works best in the interview with David Ford.
I think we need to try and get that kind of quality and pace in from the beginning in future…
No comment on the Parci/Andrew rematch… Just thought is enough to bring on trauma…
Posted by on Jan 31, 2007 @ 11:56 PMLOL Mick,
but am I right in saying that in the future you’ll be able to take calls?
I often speak to my brother in New Zealand via Microsoft messenger, and all it requires is a headset and mike. works very well too.Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 12:00 AMSorry about that, David. I should have identified myself to be certain you were aware of who was asking the question. A case of testing the format live and all that. I think we’ll probably try to include any guests more fully in the hour-long discussion.
“In total, it was a cross between a transatlantic phone call with a friend, slightly gossipy, and a proper interview, never quite sure who was likely to speak.”
You know, I’m not sure that’s necessarily a bad thing.. at least from a blogging perspective.. especially the not being “a proper interview”.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 12:05 AMYes that was bit rushed… Some of the nervousness on my part was in trying to drive the thing and talk and keep the kids out of the room…
I have an idea that we can polish it a quite bit, but not too much… We’re not trying to push the boundaries here, just trying to gently open up contexts…
Would like a bit of feedback on what issues we might discuss next time, and use that as a frame… May try to rustle up a few more callers and guests…
Many thanks though David, I thought it was a good interview… we sort of caught you on the hop: in the round, so to speak…
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 12:06 AMPete
My last comment wasn’t meant as a criticism, sorry if “proper interview” suggested that. It was actually interestingly different, certainly not the same as staring Noel Thompson in the eyes or knowing how Seamus/Wendy/Conor are likely to pose their questions.
Listeners will have to judge whether the difference in style gets more info from the interviewee.
Remember the last “Let’s Talk”. Anna Lo got huge positive feedback because she came across as a normal human being, not an automaton reciting the same lines used for the last thirty years. Could blogtalk reward the candid?
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 12:21 AMIts good to hear people speak from their hearts and not from the script, like politicians do.
One idea Mick is to have a chat about what people think the kind of society norn iron is likely to be post devolution. What will be the news?
lovely accent peteb ;)Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 12:26 AMDavid
I didn’t take it as a criticism, far from it. As you suggest in your last line, I think BlogTalk could reward the candid.. and, I’d suggest, so could proper interviews given the chance.
“Listeners will have to judge whether the difference in style gets more info from the interviewee.”
The difference from “a proper interview”, again only my suggestion, could be a - possibly still to be developed - understanding that there isn’t an intention to trip up the interviewee, to get them to make a mistake - just to allow their thoughts to emerge on any particular issue.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 12:33 AMGreat show, great to hear slugger on the airwaves…so to speak, and i’m sure you’ll get past the teething problems.
You should definately offer your own slugger brand of election coverage.
keep it up!
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 12:33 AM“lovely accent”
Yeah, well, thanks parci.. but it kinda comes with the [personal] territory..
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 01:18 AMI am canadian as stated earlier and i love all the different subtelties of the irish accent.
I know a wee catholic girlie from antrim and its always great to hear her speakits odd though the turn of a phrase means different things in different parts of the world
In Canada a sight for sore eyes means that someone is very happy to see you but i have learned, painfully i might add, that in NI it means you are ugly and make my eyes hurt.
me just shooting the breeze
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 05:00 AMMick Fealty, the next Paxman. Who would have thought?
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 09:34 AMThis is probably a stupid question but can I replay the piece from somewhere as I missed it.
regards
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 06:02 PMTop left hand site, just under the BlogTalkRadio logo. I would recommend skipping most of the first half, where we had some serious feedback problems.
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 08:35 PM<strong>We<strong> had some serious feedback problems, Mick? ;op
Posted by on Feb 01, 2007 @ 08:40 PM
