GuysterRules (guysterrules) wrote,

  • Mood:
  • Music:

Save the best for last...

After a month of Guffman performances at a horribly inappropriate venue, last night the musical fired on all cylinders. We moved the show to a great room, and many financial and theater people attended. the sound and lighting were better than ever before, and the audience actually enjoyed the experience. This became apparent at the very beginning when they laughed in the right spots. I knew from there it would be a charmed evening. And it was. Those capable of adding money to the pot and the wherewithal to bring it to Broadway swarmed the creator of the show afterward and its future looks bright. My time with the show has, thankfully, ended. I'm glad it closed on a good note.

It's back to work on the start-up radio network. The studios have been built out conveniently across the street from the Hustler store on Sunset Strip so our in-studio guests can do an interview then go dildo shopping. I'll be focusing the next week on booking and producing the interview segments as well as creating some content. It is a fun environment although I continue to question its business model. To me, canned pre-produced radio is not radio it all. It is TV for the blind.

I'm waiting to hear about the off-network pitches that were made today. Should any one of them go forward, that would be a ticket to ride.

My old boss and radio mentor set me up for an interview today with a gay radio network that is about to launch. The lunch with Mr. Morning Host started off nicely enough. We spoke of our mutual love of talk radio and its power. We railed against Rush Limbaugh and collectively scratched our heads at his success. I had already listened to some of his shows he currently has on-air and I was relieved they weren't frivolous but actually had substance. There were no poppers or porn reviews, and he tackled both social and Beltway politics. But the lunch started to go south.

The conversation turned to a Rolling Stone article I had read in last week's issue about "bug chasing" and "gift giving." This is something my friend Scott and I have been hand wringing about for the last few years - horrified and repulsed by its existence. Mr. Morning Host wondered why Rolling Stone would print such an article and feared it would give fodder for the Ashcroft brigade to force homosexuals to once again wear a pink triangle. I didn't mention to him that pink triangles are willfully pruchased at every gay store for accessorizing your car, jacket or bare chest. I pointed out the article was very even-handed, did not ascribe to any agenda and told an important story that has been aggressively ignored by the gay mainstream press. He countered that Fab, a gay circuit rag hand-out in LA, already covered it and why should the straight press pick up the story at all. I informed him the founder of Rolling Stone is gay and the story itself transcends sexual orientation. "But what gay people read Rolling Stone?" I told him I've always had a subscription to RS along with my Maxim subscription and my Vanity Fair monthly. He started to glaze so I took the opportunity to tell him what a genius I think Dr. Laura is as a broadcaster, and how GLAAD and others subverted the 1st Amendment by their strident reactions against her TV show. His fixed smile told me lunch was over.

I'm pretty certain this would not be a good fit for me. The very notion of gay radio or gay TV or gay restaurants or (to borrow fabulist's phrase) gay bread is kind of silly and ghetto (not fabulous).

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.