Oh look who’s back. Now Wenzel’s got another post regarding the show (making it an even 6 now). This time he’s going to tell us “how it really went down”. He quotes from the audio hobbiest who posted in the comments explaining how the audio setup on radio generally works, and that basically anytime Peter talks, the audio of the other person gets drowned out…and even Peter can’t hear them. Kind of like a walkie-talkie. Let’s hear how Wenzel deals with this:
Although it sounds like I stopped talking, Peter interrupted me three times during the first part of the interview. He just talked over me. The first time it happened I thought it was rude, but, hey, I have had worse things happen. I waited for him to finish and then continued with a point. He interrupted me again, this time I thought I was not letting him get away with it. I said, “Peter…Peter…Peter…Peter.” Trying to indicate that I did not give up the floor when he interrupted me. I was amazed that Peter didn’t respond, since I thought it would show how rude Peter was being. Especially, when I called out Peter’s name four times and gave him opportunity to stop between each time I called out his name. Now, I realize why he was unconcerned.
Oh really, Bob? You realize why he was “unconcerned”? You mean, because he couldn’t hear you? Jeez this guy’s bitter. And of course Peter cut him off, he wouldn’t talk any sense or answer the question he was asked. He would just keep going on and on with the same confused nonsense. It’s one thing when you’re having a private conversation with someone…but when you’re broadcasting live on the air (in an audio-only medium, especially) attention has to be given to the quality of the conversation. No one wants to listen to some old geezer continuously miss the boat and keep rambling on about the same non-point…and then when he can’t come up with anything else to say, keep trying to change the subject. It’s bad radio.
Hosts have to deal with crappy guests all the time. Directing the conversation is one of the biggest parts of their job. I don’t doubt that Peter is usually more interested in what he has to say that what his guests have to say…but it’s The Peter Schiff Show. People tune in to listen to him. And if you know anything about Schiff and his background and the history of the show, it’s pretty obvious he does the show more than anything, for himself. It’s his therapy. It’s his de-stress time. He gets 80 minutes a day to talk about whatever’s on his mind, and express his opinions, and hear from people who are interested in the same things he is. I wouldn’t be surprised if the show barely breaks even, even by now, having been around a year already. It’s obviously not about money. I guarantee you there’s plenty of more profitable things a guy like Peter Schiff could be doing with 2 hours every weekday.
It’s his show, he’s doing it for him, but also for the listeners, and if they don’t tune in, there’s little point to him continuing to do the show…certainly not in paying for it. So he’s gonna run the show his way and he’s gonna talk when he feels like it, but he’s also gonna do what he can to try and keep it entertaining. And I think in cases like this, those are one in the same. I wouldn’t even be surprised if Schiff wasn’t even thinking about the quality of the broadcast when he was interrupting Wenzel, he was just thinking how annoying it is when someone is so stuck on their own idea that they can’t take two seconds and answer a question that takes them outside of their comfortable little box. He was thinking how boring it is to have to listen to someone ramble on and on explaining something that you not only already understand, but that isn’t even relevant. Of course he’s going to try to steer the conversation back to an intelligble dialogue. And it just happens that in the radio setting, any time he has to do that, he loses the audio of the other person.
Again I think Wenzel is just bitter because he got out-debated. He begins to close out the blog post with
At this point I had figured out The Peter Schiff Show game, which was that I had the opportunity to get one sentence out before Peter could technically take me out of the conversation. Since Peter wasn’t going to allow me to completely express my view on the consumption tax on his show, despite his inviting me on the show for just that purpose, I decided to take the debate over here to EPJ.
Give me a break. Wenzel expressed his view. Multiple times. “A consumption tax doesn’t affect the consumer, it’s carried by land and production.” We got it. And he wasn’t there to discuss the consumption tax, he was there to explain his ridiculous claim that Schiff endorses the 9-9-9 plan, and explain why it’s not an improvement over the system we currently have. All Schiff was trying to do was get to the point of “Okay, you say 9-9-9 is no good, and now you’re saying consumption tax in general is no good…what tax system would you have?” Wenzel just didn’t have an answer for that so he did what most confused old men do when they don’t have an answer…just keep re-explaining something they do know. And then when that doesn’t work any more, they change the subject. Surely I’m not the only one who has noticed this in senile people? (But then again, I guess this is a tactic of young ignorant people too…but I don’t think Wenzel fits into those categories.)
And even taking into consideration his appeal that “he really was making great points, we just couldn’t hear them”, I seriously doubt it. I just don’t see how he could be talking almost total irrelevant nonsense on the air the whole time and everytime Peter moves in to redirect the focus, the minute Schiff starts talking and Wenzel is drowned out he starts speaking spades. I just don’t buy it. There’s no way anything the guy said off the air was that much better than what got on the air.