Talk:Walton & Johnson Show
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article is not very objective. Stalker Patti
This article was evidently blocked due to vandalism by persons who dislike the show. Yet the present, locked, version of the article is scarcely better at conforming to Wikipedia's neutral point of view standards. It looks like a cut-and-paste job of the radio station's promotional materials. Subjective blurbs like "The morning show is a unique blend of humor, intelligence, and politics" do not belong in a Wikipedia entry.
I also agree with previous commenters that the fake-voices gimmick, wherein Johnson changes his voice and Walton replies as if the character is a real person, should be more prominently explained in this entry, in which currently it is mentioned very slightly, almost as a mere hint. First, the gimmick is an integral and constant part of the show. It is almost impossible to find a segment of the show where Walton and Johnson avoid performing the gimmick. Thus, this fact should be explained prominently, not in passing, in the Wikipedia article. Second, many listeners are not even aware that the fake-voice personas are not real. Therefore, it behooves the Wikipedia movement to emphasize the nature of the gimmick, the better to educate readers. Third, the hosts and the radio stations consciously attempt to keep the gimmick secret and conceal it from the listeners. As a TV news tease might put it: "Find out what Walton and Johnson don't want you to know!" Outer sources of reference, like Wikipedia, are the only way for listeners to find out the truth. Wikipedia should embrace its role as the source for the truth and set its readers straight. Fourth, the fake-voices gimmick borrows heavily from - the vandals would presumably say it rips off - Phil Hendrie's popular syndicated radio show, in which Hendrie provided the voice of countless characters. Wikipedia's entry on Phil Hendrie makes this fact strongly clear; why should the same fact about Walton and Johnson be reduced to what it currently is, a very oblique passing mention?
-- Menino's Widow
How do you have a radio show on an encyclopedia boasting the crew of imaginary people on it... aren't encyclopedias supposed to contain facts... instead you flaunt a white guy who pretends hes black and poke fun at black people.
Article seems little more than promotion for radio show rather than factual information. Examples include suggesting that the show is unique from other morning radio shows in largely subjective area: humor and intelligence. Cites lack of standard radio show format and yet offers examples of things found on most morning radio shows (sketches include "taser report" after explicitly stating that the show does not use convention of radio stunts)
== This entry is blatantly biased == (IS IT????)
It has obviously been edited by a fan of the Opie and Anthony show, who have an apparent agenda against this show, whether or not justified this entry is NOT ONLY an absolute train wreck as far as organization is concerned, it is clearly written by someone who *clearly* has an agenda against the show and tries to plug opie and anthony in the entry in anyway possible, even though it's hardly relevent. In the related links section he put links to both Opie and Anthony sites. I have never listened to Walton and Johnson but this entry is clearly biased, see example
." The morning show is a wased-out blend of boring topics, unintelligence, and politics produced by the feminine comments of John Walton and the various stereotypical unfunny personas created by Steve Johnson."
Thre is a litany of other examples if you read it
Ramone.....Find me a radio show without a host who does lame voices trying to pass them off as legit.
-
- Sadly, the talk I started happened directly before the apparent O&A pest attack. I attempted to keep the article in its original but highly flawed form (which is where is currently is at) but I still feel that the article is seriously lacking any legitimate information. If the O&A fan critiques-as-fact are not allowed I don't believe a W&J fan-fueled (or, from how it reads, perhaps one of their own)article that contradicts itself and bases its factual claims on subjective understanding should be acceptable.
This show is garbage. All Of You That dont like this show are garbage.
[edit] Obviously Opinion
"Listeners are encouraged to call into the show and voice their opinions, as long as it is in a semi-intelligent and articulate manner. Callers who don't do so are regularly ridiculed and shortly cut off. Callers are also encouraged to refrain from excessively using phrases such as "like" and "you know". Callers are also asked to get straight to the point by not uttering the opening phrase "I'd like to make a comment on XYZ" and/or "How are you doing?". Refusal to do so results in the caller being cut off or the hosts literally saying how they are really doing (thus eating into precious response time). Recently though, the boys have taken a lot of heat from the fans of the Opie and Anthony Show, disabling their ability to converse with their own fans. The morning show does not lean in any particular politcal direction as both liberals and conservatives are equally criticized."
This is obviously someone's opinion, most of which is simply proper call-screening procedure for any radio morning show. Any show with a decent producer, that is.
Carface 14:15, 13 October 2006 (UTC) How is it opinion? That's how the show works.
[edit] Characters
Why change it from Characters to Daily Guest? They are characters on the show. I never hear them refer to them as daily guests. Carface 17:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
