iPod's launch five years ago caused many to sound the alarms: radio is dead, give DJs the pink slip. I'll decide what I want to listen to and when.
Well here we are a few years later, and the paradigm certainly has shifted to an on-demand culture. Radio is ailing in many ways because of this, but I don't blame the iPod. Radio has been poisoning itself for years now, and ignorance to the digital revolution is only part of the problem.
Simply scanning the FM dial for a few minutes will reveal the true reason why radio listenership is down: homogenous, repetitive programming. Cookie-cutter stations were a great business model back in the mid-90s when media ownership laws were relaxed: radio megalopoli formed with a slick, straightforward presence, and ad sales boomed as a result. But nearly a decade later, this formula has finally become obsolete to an audience that now has a choice of turning to internet radio, satellite radio, download services, or podcasts for entertainment. Folks have grown tired of hearing the same 10 songs over and over in every city across the land, and they've caught on to the insincerity of delocalized (or automated, see Jack-FM) programming. Certainly the latest string of payola scandals has only added to the public's animosity toward mainstream radio.
Listeners are also questioning shifts in NPR's programming. In recent years, many NPR stations have abandoned their committment to classical music in favor of the financially-rewarding all-news format. Although answering to the bottom line might have a lot to do with cuts in federal funding, listeners are well aware of the financial factor affecting programming.
Could it be that radio listeners have grown fickle and listless with the old formulas and tricks? Is the pendulum now swinging back toward an era of localism, personality, and diverse programming? Quite possibly. Very recently, the two largest radio conglomerates in the U.S., Clear Channel and CBS Radio, each sold a significant number of stations, essentially marking the failure of their business models. Nationwide domination is not working for either company, and they have each decided to scrap efforts in small and mid-sized radio markets. This decentralization, combined with public outcry against the FCC's revisitation of media ownership rules, just might help resurrect radio's soul.
Sorta follows the obvious path of all media today: audience guided, controlled, and participated. Video games have become one of the most dominant forms of entertainment in the last decade, so it is safe to assume that purely passive entertainment (radio, television and film) will not be able to compete with anything that allows for interface. The future of radio, I think, will most likely either a) have a .com instead of an FM at the end, and be user guided (like Pandora) and b) have much more variety, as the big box companies try and garner as much attention as they can, even reaching out to niche groups. WFMU's place in this could be pretty cutting edge, since its business (is that the right phrase?) model allows for listener input on many levels. Also, the listener supported model gives me a sense of duty to listen and participate with the station, since I spent the money on it (along with thousands of others). While I don't know how an actual "profit" can be produced with the listener supported model, its important to remember that there was not much consensus on how to produce of profit on the internet (besides bilking investors). Trial and error has produced some working models, so I suppose the new wave of radio will have to do the same. Whatever comes though is going to be a welcome relief to having to listen to Bruce Springstein's "Born to Run" for the millionth time when driving my car, which would definitely bring some welcome soul back to my life.
Posted by: Nicholas | December 04, 2006 at 01:05 PM
If the multimillion dollar profit Clear Channel made on buidling up and selling those stations was a "failure of a business model", I want to know how to design a failing business model too. Then I can retire.
Posted by: Listener Dave | December 04, 2006 at 03:34 PM
Dave,
You could go out there and try to emulate the Clear Channel model again, in 2006. Let us know how it goes...
Posted by: Listener Mike D. | December 05, 2006 at 09:32 AM