Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

NPR's "Car Talk" Glides To a Halt

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the not-actually-a-complete-stop-mind-you dept.

The Media 148

stevegee58 writes "After 25 years on the air, Tom and Ray Magliozzi (aka Click and Clack, The Tappet Brothers) are calling it quits in September. With their nerdy humor, explosive laughter and geek cred (both MIT alums) Tom and Ray will be sorely missed by the average NPR-listening Slashdotter." How many garages have names as cool as "Hacker's Haven"? I've long thought that someone should assemble a compilation featuring nothing but hours of their laughter. (Which will be available for sampling, since they will continue to play archived material for a long time yet.)

cancel ×

148 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Shit! (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264137)

Nooooooo! These guys were brilliant!

Sad day (5, Insightful)

Igorod (807462) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264177)

Sad day indeed.

Re:Sad day (4, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264287)

Sad.

I'm often seen walking down the street listening to their podcast grinning like a total idiot.
I have several years worth to catch up on. Maybe I better order something from their Shameless Products division before those disappear as well.

Re:Sad day (5, Interesting)

hal2814 (725639) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264301)

Indeed. Their forum helped me find a local mechanic I could trust. I didn't always catch their show, but I'll certainly miss them.

About bloody time (1, Flamebait)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264189)

Goodbye and good riddance to radio's most irritating show. What people saw in it I do not know. Two guys laughing like hyenas at everything each other says whether it's funny or not. Gimme a break!

Re:About bloody time (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264309)

no shit. fucking wops.

Re:About bloody time (4, Interesting)

makisupa (118663) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264409)

I guess you can tag the parent Flamebait, but I think it serves a valid purpose. Not everyone loves the show. Some people are sickened by the thousands of hours of perfectly good broadcast time that are wasted on the hyenas in question each week.

To quote Harry Shearer, whose Le Show followed Car Talk at the time, "Memo to the Car Talk guys: Stop Laughing."

Re:About bloody time (2)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264467)

I guess you can tag the parent Flamebait, but I think it serves a valid purpose. Not everyone loves the show. Some people are sickened by the thousands of hours of perfectly good broadcast time that are wasted on the hyenas in question each week.

To quote Harry Shearer, whose Le Show followed Car Talk at the time, "Memo to the Car Talk guys: Stop Laughing."

Preach it brother!

I get that it's a popular show, and I actually liked it the first time I heard it. But once I noticed the incessant hyena laughing it just got old very quickly. It's like a loudly ticking clock. You might not notice it, but once you do it can be as irritating as all hell.

Re:About bloody time (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264565)

They're Jewish, it's what Jews from the northeast do.

Re:About bloody time (2)

SteveFoerster (136027) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264975)

Hmm... "Magliozzi", is that a Sephardic name or an Ashkenazi one?

Re:About bloody time (4, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264627)

He's just bitter because he has forgotten how to make people laugh.

Shearer hasn't been really funny for a long time.

Re:About bloody time (3, Interesting)

makisupa (118663) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265195)

I'd disagree about Le Show, but that's beside the point.

I understand that people like CT, but my local NPR (opb.org) pays to play them twice a weekend. I know from listening to other NPR affiliates across the country over the 'net that there are some seriously good programs available for broadcast - programs that I suspect would even cost *less*.

My NPR affiliates love to brag on the diversity and alternative voices that they provide to the community, but on weekends they spam me with nothing but Wait Wait, Praire HC, Car Talk and Michael Whoever's show. Few of those are terrible on their own merits, but the opportunity cost is disgraceful.

Things have gotten marginally better over the years, but the weekend is a wasteland of chuckleheads. Every time the local NPR station brags on diversity I roll my eyes and think that I've always been able to listen to re-runs of CT twice a weekend but they've never broadcast a single episode of Tavis Smiley.

I get their point - they're more serious than the fart-sound morning shows and more diverse than the honkey-trash christian country on other stations, but that should by no means be the hurdle by which they judge themselves.

I'd seriously like to see a report on what is being paid for programming and what programming was turned down when the pledge drive comes around. I've always suspected that two lesser-known informative shows are passed by in order to chum the weekends with hyena talk.

Re:About bloody time (1)

makisupa (118663) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265221)

Another argument - this show effectively became The Peanuts years ago. They could have been playing nothing but reruns for the last five years and few would have even notice.

Re:About bloody time (1)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264671)

That is why I quit listening to this little Brit PC gadgets style podcast (Damned i wish I could think of the name, i HATE when i go blank like that) even though I loved the fact that would dish all kinds of info on CPU arches, new GPUs, all kinds of really nerdy tech talk because they got a new member and his ass laughs so damned much you want to scream "Just STFU you damned hyena, I'm trying to hear this cute but smart talk on geek stuff and the ONLY one laughing at your dumbass cracks is YOU!"

so while I never listened to the car guys if they laugh at stupid shit constantly? yeah i can see why that would be hated. Its just not fun to try to hear details in audio with some jackass braying right in front of the damned mike.

Re:About bloody time (2)

mattack2 (1165421) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265667)

But once I noticed the incessant hyena laughing it just got old very quickly.

Someone else can provide the specific details, but on a show in the past few years, there was a caller who I seem to remember had a delivery truck but somehow often ended up where there were lots of sheep or goats.. and the said animals would always freak out when he was playing Car Talk and the guys laughed.

Re:About bloody time (4, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264603)

It's a show about a couple of guys having a good time while talking about cars.

It hits the nail on the head. I'm sorry people laughing cut's you so sharply. really, you should see some one.

HAHahhahahahahahaha hahaha

Re:About bloody time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265913)

If you're going to write cut's, why don't you also write hit's?

Re:About bloody time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265589)

Nice sig:

"A matter of internal security, the age old cry of the oppressor" - Jean Luc Picard

But if you want to update it for this century, it should probably read: "STOP RESISTING! The age old cry of the oppressor."

Re:About bloody time (3, Insightful)

smartin (942) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264809)

I saw, or rather heard, two very knowledgeable guys helping people and having a good time doing it. Car Talk is/was a gem and will be sorely missed by the thousands of people that they have helped and millions of people that they have entertained over the last 25 years.

It is too bad that the parent poster didn't call them to learn how to change the channel on that radio thing in the dashboard of their car.

Re:About bloody time (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265543)

LOL apparently you don't know what's good entertainment value.

They were popular and well-loved for a quarter century, utilizing humor and smarts to help guests and entertain their listeners. Congrats to them for their retirement!

Re:About bloody time (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40266277)

Maybe not the most irritating but close. What they did was kill every other serious automotive radio talk show. There used to be several other radio shows that covered automotive technical subjects in depth. These bozos may known their stuff, but their show is about informative as Funnest Home Videos and their great ratings knocked all other automotive shows off the air.

Good riddance.

Hey, well... (1)

Haxagon (2454432) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264193)

At least we still have Crazy Ira and The Douche [wikia.com] , right?
Right?

Sadness. (4, Insightful)

iiii (541004) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264201)

This makes me feel sad. They were a great part of Saturday mornings. I know they are up at retirement age, but I hope they find some other projects that help them share their wit and wisdom. Click and Clack Rock.

Re:Sadness. (4, Informative)

iiii (541004) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264905)

BTW, here is their actual message to the fans announcing their retirement:

http://www.cartalk.com/content/time-get-even-lazier [cartalk.com]

And the real reason they're leaving us? (1)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265385)

Because they're a COUPLE OF KNUCKLEHEADS! I'll miss 'em. I'm not sure which I like more, Wait Wait or Car Talk, but one follows the other, so who cares? Well I do, about them both. Ah, this does suck, but they gotta take some time to relax. Hey... wait a minute....

Re:Sadness. (2)

dolo724 (22338) | more than 2 years ago | (#40266091)

Retiring?

More like getting retreads.

Now where will millions of uninformed liberals go? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264205)

To learn about things they don't know about cars.

After all, we know only liberals listen to NPR, and they must be uninformed not to know the answers to the questions they ask.

Eh, they'll just have to drive their electric cars off the cliff.

Re:Now where will millions of uninformed liberals (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264311)

Yeah, but then they'll get reasonably priced health care and some time off work. In a Conservative world, they would be shit-canned immediately to save on medical care costs, probably tossed to the street, and a Mexican would be hired to do their work shittily but cheaply. The company would go bankrupt, the excutives would cash out with golden parachutes and stash the money in the Caymans, and start another shill company hiring back the employees of the first one but with fewer benefits and 70% wages.

Re:Now where will millions of uninformed liberals (3, Funny)

QuincyDurant (943157) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264463)

Haywood Jabuzoff

New [EV] technologies... require new commentators. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264207)

Why stop now...? Were they unready to embrace Electric Vehicles? "Too" ready...?

Technologies change... perhaps a new generation must take over the helm, when they do...

Perhaps the next generation of commentators (eg, for EV's) will come from Stanford, or another West Coast university... farthen from Detroit, closer to Japan / China and the Silicon Valley...?

Re:New [EV] technologies... require new commentato (1)

ivi (126837) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264239)

Or... maybe smart people just need to move-on to other interesting work...

Re:New [EV] technologies... require new commentato (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264473)

Why stop now...? Were they unready to embrace Electric Vehicles? "Too" ready...?

Why now? Because they are 74 and 63 years old.

Re:New [EV] technologies... require new commentato (3, Insightful)

IntlHarvester (11985) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264673)

Why stop now...? Were they unready to embrace Electric Vehicles? "Too" ready...?

Technologies change... perhaps a new generation must take over the helm, when they do...

There's definitely something to that. The show was really great back when people had bizarre problems with something like a 1982 Suburu, and it turned out to be a vacuum hose leak. Now it's all "should I buy this used car?" and "take it to a dealership and have them read the codes".

Re:New [EV] technologies... require new commentato (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265345)

You really never listened to their show. Your 'all' example is pretty far off the mark. They won't be stopping until October, listen to at least one show and try making a more informed comment again later.

Re:New [EV] technologies... require new commentato (1)

IntlHarvester (11985) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265511)

To be honest, I find listening to them banter about people's husband/wife problems and "the puzzler" to be intolerable. When someone calls in with an old (usually foreign) car that the guys know back-and-forward it still can be entertaining, but they really don't have much to say about someone's 1999 Civic.

NPR? Who gives a flying ****? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264225)

"The average NPR listening slashdotter."???

Yeah, all 2 of you. NPR is *shite* liberal commie bullshit radio for idiots who have never read any Rand or even a basic economics textbook.

Re:NPR? Who gives a flying ****? (2)

LordLimecat (1103839) | more than 2 years ago | (#40266171)

NPR-listening republican checking in.

What were you saying?

Thanks for all the laughs (3, Informative)

sk999 (846068) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264243)

I first listened to them on WBUR, before they were picked up by NPR. "Cartalk Plaza" was located on Commonwealth Avenue, not in "Hahvuhd Squayah", and "our fair city" was Boston, not Cambridge. Been a long time since I wandered those haunts. Click and Clack weren't going to last forever, guess it's that time to move on.

Re:Thanks for all the laughs (2)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264501)

Not entirely positive, but while I was at the 'Tute in the late '70's, there was a do-it-yourself car repair garage near where the Media Lab is today. I seem to recall hearing that our fair radio hosts may have been involved with that venture.

Re:Thanks for all the laughs (2)

bmo (77928) | more than 2 years ago | (#40266353)

Why is this downmodded?

It's true. They actually did run a do-it-yourself car repair garage, and it turned out to be a disaster for them.

Crikes.

--
BMO

Hacker's Haven??? (0)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264251)

I'm amazed they didn't get arrested by the TSA or FCC or DHS. Or at least get hatemail from the same people who spammed a magazine that said "How to Hack your Computer" on the cover.

Re:Hacker's Haven??? (4, Informative)

Mr Z (6791) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264555)

Back in the 70s when they had said garage, a "hack" was someone who was unskilled or at least an amateur at whatever it was they were trying to accomplish. Hackers were just dedicated hobbyists. Their Hacker's Haven was a shop for DIY shade-tree mechanics to rent space at to work on their project cars. It wasn't until sometime into the 80s that "hacker" started taking on a different meaning.

In any case, TSA and DHS didn't exist yet, they weren't yet on the air so the FCC wouldn't give two shakes. The most they might have to worry about is ending up in a Bufile at the FBI, which seems unlikely.

Re:Hacker's Haven??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265007)

Back in the 70s when they had said garage, a "hack" was someone who was unskilled...

How wrong you are. I was at MIT through the mid 70s and a good hack was something to celebrate. The best software hackers were highly respected.

Re:Hacker's Haven??? (2)

Mr Z (6791) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265171)

Keep reading: "...or at least an amateur." You're right, though, I chose my words poorly. There were (and are) some very skilled, talented hackers at MIT. (Look no further than HAKMEM!) Hacks are still hacks, though, clever as they may be. The TMRC [mit.edu] hackers (perhaps the largest MIT hacker contingent I'm aware of outside the famed MIT AI lab) describe themselves thusly:

We at TMRC use the term "hacker" only in its original meaning, someone who applies ingenuity to create a clever result, called a "hack". The essence of a "hack" is that it is done quickly, and is usually inelegant. It accomplishes the desired goal without changing the design of the system it is embedded in. Despite often being at odds with the design of the larger system, a hack is generally quite clever and effective.

Re:Hacker's Haven??? (1)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264635)

Maybe yo should step away from /. and similar sights and change your perspective. It's not nearly as bad out there as some people seem to think.

Seriously, take a year off.

Re:Hacker's Haven??? (1, Interesting)

cpu6502 (1960974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264793)

Watch the youtube videos of a mother being held in glass jails (her crime: carrying milk for her baby), or thrown to the ground by TSA, or other disgusting events, and you'll see how bad things truly are.

Dodge Dart (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264253)

I think that when they saw the Dodge Dart was coming back on to the market, they decided to get out of the business.

Terrible News (1)

MojoRilla (591502) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264277)

I just discovered the joys of podcasting their shows, which is a great way to consume non-news radio. This is terrible news.

I'll really miss Tom and Ray. I even thought they were great in their Nova special on the car of the future [pbs.org]

SIGH!!!! (2)

Yew2 (1560829) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264295)

Sorry, nothing too insightful to say other than how sad I am! Can we do a /. funeral? We could hire the Donwanna Behere funeral home.....Yea, lame I know - - see? we need them!!

All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (5, Interesting)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264351)

The mouth-breathers see "NPR" and have flooded every forum on the internet with their ass-hate "libtard yuck-yuck" comments. It's a great show, more for entertainment value than anything. Oh yeah, and NPR listeners are bar none the most well-informed news consumers in this country.

My local station plays the show at 7 or 8 Wednesday nights which is when I usually catch it.

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (1)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264361)

oops supposed to be "ass hat"; not even sure what ass-hate would be!

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264497)

Can we stop using "mouth breathers" as a euphemism for low intelligence? There are plenty of people that actually do breathe through their mouth due to problems with their noses, but are otherwise quite intelligent.

Thanks,
An intelligent mouth breather

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (0)

jo42 (227475) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265229)

Can we stop using "mouth breathers" as a euphemism for low intelligence?

How about Republicantard? Or American Dumbtard?

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40266521)

This is true. I had my adenoids removed in my teens in the hopes of alleviating the problem, and yet it still takes significant extra effort for me to breath through my nose and it's also pretty noisy. I think the only possible cure would be rhinoplasty, and I don't foresee myself having that kind of excess cash lying around for a long time.
 
That written, I've never bothered to say anything when people use the term because it's too minor of a thing for me to get at all offended, and it is really off-putting to me if someone is noticeably mouth-breathing in social situations. I mean, even if it's so bad you simply cannot breath through your nose or you sound like you have emphysema when you try it (both of which happens to me), please do keep your mouth as closed as you can when you're not talking. One of my best friends is a fellow mouth-breather, but up until his thirties he'd just leave his mouth hanging open all the time and it was always kind of gross to me. I think that's what that gave "mouth breather" a negative connotation.

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264679)

Amen brother!

And NPR is probably the closest thing to unbiased reporting we'll ever get in this country. The have stories that I never see anywhere else in US based media. And I don't know why it called "Liberal". On any hot topic, they make an effort to get both sides - and they don't have crackpots representing the other side either. When they cover an issue, by the time the segment is over, I very rarely have a definite opinion either way because when they've finished, I can understand both sides and either sides reasoning. They constantly have Conservatives on stating their views, opinions and their side. And on many occasions on some issues, I have taken the Conservative's side because of NPR's reporting; which I can't say that about any other US based news outlet.

NPR - "Liberal" indeed.

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (1)

StormyWeather (543593) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265219)

I have had a few problems with some stories that had gross errors, but the bias is pretty level. With that being said I'm OK with the government giving NPR airwaves license free and even a mandate from congress, however I'm not OK with a dime of taxpayer money going to any broadcaster or news agency public or private.

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265421)

I love me some NPR...

I have to say, they are much more fair and balanced (and accurate) than other un-named media outlets. Freakanomics just did a great show about how eating local (your typical liberal douche's favorite bragging point) really isn't very smart. http://www.freakonomics.com/2012/06/07/you-eat-what-you-are-pt-2-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/

They (freakanomics) also did a great show about conspicuous conservation. Basically exposing liberal douche behavior...

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265433)

And I don't know why it called "Liberal". On any hot topic, they make an effort to get both sides

I think you just answered your question right there.

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (1)

Nimey (114278) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265547)

...if you can say that Eric Cantor isn't a crackpot, anyhow. That's disputed.

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (2)

Daniel Dvorkin (106857) | more than 2 years ago | (#40266279)

And I don't know why it called "Liberal". On any hot topic, they make an effort to get both sides - and they don't have crackpots representing the other side either.

The second sentence answers the implied question in the first. To the right-wing nutballs, accurate reporting always has a "liberal bias."

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (1)

Raenex (947668) | more than 2 years ago | (#40266289)

And I don't know why it called "Liberal".

If you can't recognize the liberal bias, then you're too steeped in it to even recognize it.

On any hot topic, they make an effort to get both sides - and they don't have crackpots representing the other side either.

Yes, in general they do a good job about that. However, whether it's the topics they cover, or the general disposition of their hosts, it's obvious a bias exists. I say this as somebody who likes NPR and has been leaning Democrat for several years now.

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (-1, Troll)

StormyWeather (543593) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264811)

Wow the only vitriolic crap I see being spewed is from leftists like you. Just because I don't think the government should not be funding churches, oil companies, or broadcast stations does not diminish my ability to reason.

So crawl back in your cave and think up better nasty names to call people who's views you are intollerant of, after all name calling is a sign of intelligence right?

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264991)

"because I don't think the government should not" double negative! You lose!!!

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (3, Informative)

poity (465672) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265577)

Very little of NPR funding comes from the government.
http://www.npr.org/about/aboutnpr/publicradiofinances.html [npr.org]
As you can see, it's actually supported by individuals donations and corporate sponsorship. And as someone who often takes issue with many ideas presented by self-ascribed progressives and liberals on /., I think I can fairly say that I find NPR to be among the most balanced and honest media organizations.

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264863)

They themselves acknowledged that they host a lousy show.

I mean im a fan. But what made the show listenable is that yeah. They don't have a lot of, on air at least, ego into their show.

Think they host a lousy show? They do too.

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (3, Insightful)

Mr Z (6791) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265285)

Yeah, you can tell that the folks who complain about it haven't actually listened to it. But, you might guess they listen to rather more inflammatory material on the radio dial, judging by the critical thinking skills and general decorum they exhibit.

Re:All the anti-NPR vitriol this story incites (4, Interesting)

TexVex (669445) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265891)

I listen to NPR during my daily work commute, and that has definitely made me much more well-informed about world news.

I've caught snippets of Car Talk on the occasional Saturday morning where I'm out driving early, and it's always been entertaining. I'm no expert in cars, but I've replaced my own brake pads, changed my own oil, and recently even worked through a do-it-yourself oxygen sensor replacement. The show is both entertaining and informative; the hosts are witty and the subject matter is at the right level for someone who realizes that you don't have to get screwed over by a repair shop for a burnt-out headlamp.

On a recent road trip, I found myself in a weird no-man's land somewhere in North Carolina where I could only pick up talk radio and country music. I ended up actually listening to Rush Limbaugh for a short stretch. I was absolutely amazed at the complete lack of substance in his show. It was nothing but taking a random fact and then spewing heavily slanted personal opinion about it.

For those who choose to listen to that kind of crap over something like Diane Rhem or All Things Considered or Kojo Nnamdi, all I can do is just beg: Give it one hour. Any of those three shows. You will get twenty times the information and one twentieth the spoon-fed opinion from it than you will get from Rush.

Listening to conservative talk radio is for those who can't be bothered to learn the truth or think for themselves. If you won't listen to NPR because you think it's "liberal" then you are doing yourself and your species a huge disservice, and you are worth nothing but contempt.

My current fav Cartalk advice (4, Funny)

willoughby (1367773) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264359)

After recommending muriatic acid to remove concrete overspray from a cars paint they added the advice to "test it out on a neighbors car first". I will really miss these guys.

Re:My current fav Cartalk advice (4, Funny)

RapidEye (322253) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264929)

Yeah, that was funny.
And they capped it off by bringing the guy back on last week for Stump the Chumps.
Ya know what - it worked! Muriatic acid removed the concrete and didn't hurt the finish!!!
Well done Ray! =-)

I hate those guys! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264457)

They drove a much better, if less fun, show off the air. That seems to have happened in many markets.

F*ck (1)

ztexas (1351217) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264537)

I hate it when good radio programs go away. Dr Dean Edell, now this. I don't know what it is, but I've always felt a stronger connection to radio than TV. I guess it's that I'm an old fart. But radio is so much more personal with less glitz, extraneous distraction. At least I still have As It Happens.

Re:F*ck (0)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264639)

Bias alert.

Many, many Radio shows are annoying as hell.
Many TV shows are good viewing and not about the glitz.

Re:F*ck (1)

ztexas (1351217) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264687)

Time to call it a week. My wistful expression of preference has been met with a bias alert by a dad in Portland. Internet, why do I bother with you. Yet I've learned something. Apparently there are some good TV programs. Who knew. Eat shit, snark sig troll.

Re:F*ck (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264783)

You're not an old fart if you prefer radio programming. TV may have always been a wasteland, but it has never felt like such a wasteland to me as it does today. On the other hand, on radio there are still a number of programs that I enjoy listening to every day.

No, you are not alone in your assessment of this situation.

Good Show Retires (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264583)

I know there some mix feelings about the show, some people don't get it.

Well I do and I like them. I just wish they had found some kind of successors carry on things instead of getting re-mix of old and unaired material.

They Were Actually Frauds (0, Troll)

NEDHead (1651195) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264601)

I called in once to see about getting a diagnosis on a car issue. They took the info, and said they would get back if they found it interesting, but if they did, then the whole phone call would be essentially scripted. They would do (or have done) a diagnosis off air, then pretend to figure it out all in the span of a few hyena-larious moments on air.

Experts my ass.

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (1)

StormyWeather (543593) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264709)

I always suspected that. It was still a funny show.

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40264977)

Sorry you didn't get the part, but it's no cause to be so bitter. That's show biz.

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (2)

tofustew (563151) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265033)

Oh, come on. Why can't an expert be someone who knows where to look and produces helpful information?

I grew up with Car Talk and it never occurred to me to question the reality of the show, so when I found out how it's produced (not a secret: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_Talk [wikipedia.org] ), it felt like learning the hard truth about Santa Claus all over again. Hurts, right?

Suspension of disbelief is your friend, and it's still a great show. My weekends will miss them.

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (4, Informative)

bussdriver (620565) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265037)

You sir have no idea how tv or radio production works. Sorry to ruin your world.

A real diagnosis would be everybit as horrible as helping a relative on the phone with a computer problem-- most the call is trying to communicate and often does not properly describe what is going on then you look like some git when it doesn't work and it was actually THEIR fault. If they really did know their stuff it would be a typical production to have them do the work upfront and NOT on the air where it could easily take most of the show to properly handle problem besides being BORING to listeners/viewers. It is not a "speak with a sex therapist" show where the topic is the only thing holding it together.

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265069)

"speak with a sex the rapist"

FTFY

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265331)

Automotive problems are often complex and may have multiple causes.

Reciting a checklist over the air would bore listeners.

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40266037)

A real diagnosis would be everybit as horrible as helping a relative on the phone with a computer problem

Funny example because Leo Laporte has been doing exactly that on his national Tech Guy [twit.tv] radio show for over a decade. People who are not generally computer savvy call in and he tries to help them, live and unscripted. He doesn't always have a good answer to the caller's question, but in the worst case, he gets them pointed in the right direction at least. The show airs on Saturday and Sunday for three hours both days and has a pretty decent following, even if it's not quite a household name.

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (3, Insightful)

artor3 (1344997) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265041)

Gasp! Next you're going to tell me that the Stig actually knows more than two facts about ducks!

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (4, Insightful)

fermion (181285) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265173)

This is a perfect example of fact based reporting and opinion based reporting, and the sad state fo the world in which random opinion is considered equivalent to fact. For instance, the opinion that Rush Limbaugh is a child molester based on the fact that he had a sex party in a country that at the time trafficked in young boys for sex is considered a fact by the large percentage of Americans who believe opinions not fully supported by facts. Of course there is no real for us to know this is true, so a legitiimate new organization is not going report it, yet opinions as spurious as these are reported as news every day, in a false attempt to be fair and balanced.

I am sure this is done like every other show. People are screened, a number of recordings are made, and the best are broadcast. The show is edited to fit the hour timeline, and of course the calls that don't work are not broadcast. They probably use old calls as fillers. Those who listen to the show also know they have had callers call back to see if the diagnosis is correct, and at this time they include situations where diagnosis was wrong.

This is pretty typical. I watched a taping of Wait Wait, and it is also heavily edited. Not all the answers are given at the time of the question, and it is edited for time. There seems to a general attempt to show that NPR and PRI are not fact based using minor incidents of non disclosure. For instance, there is a great brouhaha over the work of humorist David Sedaris. Now, I understand that are some sad people who believe that every word in the biography of Ronald Reagan is true, but reasonable people among us know that any story, not matter how based on fact, is to some degree apocryphal. Recollections are based on reconstructing memory, which is highly unreliable. We get a realistic point of view by listening the recollection of many people.

What we have here is the proposition that a live unedited show based on personal opinion is more valid that a semi-scripted researched show based on fact.

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265355)

Tangent: Raise your hand if you're unable to read the word "apocryphal" without mentally adding "or at least wildly inaccurate". Thank you, Mr. Adams.

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265417)

They're experts at providing a very entertaining and informative show about car repair.

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265491)

I always suspected this was how the show was made - how else would it fit for time, and stay interesting? Besides, the show aired at many, many different time slots at many stations across the country... They weren't sitting at the phones 24x7 to answer all the calls live as they came in, randomly! Naturally someone had to screen them, narrow the huge list of calls down to a few, and schedule a time when they could work the calls into when the guys were actually scheduled to be in studio. The show was interesting, informative, and funny. I'll miss it.

Re:They Were Actually Frauds (1)

waldonova (769039) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265945)

Really. I called in and my experience was the same as yours up to "if they found it interesting they would call me back". They didn't tell me the call would be scripted or researched. Why the heck would they tell the caller if they did that? I really don't think that they have an obligation to disclose and would have nothing to gain by it. You sure you're talking about Cartalk here?

Actually, that's entirely false (5, Informative)

Theaetetus (590071) | more than 2 years ago | (#40266175)

I called in once to see about getting a diagnosis on a car issue. They took the info, and said they would get back if they found it interesting, but if they did, then the whole phone call would be essentially scripted. They would do (or have done) a diagnosis off air, then pretend to figure it out all in the span of a few hyena-larious moments on air.

Experts my ass.

Sorry, that's a lie. I was the assistant chief engineer for WBUR for 8 years, and I sat in on the recordings of many of their shows. I've also consulted for Car Talk, fixing their network and computers, and have stayed at one producer's house in New Hampshire.

The producers screen the calls (they get hundreds each week), but Tom and Ray know nothing about each call. They're presented with the person's name, city, and car type, and that's it.

Mind you, the recording of the show is over 2 hours, and then gets edited down, but no - the calls are not scripted, they haven't pre-diagnosed the problem, and yes, they figure it all out during the phone call. That call may be edited from 20 minutes down to 5, but it's still their first (and only) crack at the problem.

I'm not sure why you'd lie about something like this, but it's probably some sort of mean joke like your sig, because of your own personal insecurity and desire for attention. Just as I hope others don't believe this, I hope your wife sees your posts.

Last Spin in the Fiat! (1)

RapidEye (322253) | more than 2 years ago | (#40264911)

Makes Me Sad - I'll Really Miss Them!
I've been listening to them since 1994 and loved every show they've done.
They haven't lost a step, being just as funny, witty, and informative now as they were in '94.
They deserve a long, fruitful, and fun retirement, cruising around in Tom's Triumph.
Oh, wait, there is no such thing....
Well, best of luck fellas and thanks for all the tips and laughs over the years!!!!

I was actually on the show! (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265321)

Here's how it worked:

- You call the 800 number, describe your problem, if it sounds interesting the producer (Doug Berman) called you back and scheduled you for the show. So the problem is already known.

- About Thursday afternoon before the weekend broadcast you called in to essentially a conference call a few minutes before your slot and got to hear the end of the previous caller. I suppose this is to get you in the mood, all it did is make me come down with a bad case of flop sweat.

- You're on, you talk to the guys for five or ten minutes. They (correctly) guessed the solution to my problem pretty fast, primarily I think because they saw it before in their garage. My time was edited down a bit, but it was mostly verbatim.

- They do not send you a copy of the broadcast, the only way I have one is because I recorded it off my local NPR station when it hit the air.

That's the scoop. This is Tom from Michigan with a mysterious oil leak in his Z28 Camaro signing off.

Re:I was actually on the show! (1)

codepunk (167897) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265693)

"They (correctly) guessed the solution to my problem pretty fast, primarily I think because they saw it before in their garage."

True long ago I used to sling mean wrench. For amusement I used to ask customers what their cars symptom was then try to diagnose it before lifting the hood. My track record was probably at least 90% or better. We constantly seen the same common failures every single day.

Re:I was actually on the show! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265819)

This is what doctors do every day. We don't get to "open the hood" much.

NPR Just Became 20% Less Cool (1)

asm2750 (1124425) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265483)

I always enjoyed listening to Car Talk, Wait Wait, and Sound Opinions on the weekends. I guess nothing can last forever. I hope they do reruns, I'm sick of being bombarded with news.

mars rover and car talk (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265541)

From wikipedia, but I remember when this happened:

"In addition to at least one on-orbit call, the Brothers once received a call asking advice on winterizing a couple of "kit cars." After much beating around the bush and increasing evasiveness by the caller, they asked him just how much these kit cars were worth. The answer: about $800 million. It was a joke call from the Jet Propulsion Laboratory concerning the preparation of the Mars Rovers (Spirit and Opportunity) for the oncoming Martian winter."

Analogy, please (2)

natbrooks (465129) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265593)

I just don't get this decision at all. Can someone please explain it using a software engineering analogy?

Yes, this sucks, but... (1)

leamanc (961376) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265647)

The show will continue on NPR, drawing from the past 25 years of national syndication. They have actually been inserting a few older calls into "new" shows for quite some time, so little is going to change for the average listener. No, you won't be able to call them anymore, but it wasn't a live call-in show anyway...you called the 1-800 number and got a scheduled time through the week, and then your call aired on Saturday's episode.

So no biggie for me; my Saturdays will still be all about Car Talk, Wait Wait Don't Tell Me, and Michael Feldman's Whad'Ya Know on NPR for the foreseeable future. And oh yeah, Weekend Edition, if I happen to get up that early on Saturday.

Alas Click and Clack. We knew them wheel well! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40265715)

This news is BO O O O GUS.!!! What will Bongo Boy Berman do now?
Who will the astronauts on the Space Station call for Advice?

Timothy, Timothy, Timothy... (1)

aitikin (909209) | more than 2 years ago | (#40265999)

I've long thought that someone should assemble a compilation featuring nothing but hours of their laughter. (Which will be available for sampling, since they will continue to play archived material for a long time yet.)

The problem there is that it's almost definitely still legally copywritten material and therefore it would be a violation of copyright to sample their laughter and distribute it in any way, shape, or form without the express consent of the content owners, most likely being NPR... (standard slashdot disclaimer, IANAL, check with a lawyer, yadda yadda yadda.)

Oh, and apologies for fueling a copyright flamewar/trolling in advance...

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>