Radio vs TV

In this world of ever-increasing access to media, the question has to be begged as to which is the better medium, the TV or the radio?

With the younger generation, it appears that TV is more popular, whilst the radio could be said to be the favoured choice of the older generation. But is this merely social conditioning or is there a definite trend?

TV has a distinct advantage, in that there is a visible picture on the screen and little or no imagination is required. It is all too easy to sit in front of the TV for hours at a time, not thinking or interacting at all with anyone whilst doing so. But is that necessarily a good thing? As I commented in my earlier blog about the entertainment value of reality TV, there is little "educational nutrition" in many of the TV shows we care to watch, and again the subject of escapism is brought into play.  Of course, many of us watch soap operas, such as EastEnders, Neighbours or Home and Away, the theory being that we would rather watch other people play out their lives rather than consider our own. But is watching Dot Cotton in the launderette really preferable over sitting on a comfortable couch with your partner with a nice bottle of Sauvignon Blanc, listening to old music on the radio and reminiscing about times gone by?

The radio certainly has its own advantages, one of which is that there is far more interaction than there is on TV.  The presenter certainly has to work harder on maintaining the audience figures, to compensate for the lack of body languge and non-verbal communication.  Every joke has to be carefully considered, and every link has to be thought through. Of course, radio is usually live, which adds excitement (or an element of fear, depending on your viewpoint!).

There are certainly some radio presenters who make it their mission to be as controversial as possible, without ever actually overstepping the mark, Chris Moyles being a prime example.  Love him or hate him, he has made an art form of the mickey take, causing consternation with BBC bosses and generating several complaints. His popularity with youngsters cannot be denied. 

Radio communicates with people in a way TV simply cannot. Most of us have felt the thrill of making a request to a radio station and then hearing your name spoken "live on air" by the presenter...if you haven't yet done that, I would solidly recommend you do! It's a little narcissistic, but incredibly satisfying.

I am lucky enough to have had experience of presenting live radio, and it is something I would dearly love to go back to. There is a sense of real power in sitting behind a mixing desk with only a microphone, a cup of coffee and music as company.  The real skill, in my mind, comes in having the knack of just speaking normally, as though talking to just one person, thus making all listeners feel "special", as though they are the only person listening.

Before the TV was invented, the radio was the ONLY form of interactive media.  The whole family would listen to the news being broadcast and discuss amongst themselves the subjects of the time. These days, we have scores of dedicated "news channels" on satellite channels, as well as music channels, movie channels and biography channels.  But does this mean TV is necessarily superior? Indeed, the very first music channel, MTV, has just changed its status from "music channel" to "entertainment channel", and I cannot be the only person to wonder why it is still called MTV when that is an acronym for music television!

TV has been held responsible for a great deal of negative influences on society today, being accused of glorifying violence, alcohol, drugs or sex to increase viewing figures.  There are examples of TV "breaking taboos" to create controversy and therefore bring important subjects to the fore. For example, when Brookside broached the rather uncomfortable subject at the time of lesbian sex, many people were horrified and several complaints were made. Since then, we have had more and more "hard hitting" storylines to contend with, and the question has to be raised as to whether we really need so much realism on our TV screen when there is more than enough drama all around us.  It would be unfair to blame all of society's wrongs on simply the contents of today's fictional TV shows, but it would be accurate to point out that this has surely had some influence on those who are inclined to allow themselves to be influenced.

Which of the two mediums have had most impact on our lives is, to me, not a difficult question to answer.  Most, if not all homes, possess a TV set (more than one in some cases)...if we are to believe WikiAnswers, the figure is 86%, which seems a reasonable number. According to BARB (Broadcasters Audience Research Board), the average person spends over 29 hours a week watching TV.  Many households do not necessarily own a radio, but with the rise of the Internet, allowing people to listen to live "streaming" on the web, there has been an increase in people listening to radio stations they could not otherwise receive.  TV has certanly impacted our lives in ways we now take for granted - if it were to be somehow removed, many people would find it difficult to simply replace the void by listening to the radio. 

In summary, I feel that although TV is more popular, the radio has the edge. It is relaxing to sit in a warm, sudsy bath, listening to a local radio station in the background.  You may agree, or disagree, but to me, the video certainly did not kill the radio star.