At the end of the day, it is callous and uncaring, and while the people making those decisions might feel bad about it, they do it anyway. Lightly or not, they cut the head count as instructed.
I remember having a long conversation with someone on my staff who was frustrated over his inability to get a bump in his salary after years of service. He thought that working hard and doing a good job was enough. It wasn't. I explained that to "corporate," he wasn't a person. He was an entry on a spreadsheet. If the number on one square that represented his pay went up too far, someone up the food chain would have to answer for the increase.
I had to tell him "I'm sorry you're thinking that busting your ass and doing a good job doesn't matter, but it doesn't." Because that's true. He finally got that bump in pay not because he was working harder, but because he got a slightly different job description. The home office looked at him not as a person who had been promoted, but as a new position that was a different entry on the spreadsheet.
That's callous and uncaring. I get that. I understand what's going on. But I'm not going to pretend it's anything other than a necessary evil. At some point, we have to evaluate whether ruthlessly cutting staff over and over again is a good idea, and treating people like an entry on a spreadsheet is the proper way to grow a business built on talent and creativity.
At the moment, other models are cutting into radio's market share by offering alternatives, and radio's response seems to be "well maybe if we cut staff even more, we can compete!"