I wonder if Canada's experience will be relevant here -- with AM viable only in major cities as there's enough audience diversity and critical mass to require use of both AM and FM to reach audiences.
AM will be relegated primarily to religious and minority ethnic interests...just like shortwave in the US... John's point - you want the girl you can't have vs. the girl you got - is an interesting simile to all this. Where I fear the simile loses out is that, in 10 years, the girl you got is dead (figuratively), versus the girl you can't have, who is now someone you desperately need to reach before you lose all chance of influencing her. And anyway, that girl you can't have won't be showing up at a class reunion for radio... RC On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:48 PM, Rob de Santos <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it's clear that radio (at least in the US) has not done a good job of > marketing itself to younger listeners or given them reasons to listen. I also > think that the ability to participate and be part of the dialog is important > as > David's experience suggests. > > With the rapid movement of talk and sport formats from AM to FM in the US, it > does make you wonder if AM will be viable at all in the major markets a decade > from now. Clearly, young people still want to be "heard" but have had little > reason to see radio as a way to do that. That's very unlike the generation to > which most of us in this discussion belong. > -- _______________________________________________ Internetradio mailing list [email protected] http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/internetradio To unsubscribe: Send an E-mail to [email protected]?subject=unsubscribe, or visit the URL shown above.
