Poll

What do you listen to when you can't take C2C anymore?

Nothing
Mainstream talk radio
Progressive talk radio
Music
TV
Podcasts

Author Topic: Ian Punnett  (Read 251556 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1740 on: October 10, 2011, 06:03:39 AM »
To add to that a little bit, a big part of what attracts me to the show (and why I can't stand Noory) is the personality of the host. It doesn't really matter what the topic is, if the guy behind the microphone can *convince* the listeners there is a guest worth listening to at the other end of the line then he has done a good job. Part of talking for a living is holding the audience's attention with topics that may be outside of what they are usually exposed to. That's how a show like Coast grows and thrives, not by rehashing the same topics. So I do agree with the approach Ian has taken to the show, at least the way I see it.

The host's personality and interests really came through with Art who in periods of downtime would fill in the listeners on his cats and details of his personal life, or just random musings on life or things that interested him. To me those little moments of personal insight do more to "build character" to the perception of the host.  He becomes more than just a voice on the radio and instead is an interesting subject in his own right. Also Art spun a lot of great ideas out of personal musings which seemed at the time to be throw-away (ie, the date-from-hell line, Antichrist line, etc). 

Sorry to get off track and I don't mean to derail this thread. But the comment about Ian stripping the paranormal off of Coast got me thinking. Anyway. Continue.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1741 on: October 10, 2011, 07:43:19 AM »
My only worry is that we'll end up going to war again to boost the economy, and that is an even bigger gamble.
we already have three wars why would we need another?  how would that BOOST the economy?  if war were the answer we'd be flushing solid gold toilets and sleeping in fine silk pj's


i'm doing neither at the moment.  am i missing something?


Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1742 on: October 10, 2011, 08:54:26 AM »
I wouldn't have a problem with Ian if he went in his own direction at all. He's a great host on his own. He can make almost any topic interesting, even some I wasn't excited to hear about beforehand. Ian has good interview skills, especially if it's on something he's interested in. It's clear when he is shoehorned into topics as his distaste for the guests and callers shows.

Instead Ian should be left to do his own thing. He is interesting enough to carry his own show. Whether that show needs to be about the paranormal is for the host to decide. Frankly some of the regular guests on Coast are terrible and I'd look forward to a night of open lines instead (let's never hear from the numbers lady ever again). Ian's approach is more of an examination of a general pop culture which the paranormal is a very small part of, and I like that angle. I know it's impossible for Ian to carry his own show because of his obligation as the morning guy in Minneapolis but I really do think that's too bad. Coast may not be the best vehicle for him but there is a lot of potential with Ian.

I always found Ian to be more accessible than Knapp, though I've warmed up to George over the past few years. People point the finger at Ian because it's easier to identify when he's not into a show but Knapp does this as well, and has had some real stinkers as a result.

Aside from all that the best shows on Coast were with people who were not involved in the paranormal at all, like Michio Kaku or the show Art did on caving. As long as an eye is kept to the unknown and mysterious the show will hold someones attention. Granted maybe not the current audience. But right now I think that may be an improvement on the whole.

Excellent post, AO.  Given the current state of C2C, weekday variety under Snoory, I'll take Ian talking about police issues or Knapp talking about wild mustangs over almost anything Georgie Boy does, simply because

--the weekday version of Coast has turned into a "hawking snake oil" health show

--the weekday version of Coast has turned into a "hawking gold and e-foods direct" show

--the weekday version of Coast is all about the doom and gloom we inevitably face (despite Georgie's constant refrain that he doesn't believe the Mayan calendar means the end of the world)

--the weekday version of Coast is hosted by a moron who can't be bothered to prepare for his guests and

--the weekday version of Coast is hosted by a moron who has no background to draw from (other than a quick trip to Wikipedia) which would allow him to engage in conversation with the guest, hence his reliance on canned questions, one size fits all!

A week or so ago, he was introducing two women psychics.  He read the canned introductions, which clearly explained why each woman had become interested in/involved in psychic phenomena.  After the introductions, the first question he asked each woman was, "So how did you become interested in this field?", the very thing he had JUST explained to his audience!

Give me Ian or Knapp any day of the week, regardless of topic, over Noory doing the paranormal. 

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1743 on: October 10, 2011, 09:35:17 AM »
we already have three wars why would we need another?  how would that BOOST the economy?  if war were the answer we'd be flushing solid gold toilets and sleeping in fine silk pj's


i'm doing neither at the moment.  am i missing something?

Agreed.  I think that poster has the misconception that this is still 1943 and that our country still actually MAKES things in a factory to supply war and commercial needs. 

By the way, what is up with the "going to war AGAIN"?  Are we not in more wars right now than we've ever been at one time in our nation's history?

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1744 on: October 10, 2011, 10:12:24 AM »
Agreed.  I think that poster has the misconception that this is still 1943 and that our country still actually MAKES things in a factory to supply war and commercial needs. 

      Exactly, our wars lead to a steady string of jobs...everywhere but here. The "spread of democracy" in the Middle East is merely a pre-cursor to making them part of the outsourcing World Tour.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1745 on: October 10, 2011, 11:33:30 AM »
      Exactly, our wars lead to a steady string of jobs...everywhere but here. The "spread of democracy" in the Middle East is merely a pre-cursor to making them part of the outsourcing World Tour.
War is something that helps the DC metro economy like nothing else. The contractors here are very dependent on the government and its war needs.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1746 on: October 10, 2011, 11:58:51 AM »
War is something that helps the DC metro economy like nothing else. The contractors here are very dependent on the government and its war needs.

In your original post, it did not seem like you were referring to the "DC metro economy", but the US economy as a whole.  Just my opinion.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1747 on: October 10, 2011, 12:02:41 PM »
In your original post, it did not seem like you were referring to the "DC metro economy", but the US economy as a whole.  Just my opinion.
Well, I am pretty sure that while most of them are headquartered here due to their proximity to the Pentagon, they have stations and offices elsewhere.


I get the sense that you're after me about my comment. I didn't say I think war is good for the economy, but it is something that society falls back on in bad economic times.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1748 on: October 10, 2011, 01:28:06 PM »
Well, I am pretty sure that while most of them are headquartered here due to their proximity to the Pentagon, they have stations and offices elsewhere.

Those have virtually no effect on the nation's economy.  You're right with the Washington area reaping the apparent economic benefits of military operations, but this isn't the same as war having a positive effect on the national economy during the 1940s.  That wartime economic boom was spurred through industrialization that is unheard of today.  Any economic benefit of war today is merely hyperlocal, and superficial at that, because (obviously) the cost-benefit ratio is overwhelmingly negative.  The billons spent on the wars we are in far outweigh any local economic mini-booms in places like the Washington suburbs.

 
get the sense that you're after me about my comment. I didn't say I think war is good for the economy, but it is something that society falls back on in bad economic times.

I'm after your comment, not you.  I think it is ridiculous to not recognize that we are in multiple wars right now.

Also, as I said, to suggest that society wants to fall back on wars to boost the economy is simply untrue.  How do you figure that society is or is going to "fall back on wars" in this economic climate?  I don't hear anyone advocating our engagement in yet another war, so I don't see how you can assume this.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1749 on: October 10, 2011, 04:46:59 PM »
Also, as I said, to suggest that society wants to fall back on wars to boost the economy is simply untrue.  How do you figure that society is or is going to "fall back on wars" in this economic climate?  I don't hear anyone advocating our engagement in yet another war, so I don't see how you can assume this.

There are people who think we should go to war with Iran (look at Mitt Romney's foreign policy team)......although they don't give a rat's ass about the US economy because they already have their hands in many global corporate interests who would profit from it regardless.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1750 on: October 10, 2011, 08:11:41 PM »
we already have three wars why would we need another?  how would that BOOST the economy?  if war were the answer we'd be flushing solid gold toilets and sleeping in fine silk pj's


i'm doing neither at the moment.  am i missing something?
Perhaps he means a war with Mexico? I mean we been shipping plenty of weapons down there over the last few years, might as well send troops. Just sayin'

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1751 on: October 10, 2011, 08:43:36 PM »
Oooo, look.  Did Ian cut his hair?

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1752 on: October 12, 2011, 10:52:04 PM »
There are people who think we should go to war with Iran (look at Mitt Romney's foreign policy team)......although they don't give a rat's ass about the US economy because they already have their hands in many global corporate interests who would profit from it regardless.

I know that.  This is my last time posting on the topic, but what I was saying was:  there is no one saying we should go to war because it will benefit/ fix the US economy and create jobs.  I thought this was the original point we were discussing here... oh well... maybe I just misinterpreted

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1753 on: October 12, 2011, 11:45:53 PM »
Ian Poonit is a strange, little man.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1754 on: October 13, 2011, 02:07:42 AM »
Ian Poonit is a strange, little man.

That's exactly what makes him awesome.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1755 on: October 13, 2011, 02:11:17 AM »
I have mixed feelings about Ian. He seems to have "issues", that if he had his own show of Coasts size, he would work out. He's an interesting host in his own right (mostly because he actually READS his guest's books)-but NOT right for C2C.  In my opinion, once he became a minister-he became careful. Ian wasn't that way early on as a guest host. He is annoying when he argues with guests or routinely takes topics , while sometimes really interesting and provocative, still very safe in terms of Coast interests. If there was another 'main' host then it wouldn't be such an issue. However, I wait to see if George Knapp is on Sundays and cross my fingers that Ian has a topic that I find interesting to me. As a Canadian, he seems very anti-Canadian these days so if I get annoyed with him, I look for something else on stream link or on Red Ice radio. (From Sweden/US). and nooo Red Ice is not a socialist show-I am sure it must have been discussed here somewhere(??) ..... just to be sure everyone understands-Canadians are not socialists or communists either!!!!!!

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1756 on: October 16, 2011, 06:19:04 AM »
...he [Ian] seems very anti-Canadian these days so if I get annoyed with him, I look for something else ...just to be sure everyone understands-Canadians are not socialists or communists either!!!!!!

 
     I don't know much about Ian's feelings on communist Canada, but he's got cop issues.  Another segment on the misbehavior of police with Norm Stamper.  He also threw a slight muffled jab at cool guy republicano, Herman Cain.  Then is was all about pirates with Adrian Tinniswood, and a cameo by none other than the stalwart Captain Kelly Sweeney.
 
oh, Canada!

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1757 on: October 16, 2011, 10:13:48 AM »

     I don't know much about Ian's feelings on communist Canada, but he's got cop issues.  Another segment on the misbehavior of police with Norm Stamper.   
   Why does it feel like Ian got a speeding ticket recently? Something happened between him and "The Law"...

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1758 on: October 16, 2011, 12:48:43 PM »
Kelly Sweeney got real testy last night with the guest about dealing with modern day pirates. Quite frankly I thought it was unfair as the author, Mr Tinneswood, only said he'd have concerns about arming private security forces on large ships, and that really wasn't what he was on to talk about anyway. The guy spoke his peace politely and had moved on. Of course, once you bring up guns, the paranoid nutjobs who make up George's audience have to start calling in to talk about the joy of shooting people. So a pretty interesting history of Barbary Pirates was broken up by the slackjawed audience, and I blame Ian for it. Plus, his non-sequiter ramblings were turned up to 11 last night.......


Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1759 on: October 23, 2011, 04:28:18 PM »
Last night Ian said he was going to have more cops on the show next Saturday.  What is his problem?  Why is every Saturday night a cop show?

Is Ian a fascist or what?

I'm really sick of these stupid cop shows.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1760 on: October 23, 2011, 06:24:30 PM »
Last night Ian said he was going to have more cops on the show next Saturday.  What is his problem?  Why is every Saturday night a cop show?

Is Ian a fascist or what?

I'm really sick of these stupid cop shows.
How does having a few shows about cops equate to being fascist?

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1761 on: October 23, 2011, 11:47:52 PM »
Ian was particularly bland last night, I listened to the entire show and don't remember a damn thing about it today.  It was like radio wallpaper.  At least Noory makes me laugh with his idiocy!

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1762 on: October 24, 2011, 09:18:51 AM »
Last night Ian said he was going to have more cops on the show next Saturday.  What is his problem?  Why is every Saturday night a cop show?

Is Ian a fascist or what?

I'm really sick of these stupid cop shows.

He said he was having cops on to discuss their paranormal experiences.  Sounds like classic C2C fare to me, nothing fascist about it IMO. 

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1763 on: October 24, 2011, 09:29:16 AM »
I kind of like the idea of Fascist Ian. He'd keep the trains running on time.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1764 on: October 24, 2011, 11:35:13 AM »
 
    How does Ian doing segments on the alleged racism,sexism,homophobia etc of police departments equal fascism? It's more in league with ANSWER than John Birch.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1765 on: October 24, 2011, 06:19:04 PM »
Ian was particularly bland last night, I listened to the entire show and don't remember a damn thing about it today.  It was like radio wallpaper.  At least Noory makes me laugh with his idiocy!

     
     The Deonna Kelli Sayid interview was quasi-interesting.  Her focus was on the paranormal from a Islamic angle.  According to her, Islam allows for only one "paranormal" entity: the "gin".  Boring.  I found Ian's basic questions about Islam, and her coy reluctance go there ( on the status women in Islam ) more revealing.  Ian also shot down the "interdimensional" (a Noory favorite) aspect of creatures like bigfoot when he wondered why "someone would travel to another dimension just to take a piss in the woods?"  Or something to that effect.
     I thought the Ellen Schultz segment on coporate abuses was going to be the same old "class warfare/support your local OWS" drivel, but some of the stuff she researched was amazing.  Companies actually taking out life insurance policies on workers (without the employees knowing it) to fund CEO pensions?  What?  I'm a right wing capitalist tea party portrait of Cheney over my fireplace loon, but that kind of stuff will put me in "french revolution guillotine mode" quick.
 

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1766 on: October 25, 2011, 01:07:37 AM »
Companies actually taking out life insurance policies on workers (without the employees knowing it) to fund CEO pensions?  What?  I'm a right wing capitalist tea party portrait of Cheney over my fireplace loon, but that kind of stuff will put me in "french revolution guillotine mode" quick.


I learned about that from a Michael Moore movie years ago, the CEOs call it "dead peasants insurance."  Here's a list of some of the known companies that do it: http://deadpeasantinsurance.com/which-employers-bought-policies-on-the-lives-of-employees/

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1767 on: October 26, 2011, 02:27:06 AM »
I learned about that from a Michael Moore movie years ago, the CEOs call it "dead peasants insurance."  Here's a list of some of the known companies that do it: http://deadpeasantinsurance.com/which-employers-bought-policies-on-the-lives-of-employees/

I first heard of this 5 years back or so.  A lady who worked for Walmart needed some procedure to continue living.  She asked Walmart (I don't recall why she thought they might help.) They laughed at her and she discovered that they had taken out life insurance and needed her dead to collect.  It made the news (or at least one of the news magazines like 20/20.)  I was a little taken aback, but never really looked much further into what the companies were doing.

I just did not realize how widespread the practice is (or how many companies take part in it.)  I suppose if you offer a lean enough health plan and don't pay for very many life saving prescriptions you stand a better chance of profiting sooner.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1768 on: October 27, 2011, 01:35:23 AM »
I think Ian is by far the best of the current C2C hosts.  (Not a real high bar to clear, I know)  At least he is not the King of the Creampuff Questions (Noory).

And he has the stones to challenge guests. 

It seems to me that the C2C people want hosts they can control, and to never have a situation again where a host is bigger than the show.  They would rather have a meat puppet like George.

I understand the complaints of those of you that arent real high on Ian, but I like him better than the rest.

Re: Ian Punnett
« Reply #1769 on: October 27, 2011, 05:17:29 AM »
I think Knapp is best.  Ian is in second place, beating Noory by a hair.

That's 90% because of Ian's topics, though.  If he did more paranormal topics, I would rate him higher.