Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina
There is a general push in broadcasting towards more natural sounding voices. Within game commentary typically the play by play will have a more traditional "radio voice" and be a trained broadcasters, and the color analyst, will be a former player/coach, etc, and they intentionally want them to sound more like a "regular person".
Tony Romo is another a good example. Breaks almost every rule in terms of his sound, but he delivers fantastic insights.
|
How much is a push in broadcasting, and how much is it that formal training of broadcasters as a career has completely cratered? It isn’t just sports broadcasting where standards have changed. Listen to CBC radio; half the new broadcasters on the air today wouldn’t have been allowed near a microphone 20 or 30 years ago.
In the early 90s, when I was in journalism school, broadcasting students learned very quickly who had a potential career path on-air and who was destined for production. The elocution classes (or whatever they were called) could improve someone’s delivery, but only marginally. They were mainly a sorting mechanism.
But that’s when journalism programs were popular and led to a decent middle-class career. Now that the profession has cratered, and enrolment in broadcasting fallen off a cliff as a consequence, I don’t imagine employers can be choosy about the vocal qualities of on-air talent the way they used to.