My Spin

On issues and topics currently in the forefront of my thoughts

The Long Road to Radio Studies

For most of the medium’s existence there has been an insufficient effort by academics and scholars to assess and acknowledge radio’s role in American culture. Barbara D. Savage, author of Broadcasting Freedom, put it succinctly when she wrote, “Despite its ubiquitous presence in American life for over half a century, radio is a medium whose political and cultural power and influence are not yet reflected in American historiography, American studies, work on American race relations, or studies of the media and popular culture.”

Until recently radio courses have mostly been of an applied or practical nature. That is to say, when an institution offered a radio course it was more often than not centered on station production or operations. That’s fine, and we need to have that, but the idea of examining and evaluating the social and cultural nature of the medium has been given short shrift for too long, and this constitutes a material oversight in media education.

A number of factors have contributed to this. First of all, the medium’s so-called heyday was brief. Studs Terkel astutely called it the shortest golden age in history. Between 1920 and 1945, radio held the nation in thrall, influencing nearly every aspect of it through its Depression era presidential addresses, acclaimed war coverage, unique and compelling dramas, hugely popular entertainment shows, and so on. Then came television--the “enfant terrible” it was called by some because of its near evisceration of the audio medium--and radio’s importance and popularity were swiftly eclipsed. Many media observers and critics felt the medium was no longer pertinent and that its days were numbered. Who would want to merely listen to westerns or comedies when one could see them as well? Such thinking prevailed among both programmers and advertisers to the detriment of radio.

Where Are the Syllabi?

When the number of college courses in electronic media increased in the 1960s and 1970s, they were nearly always more vocational and industry-centric than historical or theoretical in nature, and when that began to change, the focus was on television. The video medium held everyone’s rapt attention, and radio was considered mere background and thus hardly worthy of academic attention because of its primary emphasis on popular music, most of which was geared for kids. While television inspired critical studies in the 1970s and 1980s, radio did not. It continued to be approached from a voc-tech, hands-on (“you too can be a deejay”) perspective. Apparently, it failed to impress teachers and scholars that the world’s first electronic mass medium had performed a unique, if not profound, role in the life of Americans for three quarters of a century. It was as if the medium’s pre-television history had been purged from institutional memory and what radio had been doing since the advent of the video box was deemed devoid of social and cultural merit or substance and therefore not worthy of study.

In point of fact the scholarly examination of electronic media in general was slow to be embraced by many college and university programs and the study of radio--beyond the applied, that is--was prodigiously overlooked or snubbed until the last decade. To this day nary a single ivy-league college or university in this country offers a degree program in electronic media that assume a critical, historical, or broadly theoretical approach. At the same time when programs in television and radio exist at other major institutions they often are viewed cavalierly, if not contemptuously, as “curriculum-lite,” i.e., lacking in academic cache or merit. Certainly this is a misguided and wrong-minded perspective given that the electronic media have played a central role in the day-to-day life of the nation since their introduction nearly 90 years ago. Considering this view it is not surprising that no endowed chair in broadcast radio exists in academe--this despite the fact that there are funded chairs in practically every field from waste management to the culinary arts.

Overall television has had a somewhat better time of it in higher education because as media programs evolved and expanded beyond their traditional industry/career emphasis in the 1970s and 1980s, courses were created to examine the medium from a critical and scholarly perspective. It was not until the 1990s (70 years after the debut of radio) that interest in radio studies (versus radio production and operations) syllabi began to percolate, and this occurred as the result of several factors, among them the debut of the first-ever academic publication devoted to radio studies—the Journal of Radio Studies (amazing to consider there never had been one), the belated creation of a radio division by the foremost organization of broadcast academics (the Broadcast Education Association), and the emergence of more scholarly research (including monographs, anthologies, and articles) devoted to radio’s place in America’s existence. Further, a good portion of that research is coming from a variety of academic fields, including history, sociology, and economics to cite but three. This provided the impetus for the long-overdue reemergence (prior to WWII a scant number of institutions, such as George Washington University, examined the role of the medium beyond a purely applied approach) of college-level courses devoted to radio studies at a handful of schools, among them Boston College, Brandeis University, Michigan State University, Brooklyn College, and very recently Chicago’s Columbia College (which, to its credit, also launched a Scholarship in Radio lecture series in 2007).

A Worthy Subject

Without a doubt the launch of radio changed the country. From its experimental inception before World War 1 to regular broadcasting after the war, it began to transform how Americans spent their leisure time and acquired information. As radio took over the parlor, it became the principle means for passing the time between work and bed. Indeed, daily life was altered by the transformation of wireless technology into a new household utility.

In the first decade of radio broadcast operations--the 1920s--women and minorities were marginalized by Anglo male dominance, and radio reflected this unfortunate reality. Not surprisingly, women and minorities, namely African Americans, were portrayed according to the prevailing social biases of the time—as radio reflected the cultural status quo. Women were depicted on the air as domestic caregivers--housewives and mothers—while blacks and other minorities were represented as second-class citizens to be ignored or stereotyped (just consider the hugely popular Amos ‘n’ Andy for one obvious example). Yet, paradoxically, the presence of women and minorities on radio (even in stereotypical roles) would ultimately help these maligned groups overcome the limitations imposed on them—albeit not for a very long time. Eventually women and minorities would utilize radio to address their equitable participation in the life of the nation.

The importance of radio as social instrument and catalyst became amply evident in the 1930s and 1940s on two fronts in particular. When the Depression placed the nation in the quicksand of financial despair, President Roosevelt turned to radio to galvanize people behind his administration’s plans to reverse the harrowing descent. On some 30 occasions, FDR spoke directly to America’s citizens over the airwaves. The overwhelming response demonstrated the power of broadcasting at crucial moments in history. So did the unintended panic impact of Orson Welle’s infamous “War of the Worlds” broadcast in late 1938. Just two years later, Edward R. Murrow broadcast courageous reports from a bombed out London tuning America to its own fast approaching war. Never before had Americans been instantaneously transported to battlefronts from the comfort of their own parlors. Radio became the first and primary source of news during World War II as an indispensable means for staying abreast of world, national, and local events. In a few short years radio became a vital part of the American experience.

Post-War Course

As television steadily usurped radio’s status as home entertainer after 1948, the audio medium struggled until it developed an enthusiastic audience among young people who cherished their portable receivers that brought them the latest pop music and hip deejays. Top 40 radio’s impact on the youth culture was immense on several levels. Radio empowered teens in ways heretofore thought unimaginable—and perhaps undesirable by adults--by instilling in them a sense of connection, exclusivity, and entitlement. Radio spoke to young people in their own unique language and in doing so influenced their attitudes and behavior in lasting ways.

As the public’s consciousness about civil rights was raised in the late 1950s and through the 1960s, and radio was seen as one means of vocalizing needs by marginalized segments of the population. One of the most extraordinary examples of radio’s new value in addressing social inequities is the story of Native American radio. By the late 1960s, the nation’s indigenous community had been watching the Black Power movement with keen interest and decided to emulate its strategy for addressing social wrongs. One positive way to reverse the negative impact of mainstream culture (and media) on its languages and traditions was to build its own radio stations on its reservations. Today nearly three dozen radio stations are licensed to Native Americans and they help retain the legacy and heritage of their listeners as well as promote their social and economic well-being. There is arguably no greater example of how a public medium can be used as a force for necessary change. Native American radio is a growing force and offers a strong case for why the radio medium deserves scholarly examination as a unique instrument of change.

Radio made its presence known in another way in the 1960s through the signals of stations standing in opposition to the status quo in the radio industry itself as well as in society. Essentially, the radio-programming phenomenon known variously as underground, progressive, alternative, and freeform was spawned by two key factors: a disdain for formula radio (specifically Top 40) by a handful of young and rebellious broadcasters and the cultural upheaval over Vietnam and civil rights that characterized the period. In the first instance, the highly formulaic hit music radio sound—featuring two-and-a-half minute doowop tunes and frenetic deejays—that dominated the AM airwaves had finally driven some radio aficionados and practitioners to chart a different course. This powerful though short-lived revolution in radio found sustenance in and gained inspiration from the counterculture movement that was sweeping the country’s colleges. Rock music began to reflect the anti-establishment sentiments of the nation’s young people, thus further fanning the flame of discontent that gave rise to commercial underground radio. This was radio designed and oriented “for the people” that gave the new programming genre its uniqueness and cache. Stations promoting an anti-corporate and anti-government mindset were rare in commercial radio. Audiences were not accustomed to hearing deejays speak out against the military-industrial complex, big business, and social inequality while advocating love and sometimes even the use of mind-altering drugs. Nor were listeners acquainted with commercial radio that aired a broad spectrum of music (albeit rock and roll) in thoughtful and evocative sets emphasizing quality and substance over quantity and banality.

Myriad Topics

Non-commercial stations (mainly affiliated with colleges) offered programming that contrasted with mainstream commercial outlets and the gestalt that informed them, but their audiences were tiny compared to their commercial counterparts. Indeed as underground radio sought to reflect deeper social issues, educational stations on the lower end of the FM band attempted to address civil inequities through programs for marginalized groups, such as gays and lesbians. As noted in Queer Airwaves, “The story of gay and lesbian broadcasting is only beginning to be told . . . The 60s and 70s gave way to several radio shows, mainly on non-commercial radio stations that engaged in a dialogue with the gay community.” This was not happening on television or in the commercial part of the broadcast radio dial. Indeed, “Queer radio would push forward and feverishly combat the stereotypical attitudes and hate propaganda targeted toward gays and lesbians into the present.”

Sadly, hate broadcasts found a place on radio in the 1980s and 1990s with shock jocks (who found it great sport to denigrate women, gays, and minorities) and right-wing extremists (who spewed virulent racist and homophobic rhetoric). In this sense radio again reflected society in providing both good and evil. From the 1930s national broadcasts of the anti-Semitic Catholic priest, Charles Coughlin, to the racist ranting of neo-Nazis and white supremacists, like David Duke and Ernst Zundel (recently incarcerated in Germany for his denial of the holocaust), in the last decade of the 20th century, radio has been exploited for malevolent purposes. Fortunately, the positive service of radio has far out weighed the iniquitous. But the power of the medium to potentially shape views of a vast audience appeals to those with agendas that strike the mainstream as harmful and even dangerous.

Two movements in the last couple of decades again demonstrate how integral radio is to the social and cultural machinations of the country. Political talk radio has impacted some voting decisions, and in the early 1990s it actually influenced the outcome of several state elections and the composition of the U.S. Congress. This is yet another poignant example of radio’s role in reflecting society. To the chagrin of liberals, Talk radio has been largely dominated by social and political conservatives. Political pundits argue that without talk radio, the leadership of the country might have been significantly different, so should we credit or condemn radio for giving us the politicians we have? Radio has clearly had an impact on the nation’s history.

A more recent radio development with potential socio-political bearing is Low Power FM (LPFM for short), which has its roots in the clandestine broadcasts that have appeared from time to time. These unauthorized and thus unlicensed stations provided alternative music and public affairs programs. Staring in the mid-1970s, a long period of deregulation has relieved broadcasters of many former obligations, most notably the Fairness Doctrine (dropped in 1978). The subsequent rise of one-sided right-wing broadcasting was one factor behind the rise of illegal low power outlets. Micro or pirate stations, as they were initially labeled, were inspired to enter the airwaves to address what they perceived as radio’s shortcomings including a decline in public service content. Their goal was to provide highly local and community-oriented programming, something they felt traditional radio was not providing due to its bottom-line obsession. Micro stations sought to provide an alternative to profit-obsessed, big business radio and even mainline public stations. These illicit broadcasters felt justified in airing without authorization because they believed they were exercising their constitutional rights of free speech and providing an important public service, which, after all, was the principle tenet behind the issuance of broadcast licenses in the first place. The government saw things differently and in the name of actual or potential interference forced most of these stations off the air. At the start of the new century the FCC created tiny LPFM licenses to meet the obvious demand for more voices. However, faced with resistance by the odd bedfellows of both commercial and public broadcasters, these are issued only sparsely, and largely in rural regions, mostly to church and civic groups. This action has frustrated the community of micro broadcasters, who left out of the mix, have in some cases continued their illegal broadcasts.

Beyond our own shores and borders, radio’s social and cultural role has been no less notable. In developing countries, the medium has typically served (and continues to serve) as the primary information source, and in some third world countries its use is of singular importance as print media are often unavailable or unreliable. It is hard to calculate the value of radio to female NGOs in Tanzania attempting to address gender discrimination (spousal abuse and genital mutilation) or the impact of community radio in Mongolia seeking to increase “opportunities for citizen participation and encourage social accountability.” Radio brings people and cultures together in sparsely populated and remote locales around the globe.

Comment

The preceding offers but a handful of examples that demonstrate radio’s long and continuing significance in the cultural and social narrative of the nation. There are countless others. Think, for example, about the role and influence of all-night radio (providing companionship for insomniacs, third shift workers, and long distant travelers), religious radio (presenting the word of the gospel to people homebound and afflicted), children’s radio (entertaining and informing millions of kids since the medium’s launch), college outlets (frequently offering eclectic and innovative programming not found elsewhere), all-news and talk operations (keeping listeners informed and up to date about what is happening in their community and the world), ethnic stations (supplying a vital connection for assimilating immigrants), and so on.

Radio studies have been slow in gaining acceptance and to date have generated a modicum of interest, but that interest finally appears to be growing as scholars and academics more fully recognize and appreciate the manifold ways radio has helped shape and influence the country and the world. As the great radio dramatist, Norman Corwin, once wrote, “Sometimes the obvious is the most difficult thing to recognize.”

Notes

This essay appeared in the Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media (Volume 51, Number 3, September 2007, pp. 530-536)

References

Corwin, N. (1983). Trivializing America. Secaucus, NJ: Lyle Stuart Inc., 282.

Developing Radio Partners. Retrieved March 28, 2007, from
http://www.developingradiopartners.org/newsroom.html

Johnson, P. and Keith, M. (2001). Queer Airwaves: The Story of Gay and Lesbian
Broadcasting. Armonk: NY: M.E. Sharpe, 28-29.

Savage, B. (1999). Broadcasting Freedom: Radio, War, and the Politics of Radio,
1938-1948. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 5-6.