I was watching the talk shows this morning analysing this week's violence in Egypt, and I was struck by one comment: The government was powerless to control the people, who were communicating via Twitter. This isn't a revolution about politics, it's a revolution about expression and the internet. In the end, politics will probably take over, but for now, the revolution is on the net.
It made me think about the theme of revolution in this country, from 1776 to 1861 to 1968. This year marks the 150th anniversary of the Civil War. Back then, the state of South Carolina seceded from the Union. Lincoln's task in preserving the Union was bringing those states back into the fold.
I believe if a similar civil war were to happen, states wouldn't necessarily secede from the union. Because that's not how state governments work any more. George Wallace was the last governor who could threaten to secede from the union. Today, even though the lines are still drawn between red states and blue states, and the debate continues to rage over the role of federal power vs. state's rights, the actual physical act of secession probably wouldn't happen.
What's changed here is the empowerment of the people through the internet. They don't need governments or states to represent them. They represent themselves. And if they get enough people together on the same side, it's a movement. That's what we saw last year with the Tea Party, and that's what we're seeing in Eqypt.
So what does this mean for radio? If one equates radio to a centralized system, like government, radio represents the status quo. It is top-down broadcasting, with programmers picking music, and air talent deciding topics to talk about. But we live in a world where the people don't need those structures any more. They have the internet and can pick their own songs and topics. The government needs a certain amount of stability and control to exist. That's what's missing now in Egypt. But radio just needs an audience. It's not bound by outside forces, but instead by the controls it places on itself. This is why I say that radio can draw a lot of audience and relevance from using the internet not simply for streaming its air signal, but interacting with its audience, and allowing THEM to decide the music and topics. I've found by using Facebook how "friends" will take a wall post and make it their own. If you respond or comment on their posts, it leads to more comments, and ultimately to more "friends." It's an amazing resource for radio. I know the traditional view of programmers is to say "We know what's best," and to program from the gut or research numbers. But you get so much more information from direct interaction with listeners. It's this interaction, this conversation, and this COMMUNITY that gets to the heart of what radio is all about. When we talk about serving a community, that's what it means. To know your community, and respond to their needs. Not running some talk show about school board elections. But becoming a sounding board for the people. It's either that, or you could do what they did in Egypt...with similar results.
It made me think about the theme of revolution in this country, from 1776 to 1861 to 1968. This year marks the 150th anniversary of the Civil War. Back then, the state of South Carolina seceded from the Union. Lincoln's task in preserving the Union was bringing those states back into the fold.
I believe if a similar civil war were to happen, states wouldn't necessarily secede from the union. Because that's not how state governments work any more. George Wallace was the last governor who could threaten to secede from the union. Today, even though the lines are still drawn between red states and blue states, and the debate continues to rage over the role of federal power vs. state's rights, the actual physical act of secession probably wouldn't happen.
What's changed here is the empowerment of the people through the internet. They don't need governments or states to represent them. They represent themselves. And if they get enough people together on the same side, it's a movement. That's what we saw last year with the Tea Party, and that's what we're seeing in Eqypt.
So what does this mean for radio? If one equates radio to a centralized system, like government, radio represents the status quo. It is top-down broadcasting, with programmers picking music, and air talent deciding topics to talk about. But we live in a world where the people don't need those structures any more. They have the internet and can pick their own songs and topics. The government needs a certain amount of stability and control to exist. That's what's missing now in Egypt. But radio just needs an audience. It's not bound by outside forces, but instead by the controls it places on itself. This is why I say that radio can draw a lot of audience and relevance from using the internet not simply for streaming its air signal, but interacting with its audience, and allowing THEM to decide the music and topics. I've found by using Facebook how "friends" will take a wall post and make it their own. If you respond or comment on their posts, it leads to more comments, and ultimately to more "friends." It's an amazing resource for radio. I know the traditional view of programmers is to say "We know what's best," and to program from the gut or research numbers. But you get so much more information from direct interaction with listeners. It's this interaction, this conversation, and this COMMUNITY that gets to the heart of what radio is all about. When we talk about serving a community, that's what it means. To know your community, and respond to their needs. Not running some talk show about school board elections. But becoming a sounding board for the people. It's either that, or you could do what they did in Egypt...with similar results.
