This week is not exactly a true open thread… I do have one topic that I’d like to discuss. I’m considering doing a weekly radio show with the same name “Watts Up With That” and I’m interested to hear opinions on the topic.
The idea would be to have a show that would cover topics that we might not cover on the blog and allow interactivity including Callins via Skype, e-mailed questions, and questions submitted in advance.
A few years ago I had done a 24-hour television program to counter Al Gore’s 24 hours of climate reality. While that effort was reasonably successful it required a huge amount of effort to produce. Radio type programs however require far less effort and can be just as effective at communications and equally entertaining if not more. It would be streamed live so that people around the world could listen in, and would be recorded also as a podcast.
While not a sure thing that I will do this, I thought I’d ask readers to see what they thought about it and I welcome any ideas that you might have.
Of course, any other topics within our normal purview are open on this open thread as well.
Thanks for your input and thanks to everyone who commented on my personal note earlier this week. It was very heartfelt and uplifting that I have so many friends around the world.
Has climate “science” killed the scientific method?
An interesting idea. Not sure how many listeners you’d get but still an interesting idea.
I’d tune in.
How long would each show last and what sort of other topics might be discussed?
Also is there any sort of rough format I.e each segment will last five minutes?
Tonyb
Anthony’s initiative is an excellent one. The most successful private electronic-media shows are daily or weekly TV shows on YouTube, which provides a cost-free method of reaching everyone. TV also has the advantage of being able to show graphs and slides clearly. This would be a heavily-watched YouTube channel, and it would attract significant advertising revenue. Anthony has built the brand: now he can reap the reward, while helping to save the planet from totalitarian anti-intellectual stupidity.
I would tune in. Grew up listening to the radio under the blankets. But as His Magnificence Monkton says, a youtube channel would likely gather more of an audience.
Just pointing out that over the last decade, I almost never listen to radio. Except in heavy traffic while in a car; even then it is rare.
Nor do I pay attention to most audio. I will turn my computer’s sound back on and play instrumental music.
The question is. Is radio a viable outreach program? Perhaps videos, or a video channel section on youtube?
Short focused radio-type segments, a few minutes long, would be good.
They do not have to be “weekly”, do not have to be live scheduled programs, but can be timely topic related summaries whenever indicated. And with links to a good WUWT article or similar web site for additional detail or verification.
I’d love to be able to share them easily when talking with others about climate issues.
I love the idea, and I believe getting listeners would be pretty easy. Keeping listeners or even building a following might be a good thing, too. My concern would be “crusher crews”, a title for people I’m sure you’re familiar with, unless they have a new name (climate jihadists comes to mind). They are relentless, not open to discussion and definitely a nuisance. Still, a great idea and I’m all for it.
Glad to hear you will provide it as podcast, since one can’t always be available at the live radio time.
Suggestions:
1. Divide your broadcast into sections of 10-20 min for each topic, interview, etc. Listen to The Economist Radio as an example:
https://itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-economist-radio-all-audio/id151230264?mt=2
2. Shortish sections will be more likely to have listeners as people podcast while walking, gardening, working, or exercising.
3. Be careful to Exclude the Ad Hominem comments from Anyone, (which seem to be collecting on WUWT of late).
I enjoy reading the many thoughtful remarks in all directions so that I can Learn from others.
I can understand the frustration of people who perceive skulduggery on the other side, but it doesn’t help the reputation of WUWT as a place to properly Debate & Discuss:
– whether climate is changing worldwide (regionally, it obviously does)
– what’s causing regional (& worldwide) changes
– how to Be Prepared! for them
– how to lead our politicians to spend our grandchildren’s money wisely in this field (all government spending is Borrowed these days),
if people insult each other or third parties to a conversation.
as a hobby, it’s a great idea.
audio only makes it very difficult to provide links to anything, which constricts the scope.
so it wouldn’t be like WUWT the website.
it would require a shift in the direction of entertainment as the focus.
as soon as it has to pay its way, advertisements for survival kits or diet supplements will require the reduction of content to be more emotionally compelling. you’ll want some ranting and yelling.
fwiw, those are my ‘thoughtful’ contributions to this topic.
Excellent idea- I would definitely tune in. I’m assuming that there would be a forum for comments on the shows, as it is with the blogs? Intelligent commentary, is what gives WUWT a definite edge in the world of blogs. I also would hope it stays scientific rather than political. Although an independent, I tend to be more liberal than conservative, and hope that new viewers would not be turned off, because they feel it is just the work of republicans (or worse yet Trump!)
Hope you can make this happen!
Agree with Lord Monckton, excellent idea. Put them all on YouTube but keep your own copy in case YouTube suddenly get Silicon Valley social engineering syndrome.
Interesting idea, but very hard to pull off. Podcast might work, as getting distribution/advertisers has been the great difficulty of most talk radio.
Podcast, maybe with sponsors.
Not Big Oil.
Hi, Anthony,
1. If this is something that you are doing because it will give you joy, do it. If you are doing it out of a sense of duty or “this needs to be done,” do not do it. Life’s short. Unless something is a genuine duty, DO NOT DO IT unless it is pure joy.
**************************************
2. Given that the radio show is a joyful thing for you:
a. Basic format:
1) 1/3 humor (whatever you like — science/climate or anything funny — songs, jokes, audio-clips from classic advertisements or shows, etc.)
2) 1/3 whatever Anthony feels like talking about — “gee whiz” (smile) stuff; politics; religion; science; ANYTHING.
3) 1/3 science truth to combat science l1es.
b. Regular, but not weekly:
1) Interviews (not rambling ad hoc; give guest questions to answer with brevity in advance) with people like Monckton, Soon, Salby, Drapela (the OSU chemistry professor fired for not bowing to consensus), Pielke, John Coleman, well, you know who you might ask. UNLESS THEY ARE EXCEPTIONAL, only articulate speakers! Their language ability is not the issue, but their “on stage” presence, if you get what I mean.
2) Basic science — about butterflies or about pH chemistry or geology, basic logical principles from engineering (incl. software), and the like. You have the faculty of a high school, a university, 100 times over in the commenters on WUWT. Ask for volunteer teachers.
3) Classics: e.g., Feynman lecture about what science is (1950’s), excerpts from Michael Crighton, Albert Einstein, etc..
********************************
3. Re: Call-in questions: SCREEN so only genuine questions. NO TROLLS. I cannot STAND radio shows where they are angrily arguing, talking over the top of each other, twisting words, mischaracterizing. Leave that kind of thing for other shows. Let this be, above all, a great place to learn.
Certainly, some trolls, subtle snakes that they can be, will slip by with an apparently genuine question. So be it. Answer it and cut them off. NO NEED TO GIVE ANYONE “EQUAL TIME” — this is not a public broadcasting service, this is YOUR private show — don’t cater to the yuckos at all.
Tip for discerning troll Q from genuine Q (using 2 hypothetical Q’s):
a. Mr. or Ms. Genuine: Hi! I sure don’t get why we don’t just use windmills, just in case. I mean, sure, there’s no proof of human CO2 doing anything, I get that, but…. well, you know, ounce of prevention and that sort of thing?
b. TROLL: Okay, Mister Watts. Why shouldn’t climate den1al be a crime? It is KILLING the planet.
************************************
4. Have an assistant (caller screener, etc.) — Don’t try to do it alone.
******************************************************
5. Schedule it at more than one time or, if at only one time, at a time when U.K. people are likely awake (as well as those in U.S. and Canada and Latin America). They add a lot! Others around the world, like tokyoboy in Japan or those in other parts of Asia also add a lot, but, are far fewer in number.
***************************************************
6. This repeats a bit of what I said above, but, this is important if your show is to be really appealingly “fresh” and “real.” DO NOT WORRY ABOUT GIVING EQUAL TIME TO ANYONE. Have fun with this (and if you do, it will show and THAT will sell your program)! If someone is being a jerk, say so and hang up on them. Take a page from Mark Levin (Mark Levin Show). He is a bit TOO harsh, imo, but, if that’s you, so be it. BE YOU. 100%.
BE YOU.
(and, with SOME people/topics, not the super-polite you that you are usually, okay? — some people’s nonsense does not deserve a response and some people should be handled bluntly)
**********************************************
7. Thanks for asking!
Janice
#(:))
I spend a lot more time on wuwt than any other form of entertsinment as I can multi task . I m sorry but don t see how you could do radio and keep wuwt at the quality and quantity it is now. Sorry but that’s mho. Of course I ve been wrong before(many times)
Just looking from the “what could go wrong” point of view. I would fear that you may get overwhelmed by agenda driven people who could pollute the show with bad information. You would need to be sure you had a way to counter that. Because we live in a society where too many people do not think for themselves and are willing to believe anything that supports their point of view, misinformation could be too easily spread this way by unqualified people, even if you try to explain that. I know that way too many people do not listen and hear things incorrectly. Once they believe what they think they heard, it is very difficult to convince them they heard wrong.
I’m thinking one useful angle would be to zoom back on the past in the sense that ‘ten years ago this week on WUWT the big hits were on XXX topic….’ So what has happened since?
Go for it. Any format you choose, I would tune in to. I love WUWT!
Idea good in general if there is a wide audience – you already get the converted in this blog. You have to decide priorities in your new life. Did your video efforts work out?
I would love it but worry whether or not you can keep up both the website and prep for the show. Don’t spread yourself too thin.
If your gut feeling tells you to do it – then do it. Life is about taking chances. Mr Watts is not one for sitting back and watching life pass him by. If you don’t do it you will regret it.
YouTube can be used as an audio medium. I would listen. Then, if and when a video came about, it could be added to the channel.
Andy: Consider starting just with podcasts. You control the length. You control how often. You control how much work it takes. If that is a success, consider a regularly scheduled broadcast.
I think you could attract a big audience by interviewing prominent climate scientists (probably mostly skeptical ones) and let readers submit questions. You and the interviewee could screen questions ahead of time.