In article ,
David Eduardo wrote:

95% of Americas listen to radio.

I don't believe that number for a moment (even stipulating the typo).
If you had said "are exposed to radio every week", I might be willing
to go along. But exposure and the sort of attention that is implied
by "listen" are very different things -- something advertisers are
beginning to understand. (That's also one of the flaws in Arbitron's
"portable people meter" methodology: it's as good a measure as the
sample size allows for *exposure*, but can't measure *listening*.) As
an advertiser, a potential customer who is merely exposed to my
message is not worth nearly as much as a potential customer who is
actually paying attention.[1]

Although the current talk about shorter stop sets is evidence that
both broadcasters and advertisers are getting this message, it's not
clear that they will really benefit, now that they have trained the
audience to tune out (either mentally or physically) as soon as the
first spot begins. (How do you promote shorter stop sets? "Only five
commercials up next before another long music set on Q-92?")

Meanwhile, we have a whole generation growing up in today's toxic
media environment who neither look to radio for entertainment nor are
particularly influenced by current modes of advertising. (Brings a
new meaning to "you're soaking in it!") Compare the size of a
suburban teenager's music collection to the playlist of one of your
radio stations; I'll bet you nine times out of ten, your hypothetical
teenager enjoys a greater variety of music than you play.

For most of the past forty years, music radio has been the leader in
introducing people to new music, which they could then go out and buy.
(That's why over-the-air radio only has to pay license fees to the
songwriters and composers, and not to the performers or record labels:
it's considered a promotional expense to sell more recordings and
concert tickets.) Today, with a few bright exceptions, radio has made
itself largely irrelevant to this marketplace. Is it any wonder that
audiences no longer expect radio to provide new music?

Either you are wrong, or there are not many bright people in America
any more.

There never were, by definition. Garrison Keillor to the contrary,
there is no place were "all the children are above average".

-GAWollman

[1] A good example: I was at my dentist's office last week. As an
observant person and radio junkie, I noticed that she had WCRB on,
rather than her usual WROR-FM. If I had been wearing a PPM, it would
have credited WCRB with 45 minutes of my time -- even though I paid no
attention to it (or to the advertising messages) after recognizing the
source. I know from talking to my dentist that she puts the radio on
to provide soothing background noise; only a patient who has arrived
early for an appointment has enough attentional resources to notice
the actual content of the programming. I regularly freak out
Jennifer, the dental assistant, when I make an off-hand comment about
something that just came out of the radio, and she had so completely
tuned it out as background noise that she has absolutely no idea what
I'm talking about.

--
Garrett A. Wollman | As the Constitution endures, persons in every
| generation can invoke its principles in their own
Opinions not those of| search for greater freedom.
MIT, LCS, CRS, or NSA| - A. Kennedy, Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. ___ (2003)