Popular Culture Review Vol. 22, No. 1, Winter 2011 | Page 76

72 Popular Culture Review As already discussed, the more one attends to the show, the more references the listener knows. This stronger understanding of the narrative is a form of reward for the longtime listener. Refflie (2006) notes the importance of intertextuality in Rome’s show: how interweaving cultural elements beyond sports gives additional texture, making it relevant to a broader audience. The lexicon of the show is built upon the historical exchanges of host and callers as well as an awareness of a variety of current events in popular culture, and, to a lesser extent, social and political issues. This allo ws for another level of intertextuality, a kind of interdisciplinary currency that requires constant updating and thus continually yields new rewards. Additionally, continued listening to the show contributes to a sense of reinforcement of the group identity and with that, a kind of permanence as the show actively refers to prior events from days, months, and years past (mentioning “Patty in Modesto” means someone is overly inebriated, a reference to a caller from nearly 10 years ago). This connection to the past allows The Jim Rome Show to create a history and level of depth not yet accumulated in newer media. These enduring references hearken back to radio’s place as part of an oral tradition, a kind of broad application of oral history as a way of connecting to the past using the medium of the spoken word. Although the Jim Rome website, other unofficial sites, and academic works in part chronicle the show, the true life of the show is in its oral iteration. Within this category, these are primarily positive aspects of community, but also important are more contested aspects of community. Indeed, community must contain a spectrum of interactions, including “conflictual as well as harmonious, intimate as well as political, competitive as well as cooperative” aspects (Wenger, 1998). These points of conflict and disagreement in many ways allow for greater intimacy and rewards, rather than just playing at a polite but superficial distance. The Jim Rome Show demonstrates both positive elements and more conflictual elements seamlessly in each show. Positive aspects are routinely present as callers laud the host and other callers whose “takes” struck a chord and followed the established norms of participation of the show. Conflictual elements are also cultivated through the expected structures of sport: rivalries and competition. Intense rivalries based upon team loyalties are clearly present in many phone calls, and there is overt competition between callers (from the daily efforts to get “racked” and eligible for the call of the day to the annual “smack-off’ in which invited participants compete to win the best “take” of the year). Callers can get “run” off the air with a loud buzzer noise, if their contributions do not meet the norms of participation, well-established but minimally recorded anywhere. Instead, Rome’s loosely defined “have a take and don’t suck” directive serves as the overarching norm, with some behaviors detailed explicitly, such as not sounding as if one is reading one’s contributions, and not taking personal digs at someone’s sexuality.