Buzz Out Loud Lounge forum: What if... (constructive criticism for BOL)...

oh yeah, for BOL - more...Cooley, Tong, Bonnie Cha, Nicole Lee, and/or Jasmine France. If I had to replace Natali's position, it would be a toss up between Bonnie and Jasmine with Nicole as a close second.

--S

I'll admit. I stopped listening a good while ago...stopped listening every day post-Veronica.. then tried to get into it through intermittent episodes I'd download. After a recurring theme of Molly being away, I just lost interest altogether.

So what's happened now? Are our veteran hosts done with the show, or has it been so bastardized by CBS that it doesn't feel like BOL?

I'm not really a listener anymore, but I'm still concerned for the show that brought me into the world of tech-- especially if it's at the expense of it's amazing listener-audience.

- Alex

OMG, my bad - skimmed your post too fast. what happened was a BOL crew change and while the crew is still providing great content, the dialogue/banter/chemistry has a new vibe that a lot of long-time listeners don't entirely enjoy, they miss the old vibe, and want something to be done...

--S

Okay, I'll say it explicitly then - I think Natali should not be in the daily BOL line-up at this time and at least for the *immediate* future (like, say the next 3-4 months). This is because I enjoy a different vibe than the show is delivering with the Natali as a daily host.

And I totally agree with the this East/West coast studio issue - it really does seem to be an underrated/sleeper issue.

Best wishes Slikkster! Come back and drop us a line sometime
--S

although, if there are great "Natali should stay if ___" scenarios, I'd be happy to know of them...but my reason for posting was that
1) Although there have been many changes over the years the show has been on, nowadays many, many BOL listeners are not enjoying the show as we used to - so, as I see it, *something* has gotta change with the show. Although the listernship are the customers, to be pragmatic, we should also adjust/give-it-a-chance *some* amount to changes to get the enjoyment and insight once delivered.
2) to have a space/thread to put *forward looking* ideas, regardless of if "Natali should stay or go", etc. I thought there's been enough commentary, thought, and emotion - so this is an attempt of a vehicle to move forward on...
3) I did include "(in the case you think it's lost something and have lost patience with the warming up period with the variety of changes)." because for those that think the show is *not* fine or better than it used to be and I wanted to redirect that thought and energy to something constructive (see #2 above). I do admit, this is not *primarily* meant to be a thread for those that think the show is fine/better than it used to be - but all comments *having to do with the theme of this thread* are welcome.

maybe this could've been a simple "Is the show as enjoyable or more enjoyable than it was several months ago? If not, what forward looking idea would you propose?" thing... but, we're at where we're at...

Okay, I think I've put it all out there now.
Best,
Shalin

As a TV director I'm use to having to deal with talent being in different studios trying to talk to each other. We (Producer and Director) try to get around the issue by talking into their ears (IFB's) and telling everybody who is asking the next question. But it is never as good as when everybody is in the one studio. The chat is just never natural.

Now in BOL's case I would say in my professional opinion that it is impossible to get around these limitations because you don't have a dedicated team in the background directing the flow of the conversation. It is up to the on-air talent to perform this function with the producer also on-air. The end result being that on every episode and usually multiple times in each the guys in the west coast studio talk over Nat or she talks over one of them. This then results in a couple of seconds of dead air and then a discussion on who is going to talk. This just kills the flow of the conversation and becomes highly annoying to the listener. Then add in the worse situation of the link between East and West dropping out the conversation continuing then when the link is re-established Nat continues to say what she was saying even though that exact point had just been discussed for the past minute.

I also believe that their is very little to gain from having a full time voice in NY and the rest of the team out West. Sure get someone to be on the show in NY if there is a big story that they will have something to ADD.

I really don't get why you guys are trying to make the show more complicated then it should be. People enjoy the simplicity of the show, 3 people sitting around a table discussing tech news. I really got into the show because of the terrific conversation that it use to have.

Go back to basics, as the old saying goes KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID.

shmody wrote:

"Given that, you may actually be able to basically assign which studio handles a story/description and it's commentary. Additional/last thoughts can be given by the other studio after the "lead" studio is done."

Then you don't have the guests engaging in conversation. I just don't see the point, its not like CNET doesn't have enough knowledgeable staff in the one location. If you are going to have two crews you might as well bang out two different podcasts instead of one.

I think the two studio issue is a big one. Listen to the eps when Jason was on NY and you'll hear a massive improvement in the conversation between Nat and Jason, that just proves my point.

Guys you tried it, your audience including very loyal long term ones don't like it, fix it and move on.

Another problem I'm having with the show is there seems to be lack of color. What I mean by that is Tom and Nat both seem to be play-by-play callers to use a sporting phrase. Although Tom does give his opinion he usually just describes the mechanics of what's been discussed. Since Molly left there is a lack of someone who mostly just gives special comments. The only time Nat does anything like this is when she rants about FIOS and helicopters. Perhaps that's why people are asking for Rafe or Coolie all they do is give their opinion.

I'd like the format to be changed to Tom as host reading out the stories (play-by-play) and opinion as needed, permanent member giving their opinion (special comments or color person), rotating guest that gives their opinion (special comments or color person) and Jason adding his two cents as needed (sideline reporter).

This setup works incredibly well, that's why almost every sport telecast or studio panel show uses it. Or maybe I've just watched too much baseball of late.

Isn't it a little sexist to say one of the hosts must be female? You know, who ever does a good job.

How about 2 forums? One for those of us who just want to discuss the content of the shows, and one for those of you who want to talk about the people on the show?

Once again, great idea Shalin.

Here's my suggestion to make BOL better: tell me something I don't already know. I like hearing about what the news is, but you gotta give me something that I can't just read or watch somewhere else. I need more substance, more depth, more "techiness". If it's a story that's basically being repeated from doing the Early Show, chances are I already know about it. I need less CBS and more CNET!

I think he is the only person at cnet right now able to successful replace Molly. Bring back the cranky cynical anaylst of the industry we've been loving from Molly.

He is, indeed, a lot of fun, but Cooley, Tom and Jason would be a little imbalanced IMO. I enjoyed (about the only thing I did enjoy) Lisa Bettany's chat on twit 191 and she struck me as both knowledgeable and humble (in comparison to Shira who was knowledgeable)....

It's definitely not all about the tech though. At the London meet I felt very much like a fake geek most of the time with my rubbish phone and cheap as chips camera (hey, I'm a youthworker! One day I'll be able to afford a cool phone but even so I was very much in people's tech shadow). I love BOL for the chit chat and care very little for the tech side one way or the other. It's all about the snappy repartee, the rants, the snarky yet loving rebuffs and the care that the presenters have for each other. It could be about anything and I'd probably still listen if the Merritt was in the house (verbally anyhoo). Just everyone in the same house ideally to keep the pace going well (imo).

I found the daily guest host experiment made the show awkward for about 3 months while each daily guest host got about 10-15 shows under his/her belt, learned how the show flowed and worked their own personality into the show. Every day there's a new guest host there's another disjointed show. Wood, Cooley, Needleman, are Tong are the only guest hosts I'd suggest. That's it. That's the list. Okay, maybe McCarthy and Reisinger, as well, but I believe going with only two hosts for a couple of days would be better than bringing in a one-off guest host. If other guest hosts are brought in then I would like it if they were to commit to weekly appearances and listen to the rest of the week's shows. They will learn what works with the show, and we will learn what makes them tick. (Very Special Guests, such as veterans of TWiT, that are experienced with this style of conversation are always welcome.)

The bicoastal experiment doesn't work for me, either. Natali - wait, I'm really not bashing Natali - seems to force many segues and moves the show along when it doesn't seem, to me, that SF is quite done. That's probably her TV news and 5 minute daily news podcast background coming out, and it keeps the show length around 40 minutes instead of what might drag out to an unbearable 60 without her keeping them on task. I am thankful the shows aren't that long, and so I will choose to believe it's because she's not in the studio with the majority of the hosts. Hopefully the video link between the studios will help all the hosts learn each other's visual cues resulting in a smoother show.

It's just my opinion, and I hope the same has been offered far more eloquently by many more people.

-Alan