Slashdot Mirror
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?"
Maybe I just starting to get old, but NPR is a good way to stay abreast of the latest news during my daily commute and provides some sanity, compared to TV news stations like FoxNews. As for commercial radio, besides to occasional classic rock channel, I've found that local college radio has the best offerings.
Radio will be used for a long long time to come.
Ever try to watch TV without using your eyes? It is a visual medium. Most TV shows are unexciting and moronic without the visuals. Try this the next time you watch tv, tape your eyes shut, and just listen. How long before you are bored.
Radio, requires more imagination, more intellegence, and is better stimulation for the brain. Leftwingers have NPR, Rightwingers have Rush (well not at the moment).
Try making sense of beer commercials while blind. "And twins!". Lame. And don't get me started on Porn. What is the point of THAT if you are blind?
You see TV requires more attention while using less brain. Radio requires LESS attention while using MORE brain. Ever try taking apart an engine while watching TV?
I think you get the picture.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Almost every university campus has an independent radio station where almost anybody can get airtime for a few hours, and say/play what they want. I know that very few people tune in, but I really enjoy it. You get a very eclectic collection of music, and usually some "interesting" individuals. I don't think radio will ever die, even the commercial stations, mostly due to car drivers and the ability to hear music that you didn't have to actively search out, even if the music is only being played because RIAA lined that radio station's coffers.
I do also.
The key is how many people listen to music at home VS in there car. I bet most people listen to music in there car more hours of the day than in there homes.
What I really think people are missing is the community aspect of radio. In many small towns the local radio station plays an imporant role. They cover the local high school sports, weather, and community affairs.
They also serve an important role during emergencys.
That is one of the reasons I hate the "Clear Channel" stations. They are nothing but repeaters for the mother station. I think it is time to put more restrictions on local stations. They should have a required amount of local program content.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
Clear Channel stations are certainly not worth listening to. I used to think local call-in contests were bad enough, but Clear Channel has made them nationwide. Combine this with their highly censored playlists, their blind dedication to the war in Iraq coupled with sensationalist misreporting (a Clear Channel station here reported four buried vans in the desert as "Vindication for Bush: underground chemical weapons Labs were found today in Iraq") and their propensity for hiring the most moronic, annoying DJs possible, and you have the recipe for a radio station I never want to listen to. Contrast this with our local independent station, 99.5. They don't have call-in contests, you simply sign up as a "community member" of their station and they randomly give away concert tickets. They play an enormous variety of music, and it's rare to hear the same song played more than once in a single month. They have knowledgable DJs who discuss things you never knew about the music they play in a calm, conversational manner so it's pleasant to listen to. I conclude by saying, in the words of Frank Zappa, "KILL UGLY RADIO"
Pardon me. The mass media was ridiculously behind, incorrect, and self-argumentative during 9/11. Slashdot was the only thing carrying more than one viewpoint, and it weathered the storm quite well.
As far as vulnerable to backhoes, radio is far more susceptible to damage, being that a single broadcast point is quickly silenced. I'd be hard pressed to find a network more resistant to damage than IP.
StoneCypher is Full of BS
I understand your point, but for me (living in Manhattan) the internet was the only decent communications medium on 9/11/01. The television was mindlessly looping 30 seconds of video (that I did _not_ want my kids to memorize), the telephones didn't work most of the time, the cell phone network was useless (and as a decent human being you'd want to avoid consuming either, so that emergency workers could get their jobs done) and the internet was JUST FINE. I could get info I needed, when I needed it, with no outages. I could email people, and receive email, just fine. So I spend the next few days playing in the park with my kids and using the internet for communication -- quite pleasant, actually, except for everything smelling like burnt concrete, and feeling jumpy every time a fighter plane circled the city (which was every few minutes).
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!
Check out For example, according to the report (pp 13) 67 percent of Fox News listeners think there is an Al-Qauda Iraq link. only 16% of NPR-PBS listeners/watchers had the same wrong idea. If you think that there was such a link you may care to kno that the President of the United States said there was no evidence of any such link. All right, mod me down as not conservative now.