Who Needs Radio?

DragonMagic writes "MSNBC asks what many /.ers have been asking: Who needs the radio anymore? Rather, it goes on to really ask, who needs the RIAA anymore? With online music distribution sources, television, and the internet itself, how much longer will it be before the radio, and the RIAA, will be an obsolete means to promote artists?"

What?

[marshac]

Why do you assume that only music is played over the radio? I listen to NPR for hours every day on my daily drive to/from work.

Erm... a lot of people

[gardyloo]

Anyone who doesn't have fast internet access or a television (or who doesn't want to pay for cable television).
Anyone who likes to camp and take a $5 transistor radio along, rather than lug a satellite uplink system for online-access.
Anyone who drives, and likes to have music or blather going while doing it (driving, that is).

In short, a LOT of people.

dont forget that

[SirSlud]

.. the radio still eclipsed the TV in terms of audience for the World Series.

Maybe 'we' dont need them, but their miniturization and tiny cost make them a difficult technology to let go of, if you look across the demographic spectrum.

To say nothing about me prefering drivers listening to the radio rather than watching TV, if they are interested in having somebody else picking the tunes ...

Just some stupid thoughts.

I love radio

[matt_morgan]

Or, to be more specific, I love a few radio stations. WFMU (wfmu.org; 91.1 in the NYC/NJ area), KFJC, a few other great stations. The radio we don't need is all the monopolized Clear Channel stations. We all know they suck. But great, personal, free-form radio is still out there, and with web streaming is thankfully more available than ever. Maybe I'm crazy, but I like to be surprised by what I like once in a while. Without WFMU, I'd be listening to the same stuff over and over. If you're tired of radio, you're listening to the wrong stations.

Cars?

[KingDaveRa]

I listen to the radio all the time in the car whilst driving. Its a much safer option than tape, CD or MP3. Less fiddling about changing song and the like. I just poke a button and I've changed channel. Radio's 'killer app' has always been being able to listen to music in the car for me. Better than listening to people honk at me when I cut them up at junctions anyway.

Is it just me ...

[dabooda]

... or did everyone in the world become a computer user/music downloader over night?

Not everyone has a PC and not everyone get's their taste of new music from the interent.

In fact I would say that most people hear music on the radio then either buy the CD or download the mp3.

I doubt that services iTunes will make radio stations disappear ...

Radio will be around for a long time

[Benm78]

Radio will not be silenced for a long time, I think.

The technology has been around for a very long time, and broadcast radio will probably outlive us all.

Using relatively simple and affordable technology, radio is a great medium to broadcast a message to a big audience. Even when the power goes out, all networks are fried and most infrastructure desroyed, radio is there. And its there as an important means for any government to communicate in such situation. If we'd loose the architecture, we might loose a medium that can save many lives when needed.

And yes, i mean broadcast radio there, since it is vital that recievers are common among the population.

However, radio's function in promoting music will probably diminish over the next decade(s), and largely be replaced by streaming etc.

Driving?

[TamMan2000]

How does that change the question? Can't you theoretically get talk radio content over, say, the Internet?

While driving?

Re:What?

[contrabassoon]

Indeed. As a radio producer, I feel the real "art" in radio is well beyond just spinning tunes. KPFA, NPR BBC PRI and many other entities are actively using radio as a communications medium, rather than just a corporate jukebox. There are great shows like "this american life" which are compelling and creative. I am hopeful that more and more of this type of radio production will help keep the medium current in the years to come.

Radio has been around for 100 years. It's pretty amazing that TV, the internet, etc. haven't killed it. It's still enjoyed by hundreds of millions of people here in the US every day.

I believe question was misphrased

[Atario]

Incorrect question:

With online music distribution sources, television, and the internet itself, how much longer will it be before the radio, and the RIAA, will be an obsolete means to promote artists?

Corrected question:

With online music distribution sources, television, and the internet itself, how long has it been since the radio, and the RIAA, became an obsolete means to promote artists?

Decline of radio

[ChuckDivine]

My musical tastes tend toward classical, jazz, some older rock, some avant garde, some weird stuff.

How do I learn about new music? From friends, live concerts and now free sampler CDs at places like Borders. Yes, I'm also now trying the Internet occasionally -- to satisfy my curiosity and broaden my horizons.

I make sufficient money to purchase CDs from people I really like. For instance, paying $15 or more for a CD at Maryland's Renfest is reasonable to me. Of course, I've heard the artists and know I'll like their work. It also helps to know the money is going to the artists, not some huge RIAA member.

There's another reason I'm listening to less radio that wasn't mentioned in the article. Radio quality is declining. Here's the current playlist for WGMS (a Washington, DC classical station):

5:03 pm Mozart: Symphony #41 "Jupiter": I

5:12 pm Schubert: Impromptu in A-flat Major (Op. 90 #4)

Mozart's Jupiter symphony is more than 9 minutes long. WGMS now seems to be going in much more for short selections than full works -- especially at drive time. I'd rather stick with my CD player. No, I don't get exposed to new music (precious little of that on any radio station around here). But I also don't get pestered with commercials.

Obviously never heard XM Radio..

[quadra]

FM Music Radio programming just sucks. Check out sattellite radio and you'll understand just how entertaining radio can be. It's well worth the $10/month.

NPR, blackouts, conservative shills

[spoonyfork]

Hey, I'm one of the millions that listen to NPR [npr.org] during the day, mostly to and from work.

In case you weren't affected by the GREAT FEARSOME BLACKOUT OF 2003 [nervousnero.com], those of us who were crowded around radios to get news.

Don't forget the 20 million so-called "dittoheads" that hang on Rush's [amazon.com] every word every day. Republican shill talk radio has never been so popular (depending on where you read your stats).

There's big money in radio and the guy [infinityradio.com] who owns it is raking it in.

talk on the radio

[Jucius Maximus]

(I hope this post goes through. I've gotten that damn 500 internal server error something like 30 times on this one post.)

For sure. News stations that feature only news all the time are a godsend when commuting, and important in emergencies as well.

Remember The Blackout? I was at work patching the office for the Blaster worm when the lights went out. If it wasn't for radio and other wireless communication, we would have had no idea wtf was going on. Thankfully radio stations with reserve power managed to transmit so everyone could get into the car or use battery powered tranceivers to get the news updates.

I used to drive to and from Toronto all the time across a strech of the 401 and if it wasn't for 680 news I would have gotten into a lot of traffic jams.

Thus radio is still needed because it is an important way of disseminating information quickly, especially when only battery or small generator power is available.

Internet radio

[Phroggy]

At home I listen to the BBC's Radio Five Live for news and current events with an international perspective, NPR's program stream for interesting domestic programming that my local public radio station isn't playing at the time I choose to listen, and for music, an awesome jazz stream from Korea (they play some crap, but a lot of really great stuff too, and no the music isn't Korean).

Re:Erm... a lot of people

[rsadelle]

Anyone who doesn't have fast internet access Amen! One of the biggest problems with any sort of "downloadable (insert product here) is the wave of the future" arguments is that there are still people stuck on--gasp!--slow dial-up connections, either because they can't afford anything else or because that's all that's available in their area.

Re:I believe question was misphrased

[yerricde]

Commercial radio playing popular music is not obsolete until the Internet Protocol reaches 50 percent of motor vehicles.

Re:What?

[Davak]

The elderly really depend on radio.

I have cared for many elderly people who would sit and listen to the world--their world--on the radio each day.

Church services, local sports, weather, politics, school functions--these all are often played on small local radio stations... and the older generation feels that they can keep in touch this way.

With their decreasing vision and difficulty manipulating the TV, the radio is an excellent friend to these people.

I wonder if they'll be prying the keyboard out of my hands one day... as all the younger generations have their neural inplants. They'll all be slashdotting with direct neural connections and laughing how the mouse and keyboard will soon die.

Davak

Nice summary

[Augusto]

You captured the whole thing perfectly! :-)

During the most recent great blackout. . .

[kfg]

(yes, I'm old enough to remember more than one) everything failed. My internet connection went down, my TV went black, my electric lights went out ( my oil lamps chugged along like always).

My portable radio worked like a charm and the emergency generators the radio stations employ kept them on the air.

Promoting RIAA "stars" is hardly the only use for radio. In fact, small radio stations are still the most used medium for promoting obscure music unaligned with the RIAA, why do you think they oppose the proliferation of small neighborhood radio stations?

Radio is one of the true modern marvels, its usefulness is far from past.

KFG

Re:What?

[slasher999]

How soon we forget. Anyone remember how useless the Internet was on 11 September 2001? Internet communication still uses shared bandwidth and is typically a one to one communication. Each user opens a connection to a web server over a relatively small pipe and requests data. With radio the data is always there - just turn on the receiver. No bandwidth constraints, no waiting for requests to be processed, no /. effect, and most of the time it's backhoe-proof. Can't say that for most websites or the Internet infrastructure in general.

Re:Erm... a lot of people

[JaredOfEuropa]

Also... people (like myself) who want to hear something new once in a while.

Sadly not many radio stations serve as a good source to discover new music. Studio Brussels was quite good; I used to commute for 2 hours (one way!) every day, and I'd listen to that station. Every now and then I'd hear something interesting and I'd quickly jot down the band name. A good station, with short and infrequent commercial breaks, DJ's that still knew how to shut up, and if they had the occasional caller on the air, they'd keep it real short. Too bad I can't receive that station on my car radio on the commute I have now.

The current run-of-the-mill radio stations playing nothing but prepackaged crap in between overly chatty DJs, deserve to die.

Re:music distrobution

[twistedcubic]

They'll become popular in ways artists became popular before the RIAA existed. Plus we have the internet now, which is the point.

Re:Translated for the America-Impaired

[Anonymous Coward]

At its core, I suspect you will find Fox has no political agenda. Its real purpose is to deliver power to, and make a shitload of money for, Murdoch and his family. It just so happens that a 'conservative agenda' makes the most money/power for Murdoch, at the moment.

Politics, country and idealistic things like that mean nothing to Murdoch. Remember, this is the guy that walked away from his country (changed citizenship from Australian to US) and dumped a mariage of 30 years for commercial reasons.

Re:Translated for the America-Impaired

[cyril3]

NPR is left-wing only if you believe that "if you are not with us, you are against us"

pacifica radio is great!

[rjnagle]

Well, it's a bit unfair to tout noncommercial radio on this discussion. But Pacifica Radio [pacifica.org] is full of fresh surprising viewpoints, and my local Houston affiliate kpft.org [kpft.org] actually plays great music. It gives you a sense of how fun dj's used to be.

Bogus claim of submitter

[LordSah]

Rather, it goes on to really ask, who needs the RIAA anymore?

No, it doesn't. If the the submitter had read the article without his anti-RIAA glasses on, he would've realized that the article just questions the relevance of radio in a world dominated by the internet and visual media.

The article specifically mentions Kelly Clarkson and Clay Aiken. Kelly received quite a bit of radio play, while Clay was seldom heard on the airwaves but still outsold Ms. Clarkson. Quote:
But the heir to her throne, runner-up but reigning king, Clay Aiken, didn't have as much luck with radio. Deejays across the country mocked him, didn't take him seriously, and often refused to play his music. Well the joke just might be on them.
Despite little radio play, Aiken's debut album went double platinum in its first week of release, out-selling Clarkson's album by a landslide. Aiken's success serves as a shining example of the power television now has over the music industry, and the arguably insignificant power radio has these days. (emphasis mine)

This article addresses radio's lessened impact on the recording industry, and not the recording industry's impact on society.

Re:Translated for the America-Impaired

[Inebrius]

A suicide bomber is someone that blows themself up.

A homicide bomber is someone that blows themself up with the intent of blowing others up.

If someone shoots a bunch of people and then shoots themself, do you call it a mass suicide or murder?

To me, it's obvious. I don't know why the rest of the news media doesn't recognize the obvious.

Idiot

[Anonymous Coward]

NPR is NOT "left wing". Never has been, and I've been listening for almost 20 years. If they seem to have a political slant, it's because the shows and views presented are usually in tune with the sensibilities of academics and artists and sometimes geeks even.

Yeah, three groups that vote overwhelmingly liberal. I hope that's a troll, and that you're not actually as stupid as you seem.

Re:What?

[McDutchie]

How soon we forget. Anyone remember how useless the Internet was on 11 September 2001?

No, I remember how useless mainstream news websites were on 11 September 2001. The Internet was working as well as always, and mirror sites were springing up all over the place. IRC and e-mail were also working just fine. The Internet was extremely useful indeed, if you just bothered to look beyond the mainstream web. Remember, Internet != WWW.

Re:Translated for the America-Impaired

[laird]

" A suicide bomber is someone that blows themself up.

A homicide bomber is someone that blows themself up with the intent of blowing others up."

Correction: By your definition, then, there has never in history of the world been an intentional "suicide bomber". Rather than attempt to spin that one, let's just admint that "homicide bomber" is a pathetic attempt by FOX to rename suicide bombers in order to portray them more negatively.

It's almost as weird as how newspeople are using the word "bias" instead of "hate". As in "johnny was the victim of a bias crime". I have no idea what that one's about.

Don't give into false dichotomies and ignorance.

[jbn-o]

Now, draw up sides, and... engage!

Cute--but I hope this doesn't give anyone the idea that it's okay to mentally disengage; to think of everyone as fitting into the false dichotomy you present then feel smug about being somehow above the fray. People who come away with that impression are often the people who should be challenged to think more critically.

It is valuable to provide yourself with a deeper understanding of the power to frame a debate. I've learned this first-hand by getting involved at a low-power community radio station (WEFT 90.1 FM -- I host "Digital Citizen"). I encourage everyone to get involved in their community radio stations (or start one).

Re:What?

[Rorschach1]

It sure as hell wasn't for the music that I got one of those solar/crank powered radios for my emergency kit.

Of course, being a ham radio operator, the 'who needs radio' headline kind of got to me. I mean, you guys DO like your 802.11, right? And your cellphones? Geez, there's more to the spectrum than FM broadcast.

Hardly.

[William R. Dickson]

NPR's funding breakdown [npr.org]. An excerpt:

The only direct government funding NPR receives is through competitive grants from government agencies for specific projects. Such grants are awarded by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, the National Science Foundation, and the National Endowments for the Arts and the Humanities, and typically represent only 2% of total revenues.

Re:Government subsidizes corporate radio.

[T3kno]

I am no fan of Clear Channel, IMHO they have done way more harm than good when it comes to radio in general. They are in the top 5 of my most hated entities, MPAA, RIAA, IRS, Clear Channel, and the State Franchise Tax Board.

Just FYI, 90% of the hosts on KFI hate clear channel too. Jon and Ken are no fans of clear channel, Bill Handel doesn't like them, and Matt Drudge (syndicated) rarely has anything good to say about them either.

Clear channel is smart enough to realize that the reason that they have the Number 3 station overall in the LA market (including FM) is because they give the hosts a very wide berth when it comes to their opinions, that is why the republican and democrat lambs really don't like the station.

Free minded individuals that dare to question the establishment a little bit are who listen to the station, which, as shown by the recent recall election, is most of us. The recall effort was very much spearheaded by John and Ken, and although I don't think the state elected the best candidte he is better than Gumby, and more importantly we sent a message to the politicians.

Back to my point, there are very few who would like to see Clear Channel and the other radio conglomerates disappear more than I. Sorry Robert ;)

Who needs radio? The whole world!

[ElGanzoLoco]

(Typing this from Cairo, Egypt, where there IS internet of course)

In the third-world / developping world, the radio is THE main means of communication. People here listen to radio all day long; this is where I get the news reports related to the place I live in (I mean, when you're in Egypt you care more about what's happening in Lebanon, Iran, Syria, Sudan, etc, than the bushfires in Los Angeles). Radio is great in that it provides localized information, as opposed to the web.

Cheap, also. I bought a 6 dollars radio that does its job perfectly well, allows me to browse in local / arabic music (go find that on Kazaa when you don't have a clue about arabic music!!).

Easy to maintain, too... Most *very* remote places (Africa, south america, asia, etc) have ONE radio + a number of batteries when the power goes out, and with only this equipment, they manage to stay in touch with the rest of the world (how the hell do you think people in, say, Guinee-Bissau managed to learn about Sept. 11?).

Internet is WAY more difficult and expensive to dispatch, operate and mantain.

Re:Translated for the America-Impaired

[Guppy06]

"NPR is left wing (although it seems middle-of-the-road to liberals)."

Um... I'm "conservative" by most peoples' reckonings. I'm pro gun rights, pro states rights, I like the idea of free trade, support the continuing mission in Iraq, and I even voted for Bush in '00 (although I'll probably be voting against Ashcroft next year). About the only thing I'm not is a member of the GOP (political parites... blech...). But I can't stand Fox News and routinely rely on NPR for all my news above all other options.

If NPR is so "left-leaning," there'd be a lot more opinion-based commentary, kind of like Fox News. NPR is about the only place where you can find a news group that routinely reads letters over the air from dissenting listeners, and they don't even comment on/reply to/belittle those.

About the only "left" part of public radio is the funding scheme. But even then, I've never heard programming on a public radio station underwritten by a labor group.

Re:What?

[shankariyer]

I beg to differ.

God forbid, if on Sep 11, if there could've been an blast in the radio-station, the signal would've still been lost.

Being in CA, surely I was scanning thro' different websites, which were getting updated - almost instantly.Visually I was able to feel as what was going on...

IMO, these are 2 different medium but serving a common purpose - "communication". Remember, radio transmits only voice. Tomorrow, while you drive you might want to see how bad the traffic is, along with the traffic report on your radio, well you can receive a video-trasmission along with the voice, while you're reserving for a movie... You can call it as a TV, but if the same 'device' has an 'browing' capability ( ofcourse ) along with zillion other features, it surely is useful and can be called "Internet".

If you think about it, they follow many common methods to feed "information".

• You change the band to listen to another station - you browse thro' different web-pages
• Medium remains the same in both the cases, with the user - PC or a Radio-device

Having said that, "internet" has the option to show video and/or restrict only to audio( streaming audio ), while "radio" doesn't offer video. After all why is TV able to flourish till this day ?

I'm sure that there was someone, who was able to get a "visual feeling" on Sep 11th, from a palm or any such device, ofcourse "along with the voice of a human narrator"

Why We Still Need the RIAA

[da_anarchist]

Last week, the senior vice president of the RIAA came to my college for a debate on copywrite and p2p. When asked how the RIAA can continue to justify the existence of the record labels with iTunes et al, his response was that we would have no new popular music without the promotion offered by the labels. I call BS. On the contrary, instead of the labels actively pushing the latest crap from Britney Spears through radio promotion and advertising, truly good music would spread through word-of-mouth. Every single day the RIAA and its cohorts continue to exist is another day our ears are spoonfed by what some executive at one of the Big 5 labels believes the public can be manipulated to purchase thorugh relentless marketing. Unfortunatley for the labels, p2p makes it easy for people to figure out that album x is crap before they have a chance to buy, hence the rapid erosion of their dated business model and the RIAA's desperate fight for survival.

Radio is still, and will remain, necessary...

[aaaurgh]

...as a communications medium for those situations when there is no direct wire alternative and/or people don't want predefined content and/or want access to news and the likes. I know that Europe has the RDS system which can interupt your car player with traffic bulletins, but who's going to run a purely traffic news content channel? I personally prefer to use the car radio during the rush hour with my CDs as backup for when the radio content is not to my taste, that way I can concentrate on the matter at hand - driving safely.

Apart from the obvious situations of car, cycling, walking and etc. where there is no viable direct connection possible, what about when the power goes down or there is no/inadequate infrastructure - people here in the Aussie Bush have enough trouble just getting reliable land-lines, never mind dial-up and broadband; and as for Africa/Asia/etc... 'nuf sed!

Perhaps radio will become a less popular medium for music promotion but, until the whole world is reliably wired, it will continue to use music in addition to providing other content, if only to fill the gaps between the news, traffic and ad. breaks.

Re:I believe question was misphrased

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly.

How many TV pop stars have there been and for how long does any single person want to listen to them?

How many people are realy downloading gobs of music off the internet? As much as the RIAA would like you to beleive, not that many are doing it all the time for all the music they ever listen to otherwise there would be millions upon millions of law suits.

How many people are using itunes or the like to download all their music needs all the time? Again not many.

Finally, how many are doing all of the above in significant amount to make radio obsolete?

Radio will be around for a long time. None of the things mentioned in the article together make radio on the virge of going away any time soon.

Re:I believe question was misphrased

[1u3hr]

Who primarily listened to radio to hear new artists? At most I did this on local "alternative" stations for a few hours a week (unfortunately none wher I live now). Most of the time it's for ambient music, news and weather.

The PC of whatever form factor is silly as a primary source of radio-type sound. Can it replace an earphone FM radio as large as a cigarette lighter? Can I take one trekking in Nepal to listen to the BBC World Service on shortwave? Can it run for days on 2 AA batteries?

Re:I listen to my local independent radio station

[ikewillis]

Wow, I was somewhat taken aback to discover this as 99.5 has never mentioned it anywhere, unlike the local Clear Channel stations which always end their station ID by saying "A Clear Channel Station" That's a bit odd...

But regardless, it doesn't diminish the fact that 99.5 is a great station, as can be attested to by monique. In this age of Clear Channel homoginization, it's so nice to see a station stand out and be different, even if they are owned by a "conglomerate".

As for that "conglomerate", as AC pointed out it appears you don't quite have your facts straight either. According to 103.7 The Mountain [kmtt.com]'s web site, Entercom was "a small family-owned Philadelphia company" back in 1990. Their station portfolio contains a couple dozen stations, compared to the hundreds owned by Cumulus and the thousands owned by Clear Channel. Clear Channel is a veritable monopoly at this point, controlling an order of magnitude more radio stations than their nearest competator.

So, I supposed I don't mind corporate controlled radio... as long as it's not UGLY RADIO.

One more thing...

[ikewillis]

I do listen to an undisputably independent radio station, Boulder Free Radio [kbfr.org], which operates (illegally, of course) without an FCC license.