The Strength and Weakness of Talk Radio as a Forum for Political Debate - Report Example

The Strength and Weakness of Talk Radio as a Forum for Political Debate As a media for disseminatinginformation and for improving the level of communication between opposing ideas, the strengths of Radio can not be denied. However, there are also significant weaknesses in how the political debate on radio functions as a forum. Talk radio is one particular instance in which political debate functions largely as a part of the infotainment value provided to listeners and an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of this form of debate is important for any student of media, culture or political studies. The concept of talk radio in Britain started after the format had taken a hold in the United States but there are several nationwide talk stations in the UK which broadcast their programs simultaneously as opposed to America where regional networks often hold more importance than satellite radio or even national broadcasters (Hendy, 2000). The UK has BBC Radio 4, BBC Radio Five Live and talkSPORT which follow a talk radio format. BBC London uses the same format as well for quite a few of its programmes. Independent Local Radio stations which came up after the removal of BBC’s monopoly in 1970 accept talk radio as the norm for the majority of their projects. Radio itself has had ups and downs in terms of popularity with the public but in the present day and age it is one of the fastest growing forms of mass communication (Hendy, 2000). It is a source for understanding the popular culture of a region and a method to judge the penetration of certain ideas. For example, in the US there are more than 1,200 talk radio shows everyday and the number of people reached by the shows goes into the tens of millions. Social scientists have gone as far as to say that it is as a medium more important than the internet since with the use of the telephone it can allow for extremely cheap access to the opinions of others and the reception of many different ideas from a wide spectrum of society (Scannell, 1991). Talk radio in particular is important as a medium for political debate since it allows people to get their say in. Of course the words of an individual may not represent the consensus of a whole society but the debate caused by those words might be important for the whole world (Scannell, 1991). As opposed to simply watching a political debate on television where the opinions of a few experts are given, or even reading the newspaper where the opinions of only one person are received, talk radio allows anyone who has to drive to be a participant in a political dialog to be a contributor (Scannell, 1996). In terms of the things which talk radio focuses on, it is a clear winner when compared to syndicated shows or the coverage of events on television. Issues which may be left alone by television due to a wide ranging audience with conservative sensibilities are often covered with a lot of discussion and detail with talk radio (Hendy, 2000). Additionally, the connections between the media empires of television, newspapers and the internet can be given a clear counterpoint if talk radio can function as another source of valid information (Boggs & Dirmann, 1999). In such situations, the role of the radio is a lot more than to simply provide information and entertainment because the radio can act as a motivator which galvanises people into action towards some civic duty that they may have lacked in the past. The radio also becomes important as a medium for communication between individuals from various backgrounds. A person has to do a lot in order to be on TV to present their viewpoint, for example, they might need to be an expert on the topic or be selected for an interview even if they are picked randomly on the street by news anchors and camerapersons. However, the invitation to talk to a radio host is open and constantly being broadcasted over the airwaves. Since other listeners can or respond to the comments made by callers, there is a semblance of debate even though there may be little chance of a counter argument or rebuttal from the person who makes a point (Scannell, 1991). Such strengths have to be balanced by the weaknesses of talk radio which suggest that since the phone line and the voice of the radio is available to anyone therefore anyone can speak with the ‘authority’ of the radio (Scannell, 1996). Facts can be presented without verification and they can be disputed without proof therefore it often becomes a debate with one person’s word against the other. At the same time, there are limitations on what becomes the voice of the people because it remains the voice of one person (Boggs & Dirmann, 1999). Additionally, that person is passionate enough to make a call to the station, wait for his/her turn and might even have to volunteer some information before they are allowed to speak. This significant investment in terms of time and effort plainly signifies that the person who calls in to a political talk show is likely to be on one of the extremes and is unlikely to present a subjective view of things. The situation seems to be quite worse on the other side of the pond since American analysts consider their talk radio shows to be very conservative in opinion and often the radio is nothing more than another tool to propagate the corporate agenda. Of course it must be kept in mind that the market for conservatives in America is much larger than the market for liberal individuals but the representation of the conservative viewpoint on radio shows and in radio personalities on the air is much more than what the national distribution would suggest (Mayer, 2004). Another weakness as discussed by Boggs and Dirmann (1999) is that the talk format of the radio is often in an informal setting since neither the talk show host nor the callers can actually see each other. Considering that radio is being evaluated as a forum for political debate, this comes as a weakening element because the talk show host will have to cater for the requirements of the target audience. Serious debate on political issues may be too dry and anything which is dry or boring may cause listeners to change stations. Undoubtedly, both in America and the UK, listeners have a choice in matters of radio stations and if they are being bored by endless droning on budgetary cuts and their political implications for the secretary of the department of Agriculture, they may choose different sources for their entertainment. Finally, I think the last point which shows the weakness of radio as a forum for political debate is a lack of consistency and reproducibility. If there is an argument published in the newspaper, it can be read, transmitted electronically, photocopied and redistributed to many other individuals. Similarly, opinions published in journals and periodicals (especially those which are backed with hard data and good analysis) are read by key decision makers and other important individuals in the industry. Even TV can be considered a more ‘authentic’ source of information since the same programs with the same opinions can be viewed time and again. However, the radio and especially the talk radio format leaves a lot to be desired in terms of authenticity and credibility. In conclusion, I think that talk radio is a very important source of information and can serve as an important part of the way in which people interact with the politics of their country. However, this statement must be tempered with the understanding that there are many weaknesses of using this system of communication as a means to improve the political debate and to allow different opinions to be reconciled. At the present moment in time, I feel that the major social purpose of talk show radio is not to act as a forum for debate but rather to make more people politically aware that there is debate on certain topics which may require a deeper understanding before a final decision can be taken one way or the other. Word Count: 1,461 Works Cited Hendy, D. 2000, Radio in the Global Age, Cambridge, Polity. Scannell, P. 1991, Broadcast Talk, London, Sage. Scannell, P. 1996, Radio,TV and modern Life, Oxford, Blackwell. Mayer, W. 2004, ‘Why talk radio is conservative’, Public Interest, vol. 156, no. 1, pp. 86-103. Boggs, C. and Dirmann, T. 1999. ‘The Myth of Electronic Populism: Talk Radio and the Decline of the Public Sphere’, Democracy & Nature: The International Journal of Inclusive Democracy, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 65-95. Read More