Understanding radio as a social medium
Radio broadcasting technology was developed around the turn of the 20th century from earlier experiments in wireless telegraphy. The achievement is ascribed to Guglielmo Marconi whose projects were initially for military clients before turning to the mediumâs potential for domestic usage. Radio radically changed the communication of messages because the sound of actual voices could be transmitted in real time over distance, eliminating the barriers of time and space. In his book Understanding media: the extensions of man (1964), Canadian theorist Marshall McLuhan describes the electronic medium as one of the ânew media and technologies by which we amplify and extend ourselvesâ (McLuhan, 1964, p. 64). His famous phrase coined at the time, âglobal villageâ, and his concern over whether this heightened sense of proximity to other people(s) would be a force for good, rings true in todayâs media-saturated, internet-connected world.
In the 1930s, artists and writers were intrigued by the paradox of the mediumâs affective immateriality over time and space and urged that the mediumâs power of expression be used for positive purposes. They believed in radioâs utopian potential. Rudolf Arnheim, convinced that radio programmes should address audiencesâ common needs, writes that: âWireless without prejudice serves everything that implies dissemination and community of feeling and works against separateness and isolationâ (Arnheim, 1936, p. 252). In The stuff of radio (1934), BBC producer Lance Sieveking describes radio as a machine: one which could achieve âsudden mental contactâ between listener and broadcaster (Sieveking, 1934, pp. 111â112, 101). Berthold Brecht, best known for his stage plays, was a radio presenter and experimented in radio theatre. He wrote a lecture about the potential of radio for connecting people and encouraging their participation in society and politics (Brecht, 1932).
Those in political circles, however, feared the use of radio for propaganda and indeed the medium had been used tactically during the Second World War. Sociologists in the USA investigated how radio as a form of mass media could influence social change, but found that its power lay more in persuasion than propaganda (Lazarsfeld and Merton, [1948] 1975, pp. 497â501). Research indicated that members of the public needed to be predisposed to engaging with a particular message. Changing basic attitudes only happened when âin conjunction with face-to-face contactsâ (ibid., p. 512).
As academic interest shifted in the 1960s towards the critical, visual text-based study of films and television programmes, the development of radio studies as a discipline stalled (Hilmes and Loviglio, 2002). This has been explained by the mediumâs evanescence, and the complications of capturing specific radio programmes to store and study as texts in classroom settings (Starkey and Crisell, 2009, p. 1). Research on the medium was occasionally published by sociologists and practitioners, exploring the act and effectiveness of radio presenting. Erving Goffman for instance listened intently to live radio, tape recordings and vinyl records for his chapter âRadio talkâ in Forms of talk (Goffman, 1981, p. 197). This study inspired further radio-focussed work such as Paddy Scannell and Graham Brandâs âTalk, identity and performanceâ in which they describe how a âdiscursive spaceâ is created in radio programmes: a sense of a shared virtual space conveying a spirit of sociability (Scannell, 1991, p. 223). Scannell highlights the importance of personability conveyed by the on-air voices because listeners âexpected to be spoken to in a familiar, friendly and informal manner as if they were equals on the same footing as the speakerâ (ibid., p. 3).
Scannellâs further work on phenomenological aspects of broadcasting marked a turn towards focussing on the emotional and affective impacts experienced by audiences (Scannell 1996), which would later be developed by media theorist Shaun Moores. Scannell acknowledges the recursive nature of social life, how broadcasting schedules are planned around it to reproduce patterns and routines, reinforcing a framework of âdailinessâ and âeventfulnessâ (Scannell, 1996 in Moores, 2005, p. 9). This continuity in daily life that people can identify with is reassuring and Moores cites eminent sociologist Anthony Giddensâ concept of âontological securityâ; we find comfort in the knowledge that life goes on, that there is a constancy in our surroundings (Moores, 2005, p. 11). Listeners develop their own rituals of listening and use radio to mark their time. In a subsequent book, Moores describes how the constant rounds of discursive exchanges, of episodic series and regular programme slots fixed into the broadcast schedules become mediated âplacesâ that audiences tune in to regularly and come to take for granted (Moores, 2012, p. 32). He argues that media-related interactions and experiences happen in these virtual places but are always rooted in physical localities, creating a spatial pluralization (Moores, 2012, p. 16). Wherever a listener is located, they can feel as if they are experiencing other actual localities being invoked on-air as well as the imagined radio studio.
This advanced theorization of radio became more prevalent as digital technologies became more readily available. Enhanced research methods meant that radio production methods and outputs could be studied more easily, and in more depth, to investigate those qualities such as liveness, intimacy and affective power. Scholars have discussed the âarbitrarinessâ and âsecondarinessâ of this audio-only medium (Crisell, 1986, p. 213). Yet at the same time, radio listening is recognized as a vital daily ritual, even an emotional crutch, as âa domestic accompaniment ⊠which ⊠aids mood creation and maintenanceâ (Tacchi, 2009, p. 174). Notwithstanding the technological basis of the medium and how it seemed to be evolving so rapidly, theorists continued to describe radio as a social medium, to account for the human elements involved in communication: with a sometimes controversial role to play in the public sphere (Hilmes, 1997). The production and dissemination of meaningful content through speech and combinations of sounds and music are cultural activities and as such carry implications for the shaping of social discourse.
Towards the end of the 20th century, radio studies emerged as a separate discipline thanks to the collective effort of academics around the world sharing an intellectual passion for the field (Lewis 1998, 2000). Initiatives included the launch ...