A Loyal Reader Asks:
“What should be the role of someone who produces a show but is not the star of it?”
First, you should know that “producer” means different things in different cultures.
To many European radio people, “producer” = “boss.” This most often happens in public radio environments, much less frequently at commercial stations.
I always find it amusing when someone from a European station pays for consulting advice from someone whose sole qualification is that s/he once worked as “(American Radio Star)’s morning show producer.”
They think that means that person was the star’s boss. Sorry, no.
Although the station pays the producer’s salary (with a few top-tier exceptions in which the highly paid star hires and pays for his own staff), the producer is there to serve the air talent — even though the producer also is prey to the expectations, demands and whims of the program director.
I’ve worked with some large European public broadcasters that employ the “state” or “national” model they inherited from the days when they had no competition.
In some instances, although the producer wasn’t “the boss,” she decided what topics, guests and features would be included in the day’s program. With that model, the host essentially is handed the outline for each day’s show and it’s his job to bring it to life.
That’s a very efficient model.
But in radio, what’s most efficient rarely is most effective.
It’s much more effective when the on-air talent has a vision for the program and it’s the producer’s job to help bring that vision to life.
With that background, here’s my answer to the question….
The producer’s role is to:
• Make the host look good.
• Make the guests (both “celebrities” and listeners) look good.
• Make sure the program always is moving forward, that at any given moment it has a goal.
Comments on this entry are closed.
Hi Dan, I was quite amused by your blog post today. A year or so ago I was interviewed via phone for a job as producer of a public radio interview show in Ohio. One of the first questions the panel asked was, “What is the role of the producer?” And I responded, “to make the host look good”. (!) I added that the producer should also make everyone else involved, station, listener, guests, subscriber, also look good. They seemed to think this was an odd response though and in any case I never got to the next step.
Brings up a more important matter. Perhaps you could blog on the subject of talk hosts behaving as though the producer was their primary audience. We have several examples of this here in the Milwaukee market, and while all the shows have been very successful for decades, I still think it’s a bad idea.
Of course I’m not opposed to mentions of the producer and the contributions of that producer, and if the subject is one in which the producer has some personal knowledge of course he/she/it should be included. In that case the producer speaking on the air would be an asset.
What they’re doing here is structure the show so the producer never speaks. The host will mention the producer every few minutes with, “Isn’t that right Bertrand?” or “Now I think Bertrand supports this idea but…” or “Now Bertrand, if you’re paying a parking ticket on time, don’t you think…”.
I realize if you’re sitting across from someone it’s natural to focus your attention on that person, but it’s off-putting because I as the listener feel left out by the use of this crutch.
If you want a two person show, then set it up as a two person show, most of which have the same problem of addressing each other instead of the listener. Sounds worse and doesn’t help the host relate to me when the host is focusing on someone who’s only partly there.
I’ll tell what the job is NOT: picking up the phone, asking for the caller’s name, and putting them on hold. That’s not even screening. Yet, I have worked at many stations where that was exactly what the “producer” did…