On 22 Aug 2003 17:11:23 GMT, Rich Wood
wrote:


That's not our experience in New York. On 9/11 WINS had an AQH of more
than 900,000. I can't help it if they're too dumb to figure out how to
change bands on their radios. WCBS had an AQH of more than 300,000.
Both are awesome figures.

These figures came directly from an Arbitron representative at an R&R
Talk convention. Such figures had never been seen before.

Maybe all those people didn't realize they were listening to AM
stations.

It would be more accurate to say that younger listeners don't know AM
exists -- especially teens. I have a young lady working in my
newsroom who claims never to have listened to AM radio, even up to
this day, and being aware of its existence only in the vaguest sense
before starting to work in radio. (She had also never seen a 45 RPM
record, and didn't know what they are until I showed her one that
happened to be lying around in one of the studios). She turns 19 in a
couple of months. I think she's probably typical of her age group,
judging from conversations I've had over the past few years.

Mark Howell

On 23 Aug 2003 20:08:38 GMT, (Mark Howell) wrote:

It would be more accurate to say that younger listeners don't know AM
exists -- especially teens. I have a young lady working in my
newsroom who claims never to have listened to AM radio, even up to
this day, and being aware of its existence only in the vaguest sense
before starting to work in radio. (She had also never seen a 45 RPM
record, and didn't know what they are until I showed her one that
happened to be lying around in one of the studios). She turns 19 in a
couple of months. I think she's probably typical of her age group,
judging from conversations I've had over the past few years.

Not long from now, probably within our lifetimes, the generation after
her won't know what FM or Satellite Radio is. When I was her age I had
never seen a 78 or an Edison cylinder until my grandfather showed me
his collection of them.

That's why the delivery system isn't important. Content is. While
delivery systems constantly (slowly) change, the formatting of the
content hasn't changed very much. It's a linear playing of a song or
two, some announce, commercials or fundraising "promo" more songs, ad
nauseam. Talk hasn't changed much, either. The most significant change
in talk has been the telephone.

You and I will sit on the porch in 2020 reminiscing with our
grandchildren about MP3, CDs, Minidisks and digital audio systems.

We can't forget to complain, even then, about consolidation and cookie
cutter radio. The kids will look at us with that "what planet is he
from" look. My family has long life genes. Unless we get hit by busses
we live into our late 90's, so I'll have plenty of time (I figure
2035) to educate uninterested kids.

Rich

"Rich Wood" wrote in message

Not long from now, probably within our lifetimes, the generation after
her won't know what FM or Satellite Radio is. When I was her age I had
never seen a 78 or an Edison cylinder until my grandfather showed me
his collection of them.

I'd say the term "Satellite Radio" will outlast the term "FM". Listeners
will always need to consider whether the programming they seek requires a
special outdoor antenna, oriented to the sky. They'll want to be aware of which
bands offer local weather and commercials, and which offer niche music. But
they won't care to know which component of a terrestrial signal was modulated to
represent the ones and zeros of digital data. Thus they're likely to say "local
radio" and "satellite radio," just as they refer to cable, satellite and local,
or "regular" TV.

As you note, content is what matters, and the term "satellite radio" conveys
crucial information about what content to expect and how to set about receiving
it. Terms like FM or the truly archaic UHF and VHF do not.

BTW, are you predicting the obsolescence of the terms or the technologies?
78's and Edisons are long out of production, a fate I don't hear you predicting
for satellite or FM radio.

Jerome