• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

radio past, present, future

U

Unregistered

Guest
I hear too many people who dwell too much in radio of the past
and are bitter about today's radio. I still have hope for radio
of the future. It's evolving and that's interesting. Same pertains to TV.
 
The difference is - television is actually exciting. The "Golden Age of Televsion" wasn't the overrated 1950s with all those live dramas - it is NOW, with all the well written and produced dramas and comedies on basic and premium cable.

Music radio, on the other hand, is just coasting along with corporate play lists and "efficiencies of scale" such as voice-tracking, so we get to hear pre-recorded announcers working in multiple markets, and there are very few people live studios, other than traffic reporters. Talk radio increasingly moribund and getting obsolete, and is still dominated by right-wing conservatives. Commercial news radio stations are an asset in many markets, but it's hard to listen to their commercial loads with all the non-commercial alternatives (mostly NPR) now available.

IMO, imaginative and eclectic radio (other than the non-comms) hasn't been done for about 2 decades now.
 
LKellerIII said:
Music radio, on the other hand, is just coasting along with corporate play lists and "efficiencies of scale" such as voice-tracking, so we get to hear pre-recorded announcers working in multiple markets, and there are very few people live studios, other than traffic reporters.
Click to expand...

Then again, there was a time when there was a lot more live & local TV, and that went away a long time ago, replaced mainly by national programming. Now you think TV is exciting. Based on that, radio should be exciting once you get better quality programming from national companies. That's already happened with NPR (which you seem to like), and it's becoming more common at stations owned by Clear Channel and Cumulus.
 
Last edited:
Agreed. I'm old enough to remember TV when it had more local programming. With a few notable exceptions, it was pretty cheesy. Good quality radio progamming from national companies would get me listening to music radio again. "Live and local" was great in its time, but it would be the programs I would be interested in, not where it originates from. I've said before that voice-tracking would be OK with me if the announcers actually provided any content, but the trend seems to be away from that. I'm not particularly a fan of Ryan Seacrest, but at least his radio show (reprocessed from his KIIS-FM morning show) provides content other than 5 seconds of mic-time every 5 songs. They run his show in the afternoon in the Bay Area.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom