The Return of Jim Chapman's Boner of the Week
There used to be this stand-up comedian, George Miller. Middleaged guy who was one of Letterman's favorites a couple of decades ago. He did this bit based on a then popular shampoo commercial. "Don't hate me because I'm beautiful," asks the fashion model in the ad. And George says, "No, we don't hate you because you're beautiful. We hate you because you're a self-centred stuck-up bitch."
I thought of that joke this morning listening to the Jim Chapman Lecture Series on Radio 980 in its entirety for the first time in months. I specifically tuned in because I knew Jim would be talking about a story in the Free Press about City Hall looking for a new home and how Downtown London's Biggest Landlord had offered to lease them office space in the Bell Building - but the building itself was NOT for sale. It should be pointed out that Downtown London's Biggest Landlord is also Jim Chapman's most important client in his side-business as a public-relations consultant.
So I just knew Jim would have something to say in defence of his biggest client. Within minutes I realized WHY I hadn't listened to Jim for the past three months. It took that long to get a headache.
Jim kicked off the show building up to his topic du jour by pointing out that lots of people in town "Don't like me." And to paraphrase - it's all because they can't handle 'the truth.'
No, Jim - we don't like you just because you're beautiful and smarter and have more hair than the rest of us who went bald gracefully. And it's not because we can't handle the truth. It's not really so much WHAT you say but HOW you say it.
In short, no one likes you because on radio and in print you come across as AN INSUFFERABLE POMPOUS WINDBAG and due to feeling so full of yourself, you feel 'special' and 'entitled' and don't even properly prepare for your radio show.
I'm not the first person to have complained about listening to dead air for what seems like minutes at a time because Jim is looking something up on the Internet or in one of the many newspapers he brings into the studio.
In short, we no longer listen not because we don't like you - shit, as a middleaged curmudgeon, I agree with at least half of your opinions. No, we've stopped listening because your show is often a RAMBLING INCOHERENT MESS.
So there you have it. I have a bias. I don't like the guy. Why he has his own morning radio program in prime-time for AM-radio is beyond me. Because of the way he defends his developer clients and sponsors, the show is more infomercial than information.
The other two local talk-radio guys in town spent 20 minutes on the City Hall/Bell Building. Jim stretched it into an hour. Even 'real' infomercials know that the audience will only buy this self-serving crap for 30 minutes at the most.
In the interest of transparency, here is my agenda in reviving 'Jim Chapman's Boner of the Week - to discredit the man through his own words. The self-proclaimed 'Voice of London' has absolutely zero credibility in advising or suggesting who Londoners should vote for in the upcoming municipal election.
In fact, he is the very least qualified person to tell his gullible following what to do when it comes to elections. In the past, Londoners have shown in THREE different elections that they DO NOT consider Jim to be their 'Voice.'
The term 'three-time loser' comes to mind. Which reminds me - just how many times has the radio industry in this town given this guy his walking papers? Three? I don't think CHRW-FM counts because his previous illogical gig of a call-in show on a university campus-radio station (of all places! Shame on you CHRW!,) had paid-for infomercial written all over it.
Anyhoo - on to the first new edition of Jim's Boner of the Week.
Taken from last week's edition of www.thevoiceoflondon.ca
Under the new category of 'Cash Conscious Candidates' for the 'Informed Voter' Jim's first recommendations are -
1. Bud Polhill. No surprise. He's one of Jim's best friends and they share a mutual love of cars and telling each other how great the other one is.
3. That's right, number 3. Denise Brown who is running in Ward 11. No big surprise here either. Denise works for Aboutown Transportation. I'm sure she's a whiz at her job and probably is good with money but Aboutown just happens to be one of Jim's corporate clients in his PR-consulting business. ... 'Nuff said.
... as a sidenote to that, Denise is hoping to upseat the incumbent in that ward, David Winninger. I don't know how David is with petty cash, but I'm sure he must be somewhat cash-conscious because he's ran his own law-firm in a trendy downtown location for decades. However, his voting record shows that he occassionally will fritter taxpayer dollars away on friviolities like social services, culture and recreation for bored teenagers.
2. Steve Orser - that's right, Jim chose Steve as number 2. I just switched the order for dramatic effect. Now this is the most puzzling of all. Steve Orser. He's cash-conscious all right. He's the one guy running for re-election who is actually honest enough to say during an election campaign that he deserves and WANTS a raise in pay. But then again, he's also the guy who suggested London could get in on the ground floor of the business of making diapers for backyard chickens.
Like everyone else in the local media, Jim had some fun at Steve's expense over that backyard chicken issue.
So why the about-face?
Would I be wrong in suspecting that maybe Steve Orser is the newest of Jim's public-relations clients? Probably. Orser can't afford him. Maybe Steve is innocent in all this and just happens to be liked by one of Jim's other clients.
Because it just makes no sense. Steve's track record as a 'cash-conscious' councillor is less than stellar if it involves anything outside his ward. And watching the condescending way his peers treat him on council and his recent blatant-electioneering publicity stunts, I don't know how seriously anyone can take this guy.
So WHY would Jim Chapman even consider naming him the Top Second Cash-Consious Contender? Something stinks here. And it ain't any possibly-lingering stench coming from the back of Orser's big red pick-up truck.
When Jim makes recommendations like that, London voters have to ask themselves this question about Jim Chapman - Just how seriously can we take this guy?
posted by Sonny Drysdale at 10:02 AM
2 comments
