RYBAK: Okay, I've spent the last three days watching the media have a field day trashing Tom Barnard (mainly) and his KQRS morning show (secondarily) and I'm just not getting it.
As we're all well aware, (since it's been front page news in the Strib and all over TV), the show ran afoul of Minnesota American Indian leaders for remarks made on a recent show about suicides on the Red Lake Indian reservation. Since then, everyone has stepped up to the plate to take a crack at Barnard-- the latest being former St. Paul City Councilman Jay Benanav, who raged in a Strib letter to the editor that, "KQRS lets Tom Barnard" get away with blah, blah, blah.
Hey, Benanav, (who I believe may have an axe to grind with TB), it wasn't Tom who made the grossly bigoted remark. It was his terminally stupid sidekick Terry Traen, whose painfully uneducated, ill-informed,tone-deaf pronouncements consistently drag down the show. Have you heard her on terrorists? The Middle East? Or religion? Or geography? Or movies? Take your pick.
By my transcript reading, Barnard tried to diffuse her remarks in as professional a manner as possible. Now everyone's calling for him to be fired or to quit.
Still, nobody seems to be thinking about what actually happened in their rush to kick Barnard for -- who knows? Remarks he made a decade ago? The fact that he has the second most popular morning show in the country? Because they can shake money out of the mighty Citadel/ABC coffers?
I may be in a minority, but I'm not alone in feeling like Tommy B is getting a bum deal in this latest dust-up.
Ron Rosenbaum, who got pistol-whipped on his KSTP 1500 radio show a couple years back, (for quoting a line from Goodfellas that a listener took as a racial slur), was most sympathetic.
"There's nothing more painful than to be dragged through the media circus," Ron commiserated. "And in this case, the comment wasn't even made by him. I'm not a fan of racist comments, but I don't think Tom did what he's accused of doing. People just accepted that he did."
Even you took a shot the other day, Mr. Lambert, by suggesting that his listeners were all bigots. Or most of them. Or the ones who lived up in Jesse Ventura country. I wasn't really clear.
I don't think you can stereotype an audience like that...not when 31 percent of radio listeners in the Twin Cities tune him in every morning. How about this for a theory? You're driving in your car and want to listen to something in the morning on your old-fashioned, non-satellite-radio enhanced radio. You can listen to music; tune into MPR/KFAI or another public station for news, or you can take your pick of a number of middling talk shows that mix news with girltalk/sportstalk/teentalk/politicaltalk/whatever.
But what if you just want to be entertained? To have a couple laughs before you get to your day job? That's when I tune into KQ.
There, I get weird news stories--many with local angles, one-liners,comedians and yeah, some stupid adolescent humor. I also get interviews with interesting people. Tom's interview with docu-king Ken Burns was one of the better ones done during his sweep through town.
LAMBERT: Well ... what is that giant puckering sound I hear? You're going to have to freshen the lipstick a bit after that one.
I remember Rosenbaum's experience pretty well. In fact, I remember writing a column for the PiPress defending him ... on the basis largely that there was nothing else in his on-air experience that remotely suggested racial exploitation, much less outright racism. Rosenbaum was railroaded, pure and simple.
Unfortunately for Barnard, his record on this kind of stuff is nowhere near as clean as Ron's. There's a pattern here.
In this particular episode I get the part about Traen riding the stupid bus. (Although, let's not omit the detail about Tom pitching that not exactly fact-checked line about the rich tribes not giving anything to the poor tribes). But my point is that knuckleheadedness is something Barnard both engenders and exploits.
Barnard's a very shrewd operator. He and every other "shock jock" (tired, badly worn phrase, that one), understand that winning the ratings game means playing down, not up to audiences. Sure he can do an intelligent enough interview with everyone from mountain climber Ed Viesturs to Ken Burns. I've never said he was stupid. But the popularity of the show rests on a bedrock of adolescent humor -- and hell, I laugh at fart jokes -- and blue collar antipathies, which occasionally come back to bite.
As I've been explaining to some of the trolls on the comment board,my run out to the bowling alley in Ramsey years ago was prompted by statistics showing that Jesse Ventura pulled the highest percentage of support in the very same area that Barnard is most popular. Interesting. What gives? I wanted to meet these people. I'm not saying there was any great science to it. I could have gone to a church basement dinner and asked the nice ladies spooning up meatballs what they thought of Barnard. They'd probably have a different view of life.But as local watering holes go, the big bowling alley seemed a good place to chat up a reasonably average enough collection of locals.
And there were plenty of Barnard and Jesse fans to go around. Beyond that, what can I tell you? They said what they said, and more than just a little of it wasn't exactly Chamber of Commerce quality stuff. But that's life.
I saw the Benanav letter in today's Strib. He might have helped his cause if he had reminded readers how exactly Barnard and he tangled.Benanav was running against Randy Kelly for mayor of St. Paul in '02. Kelly was Norm Coleman's guy, and Barnard blistered Benanav steadily all through the last week of the campaign, including election day morning. No one could ever prove the impact of that kind of advertising", but 400 votes (Kelly's margin of victory) ain't much.
But hey, Tommy needs some good lovin' from somewhere. Knock yourself out.
RYBAK: You know, I do appreciate the fact that you took a trip up to a bowling alley in Ramsey to do some field research, but I hardly think we should be taking that as scientific fact. First of all, there are no radio ratings that I have ever seen that pinpoint listeners geographically. Where would you get data like that? Does it exist?
Second, did you visit a bowling alley in South Minneapolis? St.Paul? Is the correlation really to Ramsey..or could it be to bowlers?
I am absolutely certain that if you searched cars throughout South Minneapolis and socially conscious Edina, you'd find an ENORMOUS numberof radios with KQ set on the dial--and not for the classic rock.
Tom Barnard's career here has lasted almost 40 years, and the guy's not on the fade--he still dominates the ratings. Just as you've written some dud columns and I've written some lame-ass stories--everyone has their off days. I've even gotten facts WRONG (as you mention thatBarnard did). Have you ever gotten a fact wrong?
My point is that this episode shouldn't be recorded in the Barnard ledger that the press dutifully tallies up and regurgitates each time he makes the news--it's one for Terry Traen. That's all.
LAMBERT: I'll dig through my vast collection offloppy discs and find the old, whacked PiPress story, which explained the geographical confluence, and it was as scientific as the Arbitron ratings and radio research ever gets. But I'll show what a big guy I am and concede this: This latest flare-up doesn't rise to the level of theSomali or Hmong episodes. What's more ... (all I do is give and give and give) ... I'll also agree that Barnard takes more heat by virtue of being by far the biggest dog in town.
But as I've said, I'm not accusing the guy of stupidity. He knows exactly what he's doing, and it is a calculated shtick -- that after all this time is second nature to him. His talent is in playing it so well. A little up-scale for them with book learnin' and plenty of down-scale for the kids in the back of the class. If various interest groups cared what Jason Lewis or Bob Davis were saying they'd probably have as good if not better reasons to go after them. But those guys can only dream of an audience the size of Barnard's.
We're talking about this at all because the guy -- for better and for worse -- is a bona fide cultural icon in Minnesota, every bit as big (hell, bigger ) than WCCO's Boone & Erickson in their day. If the license Barnard exercises to win and hold a huge audience is the issue here -- and that certainly is what interests me most -- I think we can agree that it says something, something real and true about modern Minnesota.
Maybe you're on to something after all. Maybe we should thank Tommy for holding up a fog-free mirror to the state of our sensibilities.There's no gooey gloss on his shtick. Real, tenured cultural anthropologists -- as opposed to amateurs like us -- can use "The Appeal of Tommy B" as a damned good object lesson.
But hey, nice going. I'm betting the boy hasn't gotten that warm a squeeze in a long time.
I just got around to reading this, and wish I'd stumbled on it sooner. I wondered if anyone was talking about the most recent KQ morning show dust up outside of the knee jerk stuff that made headlines then faded away.
I've been enjoying the KQ Morning Show for 20 years and am always amused when I find myself defending it to the Wellstonian class in south Minneapolis. No, I don't love the Morning Show every morning, and Yes, I do turn it off in disgust some times. But you know what? It's funny. Every morning when I start the car I try The Current's show, then click on 91.1 as Jim Ed drifts in to one more whistling Hawaiian folk chestnut, realize I've heard all the news already, and switch it up to 92.5. Invariably I end up sticking around for awhile, and frequently am wishing the signal was stronger as I approach Rochester or get closer to St Cloud.
I do wonder sometimes if Terry gets tired of playing the boob (all innuendos intentional), and I wonder why Sansavere puts up with the Italian cheese/constipation jabs, and I wonder why the Philly Dog doesn't jump in more often when the humor turns dark, and I really wonder why Jeff Passolt continues to stick around, as dicey as the conversation is somedays, and then I remember that it's all product, and all of them are there for a reason. I'm guessing nothing happens by accident there in the Kingdom of Barnard.
I am a Minneapolis liberal, a father of daughters, a compost-turning, front yard sign posting, Fair Trade coffee-brewing Michelle Bachmann-disgusted hippy guy, and I think the KQ Morning Show is funny. Deal. Turn it off when it gets too stupid. Come back when you've heard enough sleepy folk music and smug MPR thoughtfulness.
Turn in next time when I'll bash Kerry Miller for sounding like Thurston Howell the Third from Gilligan's Island in the same breath that I say how much I enjoy many of her guests...
I think people are in denial about all thie things Tom B. is critizized for. The people that take offence.... most likley think racist things about the people on the other side and sit around in their groups complaining... just not on the radio. The best part about the the show as mentioned here... is it is funny and it is right on and smart. It is hard for the majority of Minnesotans to accept the fact that there is real intellegence that speaks out here. As for Terry Train..... my guess is she is paid for her act to ballance out Tom and appeal to the stereotypes of her like, especially In Minnesota. People should stop picking on Tom. He is fantastic! I'm sorry we do not have more people like him. Most people are fed up and disgusted with all of our problems in America today.... its noce that we have a collective voice in Tom B.
Where's the RSS feed for this page? (Or did I miss seeing it on the redesigned page?)
Found RSS feeds elsewhere, but still good to have it on the page. I don't think the comments are more readable, but the threading is nice. I also understand not posting full stories through RSS anymore - baby's gotta eat!
Format change is nice on the front, but when you get back to the Comments, it's very hard to read them. Need more separation, bigger and/or bolder type for the senders' names, please. Just a couple of suggestions.
You're right, the latest comments look better now.
I think my previous comment got lost in the format change....
The typical pattern for the cycle on these sort of contoversies.
A host makes a comment that panders to the prejudice of the listeners. Some laughing and distancing (sort of ) occurrs at the time. Big yuks all around.
The offended party reacts and builds media attention (which, of course, the show host likes--any attention build audience).
Stome-walling ensues--building the attention of the public (more positive build-up for the host). The faithful listeners rally around the host. "It's not so bad, it's just humor, it's just a radio show, it's just entertainment".
The defense of the host by the faithful further cements the relationship between the listener and the host. Oddly enough, this is where the listener takes on the role of the "persecuted minority", ignoring the irony of that as it applies to the one of the most highly rated shows.
The persecuted listener babbles about freedom of speech and political correctness. The listener, as is the case with Limbaugh listeners and Christian fundamentalists, thourougly embrace their role as a persecuted minority, even thoughit is clear that they "run the show".
The host eventually apologizes, usually in some "I'm sorry you felt bad about what I said" form, and emphasizes some temporary program that they will promote to show their contriteness.
In the ensuing weeks, the apology is diluted subtly by references to it in demeaning fashion. Eventually it becomes a laugh line in itself, where the "insiders" know the true story and the real beliefs.
Tom Barnard and Jesse Ventura are essentially the same person. The only difference I notice is that Barnard has learned how to be a better speaker, which isn't surprising considering his vocation(s).
He seems to like talking about egos as he often states, "It's all about me, more me, me now". He is always referring to all the OTHER egomaniacs in the world, not himself. When Vince Flynn was on the other day, Barnard couldn't just be an interviewer, he had to mention that he talks to Vince Flynn while he is working on his books. So what? It seems Flynn appears first on Joe Soucheray's show each time he has a new book. Does Soucheray insert himself into the discussion as does Barnard?
Barnard might not be stupid but he seems pretty average to me, despite his crowing about the level of his intelligence. He projects a desperate need for self-promotion, with a rare self-deprecating comment thrown in. He scolds his co-group and asks them whose show is this anyway when it behooves Tom. When something detrimental happens to old Tom on the show, he is just a "dumb-ass disc jockey" who is part of the crew.
Barnard told Terri Traen this morning to think before she speaks. Barnard, the sage voice of reason. Terri is filling a specific role on the show, possibly under the direction of Tom himself.
Is Ms Rybak's subconscious at work in her assessment of the situation? Does she by chance remember Tommy complimenting her writing in the StarTribune in the past?
[The following comments were copied from the old site.]
This back and forth bit makes we wonder when we'll hear Deborah you ignorant... from Brian.
I've said before I am not a Barnard fan. I am with Deborah on this for perhaps different reasons. In a Strib article this week, the Indians leadership said they will be listening to see if Barnard screws up again. That is what is wrong with this.
Freedom of speech is a slippery slope. The minute we start to determine was is correct speech is the minute we lose the freedom. Barnard says some stupid things, the other side has the right to torch Barnard in public. But demanding a firing or shutting down his show is too much. We all have the right to turn the dial to another show. We also need to recognize that Barnard says what many others are thinking unfortunately. The public debate is good for us to recognize that is happening.
For some reason, many are trying to censor speech on the radio, while the Internet is a runaway train with far scarier content.
Barnard is an entertainer and his audience obviously eats up his product. Trying to censor him won't solve anything.
LAMBERT: As I said to someone else, it's a "personal responsibility" question. All the blue collar, lunch-pail, salt-of-the-earth heroes are big on "personal responsibility." Short of the old line about screaming fire in a crowded theater, say what you want, own up to it and don't carp if someone stands up and exercises their rights.
~Posted by: Dave at October 31, 2007 08:00 PM
You know, my keister is so weary of just about everybody's shallow grasp of "free speech."
Challenging someone's speech with more speech, as in a letter to the editor or, say, a blog, isn't censoring them. Get off that.
The guy who popularized the idea with our founders was John Stuart Mill, "On Liberty" 1869, and what he wanted to see was the healthy competition of competing ideas in a free marketplace of same, no matter how manifestly moronic or intellectually dishonest they may be.
Of course, our marketplace of ideas is about as free as our economic marketplace. Bernard's got a HUGE edge there. He has a radio pulpit with a large audience. He got it the old fashioned way--pandering. And like so many others, he's kicking the entrails out of Mill's quaint belief that in his free marketplace of ideas the best ideas will out, and, instead, proving Mencken's later theory; you know, the one nobody ever losing money or votes pandering to idiots and their ignorant fears, or words to that effect. I'm sure Karl Rove's got it tattoed on Cheney's butt where he can be reminded of it on a regular basis.
Bernard's response to Traen's appallingly baseless and insulting remarks should have heaving himself to the "dump button" followed by turning the business end of a fire hose on his in-house cretin. Instead, we heard nothing more than his middling, chortling rebuke and eventual piling on. And in case someone's still clinging to the idea that this is not the latest in a series of low-brow bigotry, just the other morning he followed up this still fresh bed-shitting during a discussion of bootlegging in the Chinese publishing market while logrolling for his pal, Vince Flynn's latest spy novel, with a joke about what a hard time the Chinese have with their "Rs" (I recounted it in a recent post). It's obviously a congenital dee-fect with this guy. You could hear the discomfort in Flynn's nervous laughter. If HE had a "dump button," I'm sure he would've pressed it and given Tommy Boy a quick verbal dope slap during the five-second delay (Dude, tryin' to sell some books here!).
Nobody here is calling for Bernard to put in the stocks (why give him the photo opp?). He's just geting the same kind of working over he'd give to anybody he didn't like on his show. He's taking some well-deserved criticism. It's actually your job as self-annointed critics. You, the critics, are our fire wall between worthy media and utter crap. Got news for you both, toots, you're both crap's bitch at this writing. Crap is king. Step it up.
Bernard's thriving. HE and his brand of sophomoric bottom trolling don't need your imprimatur. They're fine. What we could use your help with, though, is setting the bar a little higher. But if this is what you'll be championing in the future, let me know and I'll pony up the cash for satellite radio and set aside the time I spend here for The Daily Mole (fingers crossed, Steve-o).
LAMBERT: Looks like we're going to have to move up that Gary Eichten takedown piece.
~Posted by: jimmy at October 31, 2007 10:20 PM
Have any of you been to Red Lake? A beautiful and terrible place. Bad alcoholism. Depression. Suicide. Gangs. Unemployment. And.... I hate to say this.... but a lot of closely related families.
They've got real trouble up at Red Lake and they could use some help. More than the Mdwaketon Sioux or anyone else have provided.
Has anyone put the other players in perspective?
Jourdain's got trouble. His son was complicit in a horrific school shooting. The police force is corrupt.
Clyde Bellecourt. Oh my god, where do you begin with Clyde who's history goes way back. He's been right sometimes. He's also been wrong. Remember the two people from Little Earth who accused Minneapolis Police of urinating on them. Clyde practically had the cops convicted. The suspects it turned out had urinated on themselves.
The show crossed the line. Fine. Apologize. Make Amends. Move on. Brian's right. This is hardly the Somali or Hmong incident.
But will they ever be worse? The interesting media question is why did the new ownership cave so quickly. Sign of things to come? How long will Tommy put up with it?
~Posted by: Pat at November 1, 2007 12:01 AM
I do recall John Hines getting into a kerfuffle on 102 for calling someone's baby a monkey.
Oh, the outrage!
We're just so sensitive here on the tundra!
~Posted by: bertram jr at November 1, 2007 09:54 AM
Thanks for that trvializing quip, Brian. it's not may blogs where the posters put in more thought than the blogger himself.
But isn't all this blouse-rending dudgeon on behalf of Bernard coming from the very same woman who tried to gin up a backlash against Colbert for, well, being successful?
What sort of a Daliesque yardstick do ya'll measure by there at the Slaughter?
~Posted by: jimmy at November 1, 2007 10:28 AM
Maybe Deborah is right. Maybe we should cut Tom some slack. After all, he was ranting that the rich little Indians at Shakopee should be giving money to the poor little Indians at Red Lake. Isn't that a lefty view -- take from the rich give to the poor? Perhaps there's a bleeding heart deep down under all those layers of conservative-right-wing-Republican-straight-white-American-male blubbering.
Besides Traen's brief incest comment, most of the talk that followed was just more of the tired old whine about 'Indians don't pay taxes blah, blah, blah' and mention of the only Indian with a name in Minnesota, Clyde Bellecourt (the Morning Crews' favorite redskin whipping boy). So why did the station cave in so fast to the pressure? Is it because one of the major players in the protest (the Shakopee Tribe) has something that no other previously offended community had -- money or, in commercial radio terms, ad dollars? Who knows.
This little is Indian is not calling for anyone on the Morning Crew to be fired. They are free to spew all the racist drivel they want and I will continue to not listen to them. So please, to all my fellow trolls and all you media types stop lumping all us Indians into the same group. Believe it or not there are some Indians who listen to KQ. Just as there are some Indians who are Republicans (I've met him!). We are a pretty diverse group. Some us live in houses not teepees. Some of us also have jobs and don't collect welfare checks or per capita payments.
The saddest part of all this is that no one in the media has picked up or expanded on one thing that Red Lake Tribal Chair Jourdain said on Monday. He said that there haven't been any suicides on Red Lake in the past two years. Why is that?
~Posted by: Joe Allen at November 1, 2007 10:51 AM
Reading jimmy's screeds is a great lesson in the unhinging of the looney left.
Free speech is free speech, it's our right, and one that our forebears fought for. Doesn't mean you have to agree with what's said, or implied, in this case.
It's also the primary reason for the second amendment, in case you need a tutorial there as well, which it's likey you do, but what would be the point.
You clearly hate freedom, and by extension, America.
If'n you don't like it, jimmy, well, then you can kiss my red white and blue ass!
~Posted by: bertram jr at November 1, 2007 11:19 AM
I am liking this fair and balanced reporting!
~Posted by: Namzso (Tom O.) at November 1, 2007 01:23 PM
Well, I don't know where to begin. The show IS extremely popular, and I listen occassionally, even though I find some things offensive. For me, I think part of it is because I enjoy some of the humor, and because I want to hear just how far they will go.
The Native American comments were in very poor taste. An apology is warranted.
Let's face it: The show is demeaning to lots of people, especially women. But people -- lots of 'em -- listen in and everyone has a choice to simply turn the dial.
The show is like having microphones around a bunch of men sitting around a bar, with their silly, sophomoric and sometimes insulting conversation for all to hear, with a solitary woman and an African American (man, of course) with them so they don't appear exclusionary. And the woman and African American play right along, except for some very minor protests regarding comments on women from Terry, who often says dumb things herself.
I listen, yes, but cringe and roll my eyes and feel guilty, often.
~Posted by: Patti at November 1, 2007 01:32 PM
I don't understand why, when it comes to assessing Barnard's responsibility for these kinds of shenanigans, you draw a distinction between what comes out of his mouth and what's said by the other critters in his menagerie. He's one of the most popular--and last I knew, the best-paid--personality in local radio. Do you think Terri Traen would last another day if he ever decided that he didn't like what she had to say?
~Posted by: Steve Perry at November 1, 2007 02:06 PM
I'm just saying that the guys on that show talk like a lot of guys would if they were hanging together sipping beer in the garage. (Not all guys, of course.)
And while Deborah is right that Terry is the one who made the comment, the show's banter is controlled by Tom. He could set the tone and interject at any time and correct verbal missteps by his crew. But he doesn't because he approves of that stuff.
I actually like Terry for the most part on that show. I'm not sure why. At least she demonstrates some sensitivity. But she is not there to stand up to anyone, that's for sure.