Traditional Radio Endangered By New Tech 287
Rob wrote to mention a Reuters article discussing the danger to traditional radio posed by new new technologies. From the article: "The radio industry could find itself at the kids' table in the media banquet hall, as new technology threatens the business, advertising executives said this week at the Reuters Media and Advertising Summit. Satellite radio, digital music players and the Internet are slowly encroaching on traditional radio's stronghold on local entertainment and advertising. Plus, radio ads themselves are less memorable and creative, these executives said."
Re:In other news (Score:1, Informative)
Last.fm (Score:3, Informative)
Personalised radio programmes based on induvidual taste are the way forward!
Compulsory Last.fm [www.last.fm] reference
Re:XM/Sirius question (Score:2, Informative)
Our local NPR has a great music station. (Score:0, Informative)
I switch between The Current and MPR's "news and information" station. It's rare I don't find something worth listening to on either.
I can't listen to commercial radio any more.
Re:Satellite Radio Sucks (Score:1, Informative)
Re:XM Radio, I love it. (Score:2, Informative)
http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=13741
It isn't new tech that's killing radio. (Score:2, Informative)
Taken from The Myth of Media Piracy: [jmcardle.com]
It died when in 1996, the US Federal Communication Commission changed the laws on radio station ownership, removing the limits on how many stations a single company could own. As a consequence, Clear Channel was able to take over station after station. Within a matter of years, it owned 1,200 stations across the United-States; including 247 of the 250 largest radio markets.[1] This severely limited the amount and variety of new music being played on the airwaves. As Touré, a contributing editor to the Rolling Stones put it, "So now if you can't get through Clear Channel, or you can't get through MTV, how does anybody know your record is out?"[2] The fact is, no one can. Furthermore, polls indicated that youths were being turned off by the lack of fresh music on the air.[3]
Radio seemingly play the same 10 songs over and over. It doesn't help that labels like Sony BMG illegally bribed stations to play the tunes they wanted.[4]
These new technologies represent what radio should be: music. Not the worst crap of the 80s/90s repeated every hour. Unfortunately, these technologies either cost money (Sirius), or have to pay such insane royalty fees that they have no choice but to fall in the realm of illegality (Internet Radio). Did you know that an Internet Radio station has to pay $25,000 in royalties every day if it has 10,000 listeners? [5] Traditional radio on the other hand don't have to pay any royalties.
Sources:
1. http://www.salon.com/ent/feature/2001/04/30/clear
2. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/mus
3. http://www.radiodiversity.com/faceofradio.html [radiodiversity.com]
4. http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/050725/music_probe.html?.
5. http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/2002
Re:XM/Sirius question (Score:4, Informative)
By the way, Sirius lets you stream all the music stations to your computer (windows media player required, works on Mac or Windows). So you can subscribe and listen to music without the radio, pretty much whenever you're online.
Re:Public Radio (Score:4, Informative)
I actually know some construction workers in MA who tape it overnight and then listen to it at work instead of the normal programming.
Re:XM Radio, I love it. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Public Radio (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Satellite Radio Sucks (Score:4, Informative)
It's *very* obvious in the DJ speaking voices, but it happens in the music similarly. The worst is a sort of a "hollow" reverb effect.
By the way, the best feature IS the streaming audio, which is free if you subscribe to the broadcast service (or, is included, if you prefer that perspective).
I listened to mine on broadcast for 6 straight days on a car trip, and I had a lot of opportunity to compare it to FM stations along I-80. The best Sirius channels are nowhere near as good in terms of audio quality as a good FM station, and the talk channels are worse than AM. I tried various encoding schemes from CD to compare, and somewhere in the range of a 96 kbps MP3 was pretty comparable to the very best Sirius channels. In other words, just barely good enough for most people, and not a whole lot worse from what a lot of people tolerate on their iPods (128 kbps is what I think you get from the ITMS - whatever it is it's on the edge of tolerable quality-wise). Which I guess is what they were shooting for.
couldn't even find a bit rate low enough to replicate the worst of the talk channels.
I think it's *probably* worth the money, but if you are expecting CD quality sound you will be sorely disapppointed.
Brett
King Radio is dead, love live King Podcast (Score:2, Informative)
Lots of people don't have access to podcasts yet but it won't be long until they are easier and more accessible then radio.