Impromptu and Extempore Speech Programs.

 

 One of the outstanding news commentators visited my classes and pointed out that there are many programs being presented which require the ability to speak spontaneously. such programs as the round table, forum, interview. man -on -the -street, early -morning variety program with recordings, on - the -spot broadcasts, and some of the news -commentary programs require the broadcaster to be a fluent and spontaneous speaker. The art of announcing has become so standardized that at present one small bit of impromptu radio speech can be detected and frequently is a welcome relief if well done. For these types of program a good vocabulary of descriptive words, particularly action verbs, adverbs, and nouns is essential. The impromptu speaker must have a good cultural background, for he is not forgiven for mistakes in grammar, pronunciation, or diction. The speaker in every instance is required to have excellent powers of observation, to be able to see ahead while he is talking about something that he has previously observed. In too many instances the broadcaster is inclined to "hem and haw" while he is groping for a word that he feels will convey the correct impression to the listener. In such unprepared programs there must be no dead air, although brief pauses undoubtedly will make the material sound more conversational. These pauses will be shorter than they would be if the speaker were conversing with a visible audience. Quickness in thought and expression are equally vital. Perhaps one of the best practices to use in the preparation for this type of broadcasting is talking to oneself, particularly describing things that are being seen. Another requirement for such extempore and impromptu programs is an ability to time the material to be presented. The program will run for a definite period, and the broadcaster must time himself so that he will have rounded out his material, summarized if necessary, and come to a satisfactory conclusion at the second that he goes off the air. I find it excellent practice when called upon to deliver a talk to inquire of the chairman or toastmaster how long I am supposed to talk and then to make every effort to stop on the minute. During the German campaign in Norway just following the Russian invasion of Finland, a historical commentator was to give a half-hour program on these two campaigns. We desired to record his talk but could record only 15 minutes on each side of the disc. I asked him to make a break in the middle of his talk long enough for us to turn over the record and start the recording of the second 15 -minute period. He agreed to complete the Finnish situation in 13 minutes, take 1 minute for transitional comments, then start in on the Norwegian campaign. Despite the fact that he had no notes or manuscript, he came out practically on the second, an excellent example of timing of an extemporaneous program. I place my students before the microphone with one of those 3 -minute glasses made for the timing of boiling eggs and tell them they are to talk until the sand has dropped to the last grain into the lower chamber and no longer. One of the faults evident in the impromptu speech of the novice is the repetition of certain phrases and words that pierce the ear of the listener. Some speakers, masters of ceremonies, man -on -the street interviewers, are inclined to start their sentences with an ejaculation or connective, in most instances, "Ah," because they have not definitely formulated ideas about what they intend to say. It is much wiser to be silent for an instant while the sentence, expression, or thought is developed. Possibly good experience in smooth delivery can be obtained by the practice of dictating to a stenographer. If the program is a commercial one, the announcer is constantly aware of the fact that he must smoothly lead into the commercial announcement from his impromptu speech. Many masters of ceremonies have before them a page or two from a scrapbook in which they have pasted short stories or sayings which they hope will fit into their program.

Public Events; Special Features. 

Announcers are frequently sent out upon remote -control pickups when the radio station manager feels that public interest in the event is adequate. From the skies the announcer will give a running account of a trip in an airplane or dirigible; from the depths of the sea his voice will come from a submarine. He describes vividly a flood from the banks of a raging river which furnishes sound effects, or from the shore of the sea he may bring all the thrill of a rescue from a burning ocean liner. Listeners can hear the crackle of flames and imagine the smell of smoke as the announcer carries his mike close to a burning building; they hear the bands and tramp of feet as a parade passes by a microphone in the reviewing stand. These announcers must have eyes that see what the public will be interested in, vocabularies that contain the most vivid and concise descriptive words, and tongues that wag conversationally and constantly. Such announcers experience all the excitement that comes to the newspaper reporter, they face danger, they must be alert to act in emergencies. It is their job to 

induce public characters to speak to the mike, to obtain the best placement for their equipment, and to satisfy the endless curiosity of the listener. These announcers work without manuscript, although they may have notes which will give them facts that are pertinent to their broadcast. They are the war correspondents of the radio and consequently must not only have all the qualities of a good announcer and of an excellent reporter, but must have a physique that will stand up under the strain and under the conditions in which they work. 

Round Table.

Since it is the aim of the radio program containing information to come into the home in the form of conversation, it is a good idea to project more than one person into the living room of the listener to discuss problems of the day. The radio listener cannot talk back but he finds that the radio discussion is more natural if there is a give and take of opinion by a group of radio speakers. This type of broadcast is the round -table discussion. Probably the outstanding example of the round table is that conducted by the University of Chicago (see Fig. 16) . In Cleveland the round table was used very satisfactorily and was an outgrowth of Stewart Sherman's "Conversations" in the Atlantic Monthly, which ran many years ago. The purpose in these spontaneous discussions is to permit the exchange of ideas, to attempt to arrive at some solution of a problem, and to avoid the formality of a lecture by using conversation. For some topics it is wiser to start the listener thinking, without arriving at a conclusion for him on such programs, by merely fading out the speakers, leaving the idea dangling before the listener. In order that this conversation may be natural, those who are participating in the round table do not prepare their parts in written form but merely outline the course of the discussion and the attitude that each participant will adopt during the period of the round table. In order to avoid any hesitation or divergence from the topic being discussed, the program must be discussed and an outline constructed with various parts assigned. 

The introduction may be written by the leader of the round table and the outline showing the various subtopics, together with the individuals who will take up these subtopics, is in written form before the participants as they sit down at their round table. In order to observe the time limitation, it is advisable to show in this outline the time that is to be allotted to a discussion of each of the points. The leader also may have his summary written out, which is prepared after the rehearsal. Usually three people will participate in a round -table discussion. Two of these will be experts holding different views or attacking the problem from different viewpoints. The third should be an intelligent layman desirous of information and questioning the opinions of the two experts. It is advisable to identify the various speakers at the very beginning of the discussion. Their questions and comments should also give their attitudes toward the topic. In order that their voices may be impressed upon the listener, they should be addressed by name for the first few minutes of the discussion. This requires a variety in the form of salutation in order that the discussion may sound conversational. The round table is designed to present clashes of opinion and to bring out different points of view, and yet it must arrive at some conclusion. It must not be merely talk but must be organized skillfully before the program starts. There cannot be too -detailed discussion of any subtopic, and, while an individual may be assigned a subtopic in the outline, there is no reason for him to monopolize the discussion. It is incumbent upon the person to whom the subtopic has been assigned to see that there are no pauses while that topic is being discussed. In order to keep up the spontaneity of the conversation, the leader should know the attitude of the various participants and point to one or to the other when he desires an opinion concerning a point raised. In order to make for the greatest realism, the expression of personal opinion should not be hampered. In order that the listener may gain the impression that he is to listen to a conversation, the program may be faded in. This requires the speakers to be discussing some unimportant topic as their voices gradually become audible. Each round -table group may adopt its own signals to'be used to indicate the procedure of its discussion. At the University of Chicago a raised arm is a sign that the person desires to speak on the topic, and courtesy demands that he be given an opportunity. The leader may indicate that he desires an opinion from a member by pointing his finger at that person. Pointing the palm of a hand at a speaker indicates that he should cut his discussion short. The announcer of the program should inform the group by means of some sign when the time is drawing short so that they can work to a conclusion. The conversation may, by its phraseology, indicate that one of the participants should come in and discuss a point.  The great problem of this type of broadcast is the possibility of vague, aimless talk which serves only to confuse and bore listeners, and the solution of this problem is to have competent people who are sure of themselves and of their subject and who are willing to express forceful opinions. It is well to develop certain personalities if the round table is to be a continuing program, to retain at least the leader for the entire series, and to bring back speakers frequently to the radio ears. The topics that may be discussed include problems of the day in politics, economics, literature, education, or religion. 

Radio Interviews.

 The radio public is interested in interviews because of the human instinct to eavesdrop upon the thoughts of others. In fact, it is not essential that the interviewee be a celebrity, for the radio listener finds interesting the comments that are given by the man -in -the -street who is stopped by an inquiring reporter. The interviewer must have an idea of what the average listener would himself like to ask the individual. He must have natural curiosity and visualize himself as the average listener. Interviews are never rehearsed in advance of the broadcast. The interviewee is asked to suggest certain questions that he would be willing to discuss, but it makes for greater interest and spontaneity if the questioner does not know the inquiries in advance. The interrogator, however, must use good judgment and diplomacy in the selection. It is good practice to sit down with the person to be interviewed at a table upon which there is a microphone and talk with him in advance of the program in order to get him into the conversational mood and to ascertain his attitudes. This puts him at ease and eliminates the probability of "mike fright." When the broadcast starts, the interviewer will introduce the victim and ask questions, which will also tend to introduce him. It is not a bad plan to ask some rather light, frivolous questions that may start the program with a spurt of humor, for this puts the interviewee at ease and pleases the listener. It is essential that there be no pauses of any length; consequently the person who is doing the interviewing must be alert to discover leads in the answers he receives. Probably the first few minutes of the interview will be devoted to less serious discussion in order to brighten the subject and to encourage the interviewee to articulate comfortably. There is a tendency to allow the interview to become argumentative, but this should be avoided because it makes the interviewer express his ideas, which are not of importance. The interviewer must remember that he is not interviewing himself. His job is to ask stimulating questions, not to supply the answers; to bring out the interviewee's personality, not his own. Do not try to influence the speaker by leading questions. The man who is important enough to be interviewed has something interesting enough to appeal to the listener. Try to dig down and disclose the person off guard; by that it is meant that there should be revelation but not exposure. To be good at the radio interview, the announcer must have a rather general knowledge so that he may ask intelligent questions in the field of the speaker's interest. Most of the questions should be of such nature as to require more than "yes" or "no" answers. However, the interviewee should not be forced to give too lengthy a reply because the radio listener will be inclined to think that it is a prepared speech and not an interview. It is permissible for the announcer to raise his hand and interrupt the speaker if he gets started on au oration. If some definite topic is to be discussed, the questioner must strive to keep the speaker talking about the topic and lead him back to the subject if necessary. This type of broadcast must be natural and conversational. Mild laughter may be heard but it is inadvisable for the announcer to laugh too heartily at his own comments. Repetition in the style of questions should be avoided, such as starting questions with the word " Well" or using "I see" after each answer. People who are well informed on special topics and who are close to their subjects are inclined to overlook the interest of the public. This form of broadcast gives an opportunity to the interviewer to bring out points of general interest which might be overlooked by the specialist himself. Long-winded generalization makes the interview a monologue; the skillful interviewer avoids this by deftly breaking in to demand particulars, concrete details, and answers to questions which will require decisive comments, or he may start the discussion on a new or more pertinent tack