Why does radio suck?

[KevinFodor]

radio sucks because my 53 year old ears cannot relate to the majority of sounds coming from the FM dial in LA. Thank goodness for online/ipod/Sirius XM

Well, I too, am 53...I just don't live in L.A. (thank God!). But you have to remember, no one is going to program to people our age. Advertisers insist on the 25-54 crowd, and, to a smaller extent on the 18-34 crowd. We're at the end of the first line, and left the second a lonnnnnnnnnnnnng time ago!

 

[RicoGregg]

Radio used to put "regular people" on the air. They were relate-able. They became your friends. They were average joes who occasionally became celebrities.
Today radio puts "celebrities" on they air. They live in bigger houses than you do. They aren't your friend. They aren't relate-able (Seacrest, Donny Osmond, etc.)

So Gary Owens, Casey Casem, Wink Martindale, Bill Ballance, Robert W. Morgan and many many others lived in little houses in Lynwood?

Actually while I was still a grade school kid one of the very popular local radio personalities lived in a small tract home right down the street, not even as large as ours. Another who also happened to be Jonathan Winter's mom lived in more affluent digs but still within our area of town. I think the poster was more referring to the aura they presented, though I've heard that Robert W. was far from Mr. Personality in real life. Of course we are all aware of Bill Handel's Persian Palace but he still appeals to the common man.

I realize that poster nmoore was not trashing Robert W. Morgan, but I still feel the need to speak on his behalf. I worked at Golden West with RWM for four years. Our paths crossed often. I started there running the board during the all-night Transtar shift. Morgan's producer would come in sometimes as early as 4:30am and turn the thermostat all the way down, the way Robert wanted it. In no time, the studio would be like an icebox. It got to the point where I was taking my jacket to work during summer. We used to joke that Morgan was a polar bear. More often than not, he would come in grumpy, the same mood I'm usually in when I wake up. He always came in at least a half hour early. And without fail, every morning, he would tell me to go home as soon as he walked in, that he would take over the board from there. I was always tired at that time, and my teeth were always chattering at that time, so as a result, I loved Robert for doing that.

No question that Robert W. was moody. There was a nice, generous side to him, and there was another side to him somewhat akin to a Pacific Southwest Diamondback rattlesnake. There were times he angered me, but in due time I came to realize that he did that to everybody at GWB. The receptionist there told me that he had bitten her head off many a time, and the GM had also felt his wrath at times. It was part of Robert being Robert.

Then there was the proud papa Morgan when his daughter started working at Pirate Radio. There was the Morgan that had anti-racism posters in his office. And, there was the Robert W. Morgan who greeted me like a long-lost friend the very last time I saw him, late one night in the parking lot of the Sunset Strip Tower Records as I was coming back from a UCLA basketball game. He couldn't have been friendlier.

The only thing all this proves is that Robert W. Morgan was human. While I didn't consider him a personal friend, I would not hesitate to work with him again. He was a great talent, and L.A. radio is not the same without him.

Maybe it was also an extension of the theater of the mind of early radio and a lot of the first TV hosts transferred over from radio. Back then, in my youth, the movies stars were presented as glamorous yet many of them like Jimmy Stewart still carried off an ah shucks aura as well. The publicity of stars back then emphasized their home and family lives, though for Joan Crawford and Bing Crosby their children dispelled those illusions later on. Is it possible that today we have too much exposure of our celebrities with their peccadilloes and many of them are not truly people we WOULD WANT in our living rooms?

Again, this goes to show that celebrities, like anybody else, are human with the same faults and foibles as the rest of us. Are stars supposed to be held to a higher standard than the rest of us? I wouldn't think so.

 

[nmoore6676]

Radio used to put "regular people" on the air. They were relate-able. They became your friends. They were average joes who occasionally became celebrities.
Today radio puts "celebrities" on they air. They live in bigger houses than you do. They aren't your friend. They aren't relate-able (Seacrest, Donny Osmond, etc.)

So Gary Owens, Casey Casem, Wink Martindale, Bill Ballance, Robert W. Morgan and many many others lived in little houses in Lynwood?

Actually while I was still a grade school kid one of the very popular local radio personalities lived in a small tract home right down the street, not even as large as ours. Another who also happened to be Jonathan Winter's mom lived in more affluent digs but still within our area of town. I think the poster was more referring to the aura they presented, though I've heard that Robert W. was far from Mr. Personality in real life. Of course we are all aware of Bill Handel's Persian Palace but he still appeals to the common man.

I realize that poster nmoore was not trashing Robert W. Morgan, but I still feel the need to speak on his behalf. I worked at Golden West with RWM for four years.

The only thing all this proves is that Robert W. Morgan was human. While I didn't consider him a personal friend, I would not hesitate to work with him again. He was a great talent, and L.A. radio is not the same without him.

Maybe it was also an extension of the theater of the mind of early radio and a lot of the first TV hosts transferred over from radio. Back then, in my youth, the movies stars were presented as glamorous yet many of them like Jimmy Stewart still carried off an ah shucks aura as well. The publicity of stars back then emphasized their home and family lives, though for Joan Crawford and Bing Crosby their children dispelled those illusions later on. Is it possible that today we have too much exposure of our celebrities with their peccadilloes and many of them are not truly people we WOULD WANT in our living rooms?

Again, this goes to show that celebrities, like anybody else, are human with the same faults and foibles as the rest of us. Are stars supposed to be held to a higher standard than the rest of us? I wouldn't think so.

No disrespect intended, I have known a number of personalities over the years who were beloved by listeners but not so much so by there associates. That is not to say that they were bad people, and everyone has their moments, lord knows I have. My point was that their talent, no matter their personal proclivities was to project an image to the listeners, or viewers, of a genuine friend to each and every one who tunes in.

No I do not expect celebrities to be super human nor perfect. However in today's tabloid world there is a tendency to over inform and in the good old days I think we were more comfortable with the fictional image created by the publicists more than the facts. Also there is the matter of how it affects impressionable youth who think that they must emulate their heroes in sports and entertainment. In some ways we were better in my day admiring Gene Autry and Roy Rogers, plus the sports stars of my day weren't always running afoul of the law from illegal drug use to physical abuse and rape.

Guess that in my old age I want the quiet life and an "Ozzy and Harriet", "Leave It To Beaver" kind of world. I know that even then it wasn't but the illusion made me feel better about things. Isn't that why we seek to be entertained, in order to take us out of our harsh reality?

 

[ChannelFlipper]

One of the things that i find really different about music radio today vs. back in the day was the actual importance of the air personality/DJ. Particularly in Top 40 radio, there was the idea in the beginning that it was up to the DJ to bring in the audience - and more importantly, that the right DJ would bring in an audience and become successful. And he was compensated as such and earned the best air-times. Management was always looking for the next guy who could tap into the teen and young adult market and if he could, the sky was the limit.

Now, with notable exceptions of course, the DJs are deemed by management to be nothing more that pawn record spinners, tape starters, button on console pushers. It doesn't really matter what the DJ does, management believes it is the format that brings the audience in. DJs are only asked to "fit the sound of the station". Of course DJs do come and go and some are deemed more successful than others, but if they aren't given a chance to do their own thing, they are nothing more than card readers, or pre-programmed automotons.

I honestly feel sorry for some of them. There are some very creative people on the radio who are either reading cue cards or talking about some inane topic that you can tell they were told to talk about. I feel for you guys. I want to hear you, not what management told you to be. The ones that resonate are the ones that have been able to do their own thing in spite of the odds. Stern is the best example. But if Howard were starting today instead of back in the day, could he really do the same thing?

So today, you have the card-reading automotons with a few syndicated personalities that have managed to hit it big taking up all of the airwave space. This leaves no opportunities for upcoming talent. So you get the same old thing. Talent goes elsewhere where they will be rewarded, or at least given a chance. Don't look for anything to change soon.

 

[JustPastBuffalo]

"Why does radio suck?" This is a leading question that presumes radio, in fact, sucks, in all forms, in all markets and all the time. I'd offer that some days radio does suck and other days it's vibrant. Depends on the format. Depends on the market. Depends on what you're listening to. Depends on the company that runs the cluster and the people calling the shots.

Radio as an art form, entertainment platform and business surely is not what it was five years ago and certainly isn't what it was twenty years ago before major de-reg kicked the legs out from under the chair. The business sometimes looks like a rudderless ship. It's weathered many a storm, taken on water, but it's still afloat. In some cases barely and due mainly to the life raft of bankruptcy laws.

 

[Goat Rodeo Cowboy]

One of the things that i find really different about music radio today vs. back in the day was the actual importance of the air personality/DJ. Particularly in Top 40 radio, there was the idea in the beginning that it was up to the DJ to bring in the audience - and more importantly, that the right DJ would bring in an audience and become successful. And he was compensated as such and earned the best air-times. Management was always looking for the next guy who could tap into the teen and young adult market and if he could, the sky was the limit.

I've been known to post messages that "cry the blues in the same key" in which you are singing. However, I do come to challenge you to broaden your view.

You are like some of the loudest voices in the political debates who can only think back as far as the Reagan years.... and see those years as "The Gold Standard". All previous history, to them, is not worthy of including in the analysis.

I see you building your case for "Good Radio" around the emergence of the personality DJs and I'm not sure you are reaching as far back as the late 50's with your portrait.

I don't propose that we go back to Fibber McGee and Molly as a Gold Standard for radio, but that we think: What did radio do for the people, the audience in 1932, in 1942, in 1952 etc. etc. etc. What would we broadcast to be of equal or equivalent value, service and entertainment to the people of 2012?

Sending Wink Martindale back to Memphis to "grind records" on WHBQ is not the answer.

 

[LKellerIII]

I remember radio in the Reagan years (80s), and for the most part, it 'sucked' just as hard as today..I'd say it was worse. At least in the Bay Area, most stations had short playlists - there were way too many "hit" music stations, and just about every station was using the slogan "More Music insert call letters here". Jocks had almost no time to talk. If anything, they have more open mic time on those same frequencies now.

I'm 58, and I certainly remember a time when rock and Top 40 DJs were given more air time than today, but you have to go back to the LBJ and Nixon years. Even in the heydey of KFWB, Top 40 DJs were not allowed to just blab on like MOR jocks - they had to keep it reasonably short, and they'd better be entertaining or Chuck Blore would call them into his office for re-instruction.

Then Bill Drake put in strict jock restrictions when Boss Radio started in 1965...that's 45 years ago, folks. It worked. Only the revered Morgan and Steele (and Charlie Tuna to some extent) were allowed to play with the format...and only a little. If you listen to old air checks of Robert W. Morgan, he's witty and had fun, but he didn't talk that much more than the other jocks, and he didn't do interviews, prank calls, stunts, or any of the talky stuff morning shows do these days. And the other Boss Jocks just delivered the format. The DJs at KHJ were not responsible for the station's statospheric ratings - the format was.

Then FM rock happened, and jocks only opened the mic every third song to back-announce. Old radio junkies like me revere KMET and KPPC jocks, but the big AOR station in the early 70s was KLOS, and the early DJs there showed almost no personality - they just read the station's liners and the weather report, and back announced the songs.

 

[michael hagerty]

I remember radio in the Reagan years (80s), and for the most part, it 'sucked' just as hard as today..I'd say it was worse. At least in the Bay Area, most stations had short playlists - there were way too many "hit" music stations, and just about every station was using the slogan "More Music insert call letters here". Jocks had almost no time to talk. If anything, they have more open mic time on those same frequencies now.

I'm 58, and I certainly remember a time when rock and Top 40 DJs were given more air time than today, but you have to go back to the LBJ and Nixon years. Even in the heydey of KFWB, Top 40 DJs were not allowed to just blab on like MOR jocks - they had to keep it reasonably short, and they'd better be entertaining or Chuck Blore would call them into his office for re-instruction.

Then Bill Drake put in strict jock restrictions when Boss Radio started in 1965...that's 45 years ago, folks. It worked. Only the revered Morgan and Steele (and Charlie Tuna to some extent) were allowed to play with the format...and only a little. If you listen to old air checks of Robert W. Morgan, he's witty and had fun, but he didn't talk that much more than the other jocks, and he didn't do interviews, prank calls, stunts, or any of the talky stuff morning shows do these days. And the other Boss Jocks just delivered the format. The DJs at KHJ were not responsible for the station's statospheric ratings - the format was.

Then FM rock happened, and jocks only opened the mic every third song to back-announce. Old radio junkies like me revere KMET and KPPC jocks, but the big AOR station in the early 70s was KLOS, and the early DJs there showed almost no personality - they just read the station's liners and the weather report, and back announced the songs.

Bingo. In going back through my airchecks, you can chart where it became about "stationality" rather than "personality". By the late 70s/early 80s, with few exceptions (KFRC, KFMB-AM, KKHR), there wasn't a lot to keep me engaged.

Of course, I'm not typical. My ideal radio station is one that gets me everything without having to switch stations...some music, some personality, some weather and news. I'd be fine with KMPC's glory days. But my generation as a whole wanted music and we've had several generations now that expect music from music stations, talk from talk stations and news from news stations.

Trouble is, as I've said before, there are new technologies that can do all of that better than radio can. So maybe radio has to do what only it can...and maybe that means delivering a complete package that can't be copied. But good luck selling station ownership, management and consultants on that...to say nothing of ad agencies.

 

[ChannelFlipper]

One of the things that i find really different about music radio today vs. back in the day was the actual importance of the air personality/DJ. Particularly in Top 40 radio, there was the idea in the beginning that it was up to the DJ to bring in the audience - and more importantly, that the right DJ would bring in an audience and become successful. And he was compensated as such and earned the best air-times. Management was always looking for the next guy who could tap into the teen and young adult market and if he could, the sky was the limit.

I've been known to post messages that "cry the blues in the same key" in which you are singing. However, I do come to challenge you to broaden your view.

You are like some of the loudest voices in the political debates who can only think back as far as the Reagan years.... and see those years as "The Gold Standard". All previous history, to them, is not worthy of including in the analysis.

I see you building your case for "Good Radio" around the emergence of the personality DJs and I'm not sure you are reaching as far back as the late 50's with your portrait.

I don't propose that we go back to Fibber McGee and Molly as a Gold Standard for radio, but that we think: What did radio do for the people, the audience in 1932, in 1942, in 1952 etc. etc. etc. What would we broadcast to be of equal or equivalent value, service and entertainment to the people of 2012?

Sending Wink Martindale back to Memphis to "grind records" on WHBQ is not the answer.

My post is more observational rather than trying to build a point and I certainly know my history, both radio and otherwise, that extends before the Reagan years (not really sure where you are headed with that one).

In any case, my point is that now format is king and personalities are, for the most part, expected to take a back seat to them. I am not even necessarily suggesting that this is a bad thing (although it probably is). The Jack format as it is presented on KCBS-FM is a manifestation of my point. The format is King and they are at least honest enough to dispense with the jocks entirely. This doesn't bother me; I am listening to the station for the music. Jocks are only useful if they add to the presentation. Think about how many jocks there are working in this town, and then ask yourself how many of them truly add to the station's format/presentation. You probably won't need all of your fingers.

 

[nmoore6676]

One of the things that i find really different about music radio today vs. back in the day was the actual importance of the air personality/DJ. Particularly in Top 40 radio, there was the idea in the beginning that it was up to the DJ to bring in the audience - and more importantly, that the right DJ would bring in an audience and become successful. And he was compensated as such and earned the best air-times. Management was always looking for the next guy who could tap into the teen and young adult market and if he could, the sky was the limit.

I've been known to post messages that "cry the blues in the same key" in which you are singing. However, I do come to challenge you to broaden your view.

You are like some of the loudest voices in the political debates who can only think back as far as the Reagan years.... and see those years as "The Gold Standard". All previous history, to them, is not worthy of including in the analysis.

I see you building your case for "Good Radio" around the emergence of the personality DJs and I'm not sure you are reaching as far back as the late 50's with your portrait.

I don't propose that we go back to Fibber McGee and Molly as a Gold Standard for radio, but that we think: What did radio do for the people, the audience in 1932, in 1942, in 1952 etc. etc. etc. What would we broadcast to be of equal or equivalent value, service and entertainment to the people of 2012?

Sending Wink Martindale back to Memphis to "grind records" on WHBQ is not the answer.

My post is more observational rather than trying to build a point and I certainly know my history, both radio and otherwise, that extends before the Reagan years (not really sure where you are headed with that one).

In any case, my point is that now format is king and personalities are, for the most part, expected to take a back seat to them. I am not even necessarily suggesting that this is a bad thing (although it probably is). The Jack format as it is presented on KCBS-FM is a manifestation of my point. The format is King and they are at least honest enough to dispense with the jocks entirely. This doesn't bother me; I am listening to the station for the music. Jocks are only useful if they add to the presentation. Think about how many jocks there are working in this town, and then ask yourself how many of them truly add to the station's format/presentation. You probably won't need all of your fingers.

Jack FM and a country station I found in Indian use their clever liners to create a sort of pseudo personality. My experience and taste leads me to appreciate personality more in the morning, give me more entertainment in my waking up and getting ready to go routine. The rest of the day, unless I'm on for news or a particular commentary the more music and less jabber the happier I am. That is likely why Howard Stern was so good as a morning personality.

One thing I do miss, probably due to tracking, satellite delivery and all is the time checks in the morning. I now have a plethora of clocks in every direction I can look toward. Anyone remember the singing clock on WING, Dayton?

 

[Element9]

Jack and stations like it may be playing "What we (it) want(s)" but it will never out-perform my well-stocked mp3 player. When I listen to radio, which I still do, I want to hear live, local personalities who add to the presentation, sound like they're alive and having a good time on my Classic Rock, Active Rock or AAA station. I listen to hear the hits and be entertained. The mavens who run radio stations don't seem to understand that it's not the live jocks that make me push the button, it's the eight minute (and longer) commercial stopsets. But of course, if the sword of debt service is hanging over your head, 8-10 minute commercial breaks are part of paying your bloated debt service. As to Stern's 10-12 minute commercial breaks, I rarely listened beyond commercial #3 or #4 before turning to the competition. There were times I never went back to the self-procalimed King Of All Hype. "Radio sucks" because it's become a commodity to be bought and sold rather than a service which is people and service oriented, informative and entertaining.

 

[Carmine5]

Radio used to put "regular people" on the air. They were relate-able. They became your friends. They were average joes who occasionally became celebrities.
Today radio puts "celebrities" on they air. They live in bigger houses than you do. They aren't your friend. They aren't relate-able (Seacrest, Donny Osmond, etc.)

So Gary Owens, Casey Casem, Wink Martindale, Bill Ballance, Robert W. Morgan and many many others lived in little houses in Lynwood?

Actually while I was still a grade school kid one of the very popular local radio personalities lived in a small tract home right down the street, not even as large as ours. Another who also happened to be Jonathan Winter's mom lived in more affluent digs but still within our area of town. I think the poster was more referring to the aura they presented, though I've heard that Robert W. was far from Mr. Personality in real life. Of course we are all aware of Bill Handel's Persian Palace but he still appeals to the common man.

I realize that poster nmoore was not trashing Robert W. Morgan, but I still feel the need to speak on his behalf. I worked at Golden West with RWM for four years. Our paths crossed often. I started there running the board during the all-night Transtar shift. Morgan's producer would come in sometimes as early as 4:30am and turn the thermostat all the way down, the way Robert wanted it. In no time, the studio would be like an icebox. It got to the point where I was taking my jacket to work during summer. We used to joke that Morgan was a polar bear. More often than not, he would come in grumpy, the same mood I'm usually in when I wake up. He always came in at least a half hour early. And without fail, every morning, he would tell me to go home as soon as he walked in, that he would take over the board from there. I was always tired at that time, and my teeth were always chattering at that time, so as a result, I loved Robert for doing that.

No question that Robert W. was moody. There was a nice, generous side to him, and there was another side to him somewhat akin to a Pacific Southwest Diamondback rattlesnake. There were times he angered me, but in due time I came to realize that he did that to everybody at GWB. The receptionist there told me that he had bitten her head off many a time, and the GM had also felt his wrath at times. It was part of Robert being Robert.

Then there was the proud papa Morgan when his daughter started working at Pirate Radio. There was the Morgan that had anti-racism posters in his office. And, there was the Robert W. Morgan who greeted me like a long-lost friend the very last time I saw him, late one night in the parking lot of the Sunset Strip Tower Records as I was coming back from a UCLA basketball game. He couldn't have been friendlier.

The only thing all this proves is that Robert W. Morgan was human. While I didn't consider him a personal friend, I would not hesitate to work with him again. He was a great talent, and L.A. radio is not the same without him.

Maybe it was also an extension of the theater of the mind of early radio and a lot of the first TV hosts transferred over from radio. Back then, in my youth, the movies stars were presented as glamorous yet many of them like Jimmy Stewart still carried off an ah shucks aura as well. The publicity of stars back then emphasized their home and family lives, though for Joan Crawford and Bing Crosby their children dispelled those illusions later on. Is it possible that today we have too much exposure of our celebrities with their peccadilloes and many of them are not truly people we WOULD WANT in our living rooms?

Again, this goes to show that celebrities, like anybody else, are human with the same faults and foibles as the rest of us. Are stars supposed to be held to a higher standard than the rest of us? I wouldn't think so.

Robert W. Morgan was one of the funniest, quickest minds working in radio. He was a shining star during and after the Boss Radio days. I especially loved his live reads of commercials since he frequently deviated from the copy with hilarious results. But with a mind like that often comes a complex, eccentric personality. That is price paid for his particular genius.

Of course, my parents thought Boss Radio "sucked." But they had alternatives such as KPOL or other Beautiful Music stations to listen to back then. That's probably the one thing in radio that is missing today, a lack of age-related diversity in programming. Not everyone over 50 likes talk radio or just oldies. KGIL 1260 is probably the closest in programming for an older audience but their analog audio is crappy and coverage into the L.A. basin is poor.

All I can say for those of us over 50 is, thank goodness for iPods.

 

[davideduardo]

Of course, my parents thought Boss Radio "sucked." But they had alternatives such as KPOL or other Beautiful Music stations to listen to back then. That's probably the one thing in radio that is missing today, a lack of age-related diversity in programming. Not everyone over 50 likes talk radio or just oldies.

Of course, in the early Boss Radio years, Beautiful Music was a 35-54 format. When it became 55+, in the mid-80's, it died quite miserably.

Today, Beautiful Music would be a 70+ format.

 

[RicoGregg]

Robert W. Morgan was one of the funniest, quickest minds working in radio.

He certainly was.

Of course, my parents thought Boss Radio "sucked."

And that was a good thing. That was one of the ideas behind the whole concept.

All I can say for those of us over 50 is, thank goodness for iPods.

Indeed.

 

[LA_Guy]

Of course, my parents thought Boss Radio "sucked." But they had alternatives such as KPOL or other Beautiful Music stations to listen to back then. That's probably the one thing in radio that is missing today, a lack of age-related diversity in programming. Not everyone over 50 likes talk radio or just oldies.

Of course, in the early Boss Radio years, Beautiful Music was a 35-54 format. When it became 55+, in the mid-80's, it died quite miserably.

Today, Beautiful Music would be a 70+ format.

But would it? Or would 40s and 50s have grown into it? I believe the reason that BM died is not what you claim, it is a combination of two things:

1. Not enough new music coming into the pipeline.
2. It didn't die, it was murdered! Murdered by the 28 year old national biyers abd the salespeople who didn't know how to sell it.

 

[LA_Guy]

The reason that radio sucks is twofold: too many stations-and not enough competition between them!

Radio's peak heyday was in the period from 1930-1955 with a resurgence from 1964-1980. The earlier time was simply because radio was the only game in town for in-home entertainment. Families sat around the radio just like they watched TV during IT'S peak heyday (from 1955-1985). By the mid 1950s, netwpork radio shows were on TV, so radio stagnated-until rock and roll radio began showing up in the mid 1960s. This inspired a whole new group of listeners- the 13-25 year olds. Top 40 radio soon followed, with it's tight playlists, jingles and excitement. Top 40 was unique in that ANY song would be played there-all that was required that the song be on the top 40 charts. It was not uncommon to hear songs like "The ballad of the green berets" and "One toke over the line" played back to back! Also, it was not uncommon to have 2-4 top 40 stations fighting against each other in the same city-each one trying to out program the other. FM radio began to come of age in the late 1970s, initially siphoning off the college age crowd with its progressive album oriented sound. Finally, top 40 wound up on FM as well. The problem became what do we do with twice the number of stations than we had before? Formats began to fragment-we had stations playing soft rock songs and other stations playing middle of the road songs and others playing just album cuts, or oldies, or disco. A song simply being on the top 40 wasn't good enough any more for these stations to give it airplay-it had to fit the specific formatics of the station as well. The result of this was the further fragmentation of the audience. AM began losing music share-and quite creatively again reinvented itself by specializing in all talk, or all news or all sports-which again fragmented audience even further. Today we have stations that specialize in groups of people that run the gamut from 7-12 year old kids to 25-30 year old women to 50-55 old men. Add to this narrowcasting the fact that thanks to consolidation there's very little competition between stations any more and is it any surprise that people believe that as a whole radio sucks?

 

[SuperRadioFan]

I agree with many of your points, LA_Guy though your timeline may be off a wee bit (Green Berets from 1966 was not played much as an "oldie" by the time One Toke over the Line hit the charts in 1971). "Rock and Roll radio" showed up in the early 60s (WABC was sailing with it in early '61).

"... very little competition between stations any more and is it any surprise that people believe that as a whole radio sucks?"

"Radio" today has many meanings but it's too general a statement made by the OP. If you like Adult Alternative and oldies, my two favorite formats, you're kind of out of luck if you just consider LA/OC radio over the air stations. For me, the "radio" that I listen to doesn't suck. No iPods for me, I am hooked on good out of town stations like 107.1 The Peak and KINK-FM AAA to name two; I also like Internet-only stations Legato Cafe and Radio Paradise for even more variety. The aforementioned 4 stations are IMO the cream of the crop. KCSN's revised AAA format doesn't do it for me as I like an even more broad-based version of the genre. Allen Sniffens has a new online Internet oldies station which sounds about right for my tastes. But The Peak and KINK are the best because they actually have real announcers/AT who sound like they really care about the music. In every stop-set on The Peak I learn something new about at least one of the tracks and/or artists they just played and back announced. That is radio that does NOT suck !!

 

[RicoGregg]

Here are some potential answers to the original poster's question. Prepare for a long read:

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1316/is_11_33/ai_80533149/?tag=content;col1

 

[michael hagerty]

Of course, my parents thought Boss Radio "sucked." But they had alternatives such as KPOL or other Beautiful Music stations to listen to back then. That's probably the one thing in radio that is missing today, a lack of age-related diversity in programming. Not everyone over 50 likes talk radio or just oldies.

Of course, in the early Boss Radio years, Beautiful Music was a 35-54 format. When it became 55+, in the mid-80's, it died quite miserably.

Today, Beautiful Music would be a 70+ format.

But would it? Or would 40s and 50s have grown into it?

Not likely. If The Wave is battling demographic death, then Beautiful would have only been worse.

 

[Element9]

Of course, my parents thought Boss Radio "sucked." But they had alternatives such as KPOL or other Beautiful Music stations to listen to back then. That's probably the one thing in radio that is missing today, a lack of age-related diversity in programming. Not everyone over 50 likes talk radio or just oldies.

Of course, in the early Boss Radio years, Beautiful Music was a 35-54 format. When it became 55+, in the mid-80's, it died quite miserably. Today, Beautiful Music would be a 70+ format.

Much as I like it, Classic Rock looks like the next Music For What's Left of Your Life format, slipping into the 45+ and 55+ demo. But at least Money by Pink Floyd continues to test well.