Reading Tweets?


If I were to give a mid-season award to most improved radio personality in Toronto sports media, I’d give the award to Jeff Sammut. Not so long ago Sammut was best known as the voice over go for the now defunct Stellick and Landry morning show. Well, countless hours of over-night radio has lead to some good on air experience and he has become a solid host well worth listening to.

Why bring that up?

Well, this morning on my drive in to work he was in for Jeff Blair, who is in for McCown and he was talking baseball, Blue Jays baseball and of course Ricky Romero. Near the end of the segment, Sammut did what so many on air folks are doing these days, asking for and then reading tweets on the air.

Long time ago hosts asked people to use email to engage in non- telephonic conversation while on the air. Today it’s more about 140 character dialogues.

Personally, I was never a fan of email being read on the air, and for some reason I didn’t think that reading people’s tweets on the air was very meaningful either.

Before you call my a hypocrite, I will admit that I often respond to questions or topics posted on twitter my media hosts. However, when I do so, I will admit, I am never listening to their show live on the air. In that sense it’s away to remain involved or tuned in without really listening in. I never respond thinking that my response will be read on the air, or at least I never respond with that in mind.

So, as you are all radio nuts, do you like the reading of tweets or am I right, it’s a waste of time.

BTW, what’s your favorite Sammut voice over? 🙂


About the Author
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
August 23, 2012 2:01 am

If you’re going to have listener input, I prefer email and tweets, first, because it means you can get more voices than just the ones who have the time and patience to wait on the line and get on the air. Also, many people don’t express themselves well on the phone, there’s stuttering and confusion, and hosts like Blair and Wilner will put you on the spot if they disagree with you and may make it harder for somebody to focus their thoughts. And some people just hate the sound of their voice on air, like me. >_> Plus, you can’t pick and choose which callers you air because you have no idea if the call is good until they talk, you can do that for tweets and emails.

August 23, 2012 6:32 am

Much more in favor of tweets/emails than callers. ability to edit, weed out bad callers, ..

Itchy Butt
Itchy Butt
August 23, 2012 6:32 am

A question is a question regardless of how it is delivered.
And I would rather have a tweet than have to listen to the collection of stiffs that called in to PTS last night. Every one of them sounded like some neanderthalic Guido from Woodbridge. They had the cadence of a drunk moose.

mike in boston
mike in boston
August 23, 2012 8:55 am

Pro: able to weed out boring or useless audience input in favour of genuinely interesting ideas. Also able to correct self-selection bias of people who actually care enough to call in and wait on the line.

Con: since there is no back and forth, it’s not a conversation or debate, so it’s easy for the host to give a cop-out or lazy response and move on.

Call-in shows/Audience input shows can be interesting if you have good callers/texters and an engaged host, but it’s a really hard thing to pull off well. I’d much rather listen to two hosts/guests debate a topic and drop a caller in here and there than have endless calls [“what say you!”], or a host reading tweets.

For example, I just listened to Hayes and Arthur and Zirin debate the Augusta situation and it was as enjoyable as radio can be.

August 23, 2012 9:01 am

I turn Sammut off when he is in for Blair… but yesterday he had the gent from the Buffalo News on re: Bisons and Jays, so I listened via podcast and he is improved, but still not there yet IMO. But maybe its because I really enjoy Blair…

August 23, 2012 10:50 am
Reply to  mike in boston

I think it depends on your core audience. To beat a dead horse, the emailers on the old tk show were clever and keyed into the spirit of the show, so it was an organic thing, not just host “x” reading boring emails.

Another Steve
Another Steve
August 23, 2012 3:32 pm

Tweets don’t enhance dialogue as much as they encourage ADD….look, squirrel!

August 16, 2014 11:01 pm

Jeff Sammut must go. Dumbfounds his guests regularly by asking and answering his often incoherent questions. Also has a terrible habit of constantly employing the use of full team names such as the Toronto Blue Jays as if listeners would be confused by hearing the Jays instead. Boring and unfunny. This market deserves better.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x