Radio can be New Media. It just hasn't realized it yet.

DARDIS, Ken, Good News for Radio: It Could Be New Media, Audiographics, 11/07/08 [http://www.audiographics.com/agd/071108-1.htm]

«É muito raro que uma nova forma de comunicação ou de expressão suplante completamente as antigas. Fala-se menos desde que a escrita foi inventada? É evidente que não. (...) A escrita não fez desaparecer a palavra, ela tornou mais complexo e reorganIzou o sIstema de comunicação e da memória social.(...) a tendência histórica de peso é no sentido do crescimento sImultâneo dos instrumentos de telecomunicações e dos transportes» Levy, 2000: 232-234 

«O elemento-chave do rádio continua sendo o som, só que agora com a agregação de novos signos nos campos textual e imagético gerados pela web. O som passa a ser o elemento definidor, o divisor de águas, o ponto de partida e de chegada da radiofonia. No rádio, o som deve ter sentido por si próprio, sem a necessidade do apoio do texto ou da imagem, como em outras mídias. Como lembra Charaudeau (1997), no rádio somente o conteúdo sonoro faz sentido (p. 120), mas podemos dizer que, com a internet, o texto e a imagem agora também fazem parte da webradio.

Outro elemento definidor do rádio é a sincronia da transmissão com a vida do ouvinte. Se não for assim, não é radiofonia. Como afirma Charaudeau (2006),

o rádio é, por excelência, a mídia da transmissão direta e do tempo presente (p. 107). O áudio on demand não pode ser caracterizado como rádio, mas como um dos elementos constitutivos da radiofonia.

Assim, a partir da definição de Meditsch (2001) e com base na presença de elementos textuais e imagéticos na radiofonia, podemos conceituar o novo rádio como: Meio de comunicação que transmite informação sonora, invisível, em tempo real. A informação sonora poderá vir acompanhada de textos e imagens, mas estes não serão necessários para a compreensão da transmissão.

Assim, ficam excluídos desta definição os

podcasts, os iPods, os reprodutores de música digital, as emissoras pessoais e qualquer outra forma de transmissão oral que não seja feita no tempo real da vida do ouvinte» (Prata, 2008:71)

Não concordo com a definição: a exclusão que faz dos elementos visuais não tem sentido na medida em que será cada vez mais dificil separar, excluir, numa logica de integração e convergencia

«Podemos tomar por empréstimo o vocábulo mediamorfose, cunhado por Roger Fidler (1997) e criar um novo termo, especialmente para este momento vivido pelo rádio: radiomorfose. Fidler criou, em 1991, o termo mediamorphosis, durante um período de estudos na Universidade de Columbia, em Nova York. Com esta terminologia, Fidler (1997) descreve o processo de mudança que em se encontram os meios de comunicação em todas as suas áreas, direções e departamentos. O autor defende a complementaridade dos meios, isto é, a co-evolução, de modo que os novos meios não supõem necessariamente o desaparecimento dos existentes previamente, mas uma reconfiguração dos usos, das linguagens e os necessários ajustes sobre o público-alvo. Fidler (1997) afirma que, como numa metamorfose, há a adaptação dos velhos meios às novas mudanças tecnológicas. Assim, ao invés de morrer, pelo princípio de sobrevivência, o meio antigo procura se adaptar e continuar evoluindo em seus domínios. (5.2)

A teoria de Fidler (1997) é claramente aplicável ao rádio e às reflexões propostas por esta tese. Assim, poderíamos afirmar que o rádio dos anos 50, através do processo de radiomorfose, superou o impacto tecnológico do advento da TV e buscou uma nova linguagem. O veículo não morreu, apenas se transformou. Hoje, neste princípio do século XXI, a radiomorfose continua e o veículo não vai morrer com o impacto das novas tecnologias digitais e da web, mas busca uma readaptação e encontra seu caminho numa nova linguagem, especialmente desenvolvida para os novos suportes.

Podemos afirmar que o rádio na web repete as fórmulas e os conceitos hertzianos, velhos conhecidos do ouvinte, pois é pela repetição que o público se reconhece. Mas, ao mesmo tempo, insere novos formatos, enquanto reconfigura elementos antigos, numa mistura que transforma o veículo numa grande constelação de signos sonoros, textuais e imagéticos.» (Prata 2008: 75-76)

«O elemento-chave do rádio continua sendo o som, só que agora com a agregação de novos signos nos campos textual e imagético gerados pela web. O som passa a ser o elemento definidor, o divisor de águas, o ponto de partida e de chegada da radiofonia. No rádio, o som deve ter sentido por si próprio, sem a necessidade do apoio do texto ou da imagem, como em outras mídias. Como lembra Charaudeau (1997), no rádio somente o conteúdo sonoro faz sentido (p. 120), mas podemos dizer que, com a internet, o texto e a imagem agora também fazem parte da webradio.

Outro elemento definidor do rádio é a sincronia da transmissão com a vida do ouvinte. Se não for assim, não é radiofonia. Como afirma Charaudeau (2006),

o rádio é, por excelência, a mídia da transmissão direta e do tempo presente (p. 107). O áudio on demand não pode ser caracterizado como rádio, mas como um dos elementos constitutivos da radiofonia.

Assim, a partir da definição de Meditsch (2001) e com base na presença de elementos textuais e imagéticos na radiofonia, podemos conceituar o novo rádio como: Meio de comunicação que transmite informação sonora, invisível, em tempo real. A informação sonora poderá vir acompanhada de textos e imagens, mas estes não serão necessários para a compreensão da transmissão.

Assim, ficam excluídos desta definição os

podcasts, os iPods, os reprodutores de música digital, as emissoras pessoais e qualquer outra forma de transmissão oral que não seja feita no tempo real da vida do ouvinte» (Prata, 2008:71)

Há quem defenda que rádio é ouvir. Não temos essa visão tão simplista do meio, na medida em que rádio não é apenas ouvir; é certamente ouvir qualquer coisa (música, vozes, sons ambiente, efeitos sonoros, etc.) mas ouvir com determinadas características, e – é aqui que está a diferença de posicionamento – são essas características que fazem o meio rádio. Prata (2008: 48-49) por exemplo releva que «a ligação humana com o rádio hertziano se dá através do sentido da audição. Isto é, para escutar rádio é necessário apenas o sentido biológico de ouvir, nada mais do que isso». Rádio é muito mais: é – ainda que diminuto – o poder de ligar e desligar, de escolher entre a oferta disponível, de procurar os conteúdos que mais interessam, é valorizar uns em detrimento de outros. Rádio é numa relação com um conteúdo sonoro… que se ouve.

Quem é que, além dos que possam investigar estas matérias, se preocupa se sites como Last.fm são rádio? A própria rádio.

É obvio que, por muitas referências que façam à tradição e herança hertziana, estes sites que disponibilizam (via streaming ou downloading) música não são rádio. Têm música e têm som. Mas ter música e ter som não faz rádio. O próprio conceito de «personalized radio» é anti-rádio, na medida em que rádio não pode ser personalizada.

A industria radiofónica, confusa com os novos tempos, tenta perceber se é ou se não é para se posicionar; provavelmente para aderir se for. Até que lhe digam que a questão é inutil, porque a resposta é evidente, a incerteza continuará.

Esta dicotomia acentuar-se-á, como veremos adiante, na forma de convergir com a internet: criando consumo activo ou mantendo-se baseados na ideia de consumo passivo (idiossincrático à rádio convencional)

«The next decade or more will be a transitional time, as radio, like newspapers and television networks, forswears allegiance [renegar/recusar fidelidade] to any one means of distribution and declares itself platform-agnostic» [ou seja o autor defende que a rádio, no caso, deve aderir a uma plataforma - a Internet? - em vez de se posicionar como agnostica em relação às que existem]

fonte: FISHER, Mark, Weakening Signals Washington Post, 1/06/08

Primeira nota: rádio é conteúdo, é o conteúdo que define a rádio (não é a tecnologia). Rádio é, portanto, um conteúdo sonoro programado de certa forma e transmitido num único fluxo (emissão síncrona ou linear).

Enquanto existir esse fluxo (de voz ou musica) transmitido linearmente estaremos a falar de rádio (não há, portanto, rádio personalizada, o Last.Fm não é rádio, o cotonete não é rádio); isto não significa que um operador clássico de rádio convencional não possa, além do seu ’core business’ que é o tal fluxo linear, ter outras ferramentas, assíncronas, que tanto podem resultar da emissão linear (hertziana ou streaming) como de novos conteúdos: podcasts, arquivos ou mesmo de ’smart radio’ (last.fm ou cotonete).

A partir do momento em que não haja um fluxo sonoro contínuo e único já não será correcto chamarmos rádio. Da mesma forma que ninguém diz que está a ver televisão quando vê videos no Youtube, tambem não fará sentido chamar rádio a conteudos de personalização ou assíncronos. Chamar-se-á o quê? Ninguém está em condições de responder.

Se a tendência de personalização se confirmar, é claro que as emissões de consumo passivo (a rádio convencional) serão cada vez mais minoritárias. Continuará a haver ouvintes interessados (por várias razões) mas se as receitas publicitárias são cada vez menores, a partir de um certo momento deixarão de ser rentáveis (suficientes). Não haverá uma massa crítica ao nivel da quantidade de ouvintes e das receitas suficientes para viabilizar o negócio.

A industria da rádio terá, portanto, de encontrar alternativas. Ao nível dos conteudos, proporcionados pela digitalização.

Existirá rádio enquanto o fluxo existir; deixará de existir rádio quando o fluxo de programação sonora for desactivado.

se não se define rádio através da caixa nem do meio de transmissão, resta o conteúdo. Sim, rádio é contéudo. [o que se assiste nesta altura é a uma profissão de fé nos conteudos como decisivos para o 'triunfo' da rádio; rádio é humanidade não é tecnologia, disse o presidente da GCap Richard Eyre; a questão é se, confundidos pelo passado - televisão, etc - não estarão a ver mal a internet, encarando-a apenas como tecnologia; o futuro não será decidido por sistemas de distribuição mas pelo conteudo e pela criatividade, ouve-se) 

Mas não é possivel entender esse conteudo como musica, voz ou efeitos (e silencio) nem apenas como audio (caso contrário, um animador num carrossel seria rádio). Rádio pressupõe tambem uma forma de programar esses conteudos audio (o tal fluxo continuo pré-programado e não manipulável)

Neste contexto, redifinir é, com este ou outro nome (provavelmente mantendo este durante muito tempo), é construir a partir do existente. é acrescentar, é evoluir a partir do existe, mas mantendo uma espinha dorsal, que - com o tempo - se irá perdendo. É continuar a chamar rádio a uma coisa bm diferente, faltando saber se a ideia central se mantém;

Reinventar é mudar, é romper, é falar de um novo meio - esse sim, a exigir um novo nome.

«You type in an artist or song title, and the engine plays that song, or one similar, and then sets the bar for all upcoming tracks based on an analysis of your original pick’s “music genome.” As the songs play you have the option to give a yea or nay in order to perfect your personalized radio station» (se se pode escolher o que se ouve, já não é rádio...)

«estamos assistiendo a la configuración de un nuevo concepto de radio» (3)

«encrucijada tecnológica» (3)

«Es ’una radio que lee y se ve’, como han señalado repetidas veces otros autores. Aparecen otros servicios y sonidos que no son radio en el sentido tradicional del término» (4)»

«Internet no puede ser considerado como uma competencia directa de la radio tradicional ni de la radio digital en DAB. Internet es un nuevo soporte que facilita la integración digital de la radio y la oferta de nuevos servicios. Cuando se habla actualmente de radio en internet, por tanto, hay que entender que se trata de una nueva forma de comunicación y no exclusivamente de un nuevo soporte» (9)

«La radio deja de definirse por su suporte técnico, o por la tecnología que lo sustenta, e impone un concepto basado en sus contenidos y funciones: la radio no se define de ahora en más por lá técnica sino por las ofertas» (9) [DESDE QUE SUGIRAM CANAIS ALTERNATIVOS PARA DIFUNDIR NÃO HERTZIANAMENTE O MESMO CONTEUDO CONVENCIONAL, COMO A TV CABO - EUA - QUE O CONCEITO FICOU EM CRISE; É DUVIDOSO QUE «LAS OFERTAS» DEFINAM UM MEIO. OFERTAS SONORAS?]

«El modelo de programación de la radio actual está caduco desde antes del inicio del debate digital. Lo que ocurre es que, a pesar de ello y a corto plazo, sigue siendo rentable para las empresas. Pero no a medio plazo» (11)

Martinéz-Costa, 2004

A proposito destes textos, uma reflexão:

- a tecnologia digital veio mudar o conceito de rádio tal como a conhecemos; já se experimentaram as mais variadas definições e restam os elementos decisivos (que já nada têm a ver com a tecnologia): o som, a emissão única, a escuta passiva (que não se pode manipular). Isto é rádio. E a definição final

O que este texto nos diz é que chegámos ao momento da 'morte de definição'.

Substituída porquê? Ninguém se atraverá a uma nova definição (seja porque é uma incognita o que vai acontecer seja para não cair no erro de tantos).

« (...) we can define radio as being a programme or series of programmes intended to be received without images and broadcast live rather than accessed on demand» (Berry, 2006: 285)

«It is conceivable that some of the iconic deficiencies of radio [blindness, medium as 'secondary'] will be offset by the new digital technology. Internet radio can offer still pictures, video clips - even printed text to remedy the evanescence of the medium's spoken words. But the question then arises as to whether this would be 'enhanced radio' radio with added pictures; or 'reduced radio' - radio which has been relegated to the status of a soundtrack. Given the primacy of our faculty of sight the latter possibility may seem more likely. Would this mean the end of radio as we know it?» (Crisell a, 2006: 6)

(Preservar a sua identidade - manter-se como rádio, e apenas adaptar-se; evoluir até deixar de ser rádio - o dilema que vive a rádio nesta altura)

«The reader will quickly be struck by two things. The first is how how extraordinarily resilient radio is, notwithstanding its frequent designation as the 'Cinderella' medium. In the context of convergent tendencies in the mass media, some of the essays attribute its resilience to an ability to preserve its distinctiveness, others to the ease with which it can incorporate new features such as interactivity and visual text» (Crisell, 2006: vii-viii)

Over Half Of Monthly Online Radio Listeners Watched Online Video In Past Month (edison media research)

Watched Online Video in past month 53%

Did not watch Online Video in past month 47%

(slide 20)

http://arbitron.com/downloads/digital_radio_study_2008.pdf

FORNEÇA VIDEO DA MESMA FORMA QUE CONTEÚDOS AUDIO

«Broadband has fueled remarkable growth of online video in addition to online audio. Digital consumers can easily fill their video fix on YouTube and thousands of other sites. It is important to provide compelling video options in addition to audio to hold your audience longer.» (slide 57)

«Call it the YouTube effect if you will, but video is quickly becoming the core element of many radio station Web sites. Video also is at the heart of making your station’s Web site a revenue generator, some experts say.
“Video for a radio station’s Web site not only is a way to increase unique visitor page views but also as a revenue driver,” said Thom Callahan, general manager of the Radio Division of the Associated Press Broadcast News Center, whose company provides video content to member radio stations.
“Many of our members have been able to sell ads against video of all kinds, from local video that they shoot to news and entertainment that we provide.”
AP provides video services to radio stations as an ad-supported service, and many other suppliers of video content are doing the same, Callahan said, so the initial cost to offer video services is negligible.
(...)Video is becoming a core element of our Web sites. Growing bandwidth speeds and better codecs are making video a big part of any site,” said Halyburton.
(...) If your radio station is just beginning to dabble in video, be sure not to dominate your Web site with it, Callahan said. “It should be an enhancement and another reason to visit the Web site and ultimately listen to the radio station. Look at your online presence as just another channel to program,” Callahan [ Thom Callahan, AP] said. [PORQUÊ?]

fonte: Video Seen as Critical to Radio Industry’s Web Revenue RADIO WORLD by Randy J. Stine, April 4, 2008

«New media have not replaced older media, any more than broadcasting replaced print in the mid-twentieth century. Rather, people's information and communication environments have become ever more individualized and commodified, integrating print, audio, still and moving images, broadcasting, telecommunications, computing, and other modes and channels of communication and information sharing» (Lievrouw e Livingstone, 2006: 1) 

HIBRIDIZAÇÂO«(...)Recombination, the 'continuous hybridization of both existing technologies and innovations in interconnected technical and institutional networks' (...) Recombination has two main forms - convergence and divergence - both of which are readily observable in the development of new media technologies, message forms, social practices and cultural/economic institutions. (idem, 4-5)

«However, unlike mass media, which by the late twentieth century had stabilized into a few major channels or forms (due to spectrum scarcity and the establishment of technical and formal standards), the forms and genres of new media continue to branch, recombine and proliferate. Marshall McLuhan (1964) observed that older media often become the content of newer media. Today, this has become an ongoing process of 'remediation' in which older media are appropriated, refashioned or absorbed by the new, therefore simultaneously shaping the new and reshaping the familiar (Bolter and Grusin, 1999)» (idem, 5) 

« Radio is no longer just audio. If you want to limit yourself to that definition, you lose because the next generation is over it. They want to see, hear and read whatever they want whenever they want it. Try to imagine that someday a new age radio company (I can dream, can't I?) says, we can do this. No longer just audio. We're in the picture business. We can deliver text. Video.»

A resposta a esta pergunta só se fará dentro de muitos anos, quando houver elementos estatisticos que suplantem a abordagem empírica e subjectiva.

Até agora os estudos feitos são muito recentes, mas mostram (como sugere Ferguson, 2007: 105) que à medida que a internet vai ganhando espaço na vida de cada um de nós, vai diminuindo o consumo de meios classicos; Os mesmo autor mostra como os primeiros estudos , feitos no final da decada de 90 e inciio de 2000, eram pouco 'prejudiciais' para os meios classicos

Nesta fase há ainda muita especulação e sobretudo elementos erroneos, não testados pelo passar do tempo

«Regarding online versus traditional media use, Lin (2001) suggested that media substitution is more likely to occur when one medium is perceived as offering certain benefits over existing media. This notion is especially evident in the inherent characteristics of MP3 devices. Owners can listen when they want, where they want, and to the content they want. In his study of iPods and radio, Berry (2006) concluded that this technology might not signal the demise of "the radio star" but that a "retuning" may be in order for broadcasters (p. 158). At the very least, new technologies are challenging radio (Albarran et aI., 2006)» (Ferguson, 2007: 117-118)

«(...) Internet television is unlikely to kill off traditional television in 2008 largely because Internet television, certainly in its current manifestation, is not traditional television. iTs another medium whose quality, content formats and audience differs largely from traditional television audiences» Delloite, Media Prediction 2008 (pag 8)

São estas as características imutáveis em quase cem anos de rádio – aquelas que permaneceram estruturais e que dão identidade à rádio, tal como conhecemos ainda hoje:

- um conteúdo sonoro (música mas sobretudo palavra)

Em resumo, depois de limpas as “gorduras” (as características que não são identificadoras), rádio pressupõe uma única e irrepetível emissão (para todos) sonora (de voz e provavelmente música) em contínuo (portanto não manipulável). Noutra formulação, um rígido “agenda setting” sonoro definido claramente por um “gatekeeper”. (Mas qualquer que seja a formulação, é claro que não é uma única característica que define o meio, antes a conjugação destes elementos)

«Outro uso corrente, que ajuda a aumentar a confusão, é a criação de sites de emissoras tradicionais de rádio, onde além da programação ao vivo e de arquivos sonoros gravados, são disponibilizados textos, fotos, vídeos, etc., o que leva alguns a imaginar que o rádio virou ou vai virar multimídia. Ora, se quando as emissoras de rádio, antigamente, publicavam revistas para divulgação de suas programações, ninguém chamava aquilo de rádio, e sim de revistas do rádio, porque agora não se chama isto de sites do rádio e se confunde tudo?»

Há novas funções?

«Hay necesidades a) cognitivas, de búsqueda de información, conocimientos y explicaciones de los hechos que suceden: la curiosidad por conocer el devenir de la ciudad, el país o el mundo en que vivimos, la historia, la tecnología, etc., (...); b) afectivas, donde el consumo de mensajes obedece a un deseo de vivir vicariamente emociones y sentimientos, así como el placer estético que producen las obras artísticas presentes en los medios; c) de integración personal, para conseguir mayor confianza en sí mismo y status personal; d) de integración social en cuanto el hecho de compartir los mensajes es un factor que facilita las relaciones sociales; y e) de entretenimiento y distracción que liberan tensiones creadas en el trabajo o en las relaciones sociales y familiares» (Noriega, 82) 

«Certainly, the development or propagation of a new technology, in the sense of a new machine does not evaluate to the emergence of a new medium. Something like 'Internet radio' may be a new medium, or it may be a new technology trying not to be a new medium, or it may be telephone technoJogy acting like a new medium so that it can act like an old medium or some other' permutation. » (Black, 2001: 398)

«The corporate prerogative of bringing media into existence by naming them can be played out in may forms and for many reasons. In the specific case of 'Internet Radio', motivation  for exercising the prerogative comes at least in large part from the fact that Internet makes it possible for non-corporate, non-wealthy people to provide audio content» (Black, 403)

«'Internet radio ' is still palpably in the naming stage» (405)

But why? Why should an audio signal ddivcrcd through the Internet be called 'radio' in the first place? Is it self-evident that making money from the delivery of such signals has anything to do with radio? Do listeners to Internet audio streams count as radio listeners? Or is 'Internet radio' a different medium from 'radio' - and, if so, why has it borrowed the name? Which comes first, the name or the medium? Indeed, whose idea was it to call it that?» (Black, 2001: 397) 

ATENÇÃO A ESTA IDEIA: the experience of AM/FM listening can be delivered perfectly and unchanged via the Internet.??? 

«New distribution channels expand radio's ability to meet consumer demand for our content where they want it, and when they want it," Haley said. "Radio is uniquely positioned to do this because radio is the only medium that does not change its form when you move from channel to channel. Print and video are different experiences when they move from digital -- radio is not. The Rolling Stones still sound like the Rolling Stones, no matter the channel."» (CEO of the Radio Advertising Bureau, Jeff Haley)

fonte: 'Audio Content Is Expanding Everywhere You Look', Radio Ink, 13/02/08

A afirmação já provocou polémica: para Mark Ramsey, «This is not just wrong, but shockingly so. Jeff, any time you move from one medium to another you change the message. This is Marshall McLuhan 101. The issue is not whether the Rolling Stones sound like the Rolling Stones across media (although it’s interesting that you picked a band best known for its output in the 60’s and 70’s), the issue is what it means to be “radio” when you exist across media and where each medium has different potentialities that extend well beyond audio alone.» Para Kurt Hansen, «What Jeff was saying was that the experience of AM/FM listening can be delivered perfectly and unchanged via the Internet. And that is absolutely correct. For sitting on your sofa listening to the local Smooth Jazz station, it doesn’t matter if the radio in the room is an FM radio or a PC playing the station’s stream. The listening experience is identical. Close your eyes, and you can’t tell the difference. This is not true for print. If one wants to curl up the sofa with one’s sweetie, drink coffee together, and read the Sunday New York Times, flipping through some sections quickly, savoring others, etc., you can’t replicate that experience using NYT.com.  Similarly, watching TV is a much different experience online. You’re not going to be watching an HD picture in surround sound on your 54” plasma TV — at least not in 2008.»

«I like what RAIN publisher Kurt Hanson wrote the other day when he said the answer to radio's problems is simple -- redefine "radio".

Kurt credits consultant Walter Sabo with pointing out that stand-alone FM radio stations were not allowed to join the NAB as recently as the 70's because they weren't considered "radio".

See, we don't just make stupid assumptions today. We've got a lot of experience in that department.

Kurt's point is worth thinking about: "In 2008, if you define 'radio' as AM, FM, satellite and streaming (both AM/FM stations and Internet-only radio properties like LAUNCHcast and Pandora and a panapoly of others), then, once again, radio is healthier and more vibrant than it has ever been".

I'd add mobile content and podcasting to the mix and call it all "radio", too.

Yes, throw satellite in there, as wel. Mel's a radio guy. Ask any XM or Sirius subscriber what they are listening to in the car and they'll say -- radio.

Call it all radio.»

fonte: Jerry del Colliano, Redefine Radio -- Don't Reinvent It 4/02/08 Inside Music Media

«the decline of the older medium may not occur immediately; under competitive pressure the traditional medium can squeeze more out of its arsenal – even actually increasing revenues for a period of time. Landes (1969: 260) noted three basic reasons for this: (1) creative technological response; (2) cutting costs and prices; and (3) widening markets and opportunities due to the increased demand brought about by the new technology’s efforts.» Lehman, 2004: 716

«What are the older medium’s possible reactions? First, attack – the best defence is a good offence. As a vehicle of communication, the threatened medium can propagandize against the newer competitor: the new medium’s content reliability and technical dependability might be questioned (Naughton, 2000). Also, fearmongering is not an uncommon ploy, where the print and electronic media play up the internet’s dark side: paedophilia, pornography, sales fraud, etc, that are actually but a very small part of the internet universe (see R¨ossler, 2001, for counter-evidence). Second, the older medium can try to cut off the new medium’s content sources. In the 1930s the newspaper industry tried to block news agencies from feeding news to the young radio medium (Emery and Emery, 1988).» (717

«However, the time-lag between invention and mass media application (Marvin, 1988) may be relatively long (e.g. ‘wireless’ took about 25 years to become ‘radio’;» Lehman, 2004: 712.

«‘Wireless radio’ started off as a minor role-player, mainlyfor land–sea communication. Only after some 20 years did its real mass nature emerge.» Lehman, 2004: 713.

«What are the reasons for the fast growth of a new medium? Culture (that is, openness to novelty), cost–benefit utility (‘bang for the buck’), userfriendliness (‘human–machine interface’), and a nation’s technological infrastructure (human and physical), are all critical factors. Also, the level of inter-medium interactivity (Mahler and Rogers, 1999), for if the medium can be utilized usefully only in conjunction with someone else’s appliance (say, a videophone), that will retard diffusion as each consumer waits for others to buy it first – until a critical mass is attained (Marwell and Oliver, 1993). However, the most important factor is social need and readiness. Without the proper communications and social conditions, new media can wait for decades to realise their potential. (715)

«How will older media adapt to the maturing internet? Most of the older media will survive in somewhat changed form in the internet age – with a few caveats. First, it is not contradictory to predict that most of the older media will continue to exist, albeit within the internet’s underlying metamedium infrastructure. While content and functions will remain recognizable, their modes of transmission/distribution will change drastically. Ultimately, newspapers will become exclusively electronic (Ries and Ries, 2000), delivered through the internet to new media appliances (PDA, ebook, tablet computers)» (724)

«Will any of the older media disappear completely (stage 5c)? To use a digital metaphor: yes, but mainly through morphing into something else. We have hinted already that the ‘newspaper’ will not exist in a few decades – in its present format. However, if it gravitates onto the web and does not disintegrate under the centrifugal force of do-it-yourself news and text/ photo weblogging, it might well survive but in quite a different form. Just as the typewriter became the computer keyboard, so too might older media ‘appliances’ become obsolete but continue to live through their functions.» 725

«Work that emerged early after the introduction of a new medium was often governed by the myths of a general cultural pessimism.»

Boehnke et al (2002: 193)

«(...)The Motley Fool investors publication says Last.fm could mean the end of radio.

Kurt Hanson, who I respect more on these issues, says wait one minute -- Last.fm isn't even radio.

It's an interesting prospect either way. To bring you up to date the four major record labels have cut a deal with Last.fm to get a penny or so for every time a young consumer goes to Last.fm and requests a song. Hanson points out, "Going to a website and saying “I would like to hear ‘You Know I’m No Good’ by Amy Winehouse right now and then being played that song is not “radio” by any stretch of the definition that I’ve ever heard."
The Motley Fool is enamored at the prospect of free online streaming of music from the major labels and a host of indies.

One problem.
Young people have voted again and again in this race that they want to own their music not rent it or listen through a glorified subscription or ad-supported service.
(...) 6. Radio (whether Last.fm or terrestrial) cannot compete with an iPod for playing favorite music. An iPod is a storage device that plays back music. Radio entertains -- or should. Subscription services or ad driven services like Last.fm will be more popular with record labels than with young consumers.

The Motley Fool says:

“Last.fm, bought by CBS… is providing on-demand delivery of its growing digital library for free...Naturally, this is also bad news for other companies selling digital tracks, like Apple, or music subscription services like Napster and RealNetworks".

I disagree. Terrestrial radio doesn't have to worry about what Last.fm is doing. It needs to worry about what radio isn't doing.(...)»

fonte: «lost.fm», Jerry Del Colliano, 25/01/08

KURT HANSEN: «This is not radio! Going to a website and saying “I would like to hear ‘You Know I’m No Good’ by Amy Winehouse right now” and then being played that song is not “radio” by any stretch of the definition that I’ve ever heard. Reasonable people can differ as to what is “radio.” The NAB and the RAB, for example, apparently don’t consider XM or Sirius to be “radio.” Some traditional broadcasters think it’s not “radio” if it doesn’t have disk jockeys (although then you have to reject Jack FM stations and 50 years of automated FM stations). Others might say it’s not “radio” unless it’s a one-to-many transmission, which would exclude personalizable Internet radio brands (even though most consumers wouldn’t). But in every case above, there’s some element of a continuous stream of music that’s selected by someone (or, in the case of a smart recommendation engine, something) else. Influenced by the consumer? Sure. A precise sequence of songs specifically selected by the consumer? I think not. That’s not radio — that’s an “on-demand music service.” Just like Rhapsody, except without a 25-songs-per-month limit (and with more advertising). And it has far less value to both the average adult consumer and to record labels» 24/01/08

«(...) Delivery systems change. Content adapts.

Just because radio companies paid billions to consolidate radio stations does not mean that future generations will want to listen to content on radios.

There will be no more radio.

No more TV.

No more newspaper.

Just audio, video and text -- adapted for the delivery systems that consumers crave.

Stand back and see it happening before our eyes even now»

fonte: Jerry Del Colliano, «Radio vs Laptops», 16/1/08

fonte: «Now you can rock 'n' go with personalized Internet radio», USA Today, Jefferson Graham

«(...) But how smart would it be for a radio station to get extra exposure for its top personalities by providing a TV outlet a live video feed of its programs for the digital subchannels?
"You're definitely onto something," said John Gallagher, who's in charge of Citadel Broadcasting's WLS-AM 890 and WZZN-FM 94.7.
"I've had discussions with some of the TV stations around town about doing that because they are looking for content for those slots. They don't really have anything to fill it, and if they were to create something to fill it themselves, they wouldn't be able to recoup their costs [because of low viewership]. ... But put some quality programming on your side channels and maybe people will come looking for it. Television hasn't figured that out quite yet, and we're trying to tweak that."
(...) It's a given that more and more stations are going to start putting video of their programs on the Internet in addition to their audio. "We've talked about that, especially streaming the video," said Rod Zimmerman, who oversees Chicago's seven CBS radio stations. "There's a certain amount of expense that we just haven't gone to, but it's certainly something you're going to see in the not-too-distant future."
(...) "In the near future, every radio station will have the ability to become a TV station," CBS Radio chief Dan Mason said in an interview with Jack Myers' Media Business Report. "There's no reason we can't have our own Webcast shows with talent [like Don Imus' old MSNBC simulcast]. Radios will soon be developed with TV screens. The terrestrial radio medium will evolve and occupy more share of the digital space." (...) "It's kind of expensive, but it would be worth it on our end from a marketing and promotional aspect," he said, adding there was incentive for TV stations to develop their multichannel capabilities. "It's a lot less expensive than doing nothing."»

fonte: «Video may bring back the radio star», Chicago Tribune, Phil Rosenthal | Media November 7, 2007

«¿podemos hablar con precisión de radio en Internet? Una respuesta más inmediata sería afirmativa: sólo cabe teclear, por ejemplo, las direcciones de cualquiera de las cadenas radiofónicas españolas[1] y comprobar cómo efectivamente están presentes en la red. Pero si observamos con atención las páginas que nos ofrecen, probablemente cambiemos de opinión: estamos en Internet, sí, pero ¿esto es radio? Los datos y las imágenes que acompañan a los sonidos nos obligan a dudar. No, no es radio en sentido tradicional, es más que radio, es sonido contextualizado con imagen e información escrita, además de la emisión estricta de la programación convencional que oferta cada una de las cadenas radiofónicas en Onda Media o Frecuencia Modulada. Por eso, en Internet descubrimos dos tipos de prestaciones sonoras: la radio en sentido estricto, tal y como la conocemos, con una emisión continuada y una programación estructurada sujeta a una temporalidad y, por otro lado, una serie de informaciones escritas sobre diversos contenidos, apoyadas por imágenes y enriquecidas con material sonoro. Esto es fácil de comprobar en la práctica. Cualquier dirección que tecleemos puede ofrecer sonido y colgar de su página lo que hasta ahora concebimos como productos radiofónicos de la misma manera que ofrece imagen y de la misma forma que la acompaña de información escrita. (...) Concluimos entonces que el producto que ofrece la red no sólo es radio sino mucho más que eso y, por esta razón, no podemos reducir la concepción sonora radiofónica a las transmisiones de aquellas direcciones de Internet que estrictamente se denominan emisoras de radio. El sonido informativo se extiende por toda la red y no es dominio exclusivo de las cadenas radiofónicas, sean del tipo que sean. (...) debido a la juventud de esta nueva plataforma se ha extrapolado a Internet la clasificación convencional de medios de comunicación. Sin duda, para todos nosotros hablar del periódico, de la radio o de la televisión en Internet resulta no sólo más fácil sino más cómodo. Pero no podemos olvidar que nos situamos ante una realidad diferente. Internet cambia esta concepción tradicional puesto que en su seno se produce una convergencia mediática que impide referirnos estrictamente a los medios de comunicación tradicionales como canales independientes (...)»

fonte: RODERO ANTÓN, La radio en Internet», Tercero Congreso de Periodismo Digital, 2002

Diz Tim Westergren, fundador do Pandora: «Pandora is an Internet radio service that listeners enjoy on their personal computers, through home entertainment products and on mobile phones».
Curioso como o serviço que mais simboliza o corte com a rádio clássica se assume como um serviço de rádio...

fonte: «Testimony of Tim Westergren» U. S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation Hearing on ’The Future of Radio’, 24/10/07

Perguntei depois a Mark Ramsey se concorda com a ideia; ele respondeu que sim, que aceita que o Pandora seja um internet radio service.

Neste texto, sobre a relação da industria publicitária com a expressão web3.0 encontrei uma explicação: «“Web 2.0 is a goal that we haven’t even come close to reaching yet,” says Richard Townsend, digital media strategist for Circus Street Communications in London. “For marketers to start to think about Web 3.0 would be misleading.”». Ou seja, a industria não quer evoluir para novos conceitos, que não sabe o que são, preferindo manter-se ligada a um anterior, que tem rendibilidade

«A pergunta torna-se inevitável para quem assiste ao processo de crescente adaptação da rádio ao espaço aberto pela internet: a partir do momento em que o texto e a imagem se imiscuem noseu universo, terminando com a exclusividade da expressão sonora que historicamente a caracteriza, e em que ocorre toda uma série de outras mudanças significativas, haverá motivos para encarar esta transformação como o fim da rádio e o nascimento de algo ainda inominável, mas que configura um eventual novo meio?

«Basic terrestrial radio might be the last of the truly “free” media available, requiring no costly equipment, content subscriptions or on-demand fees. But local ad revenues have been eroding and the industry is fighting to respond to satellite radio, Internet radio and downloads, MP3, a music industry in chaos, new radio HD technology, and competition from multiple new sources. Therefore terrestrial radio is struggling to define its core mission and place in the information/entertainment landscape. What to do?

Dan Mason, president of CBS Radio division has said: “For years we tried to figure out how to make the product compatible for the audience, but the issue was the platform, not the content. In the near future, every radio station will have the ability to become a TV station. We will see webcast and webisodes. There’s no reason we can’t have our own webcast shows with talent. Radios will evolve and occupy more share of the digital space.”» 

(fonte: «Every radio station can become a TV station» IBL News 9/10/07 

«Three-quarters of online video viewers watch more video than they did a year ago, and more than one-half expect to watch even more next year, according to a study conducted by Taylor Nelson Sofres and sponsored by AOL and Google»

fonte: «Web Video Viewers Logging More Hours», OCTOBER 1, 2007 eMarketeer

The final question may be - but will it still be radio? Predominately it will be an audio service, which will sound and be experienced much like all radio – in the mind because audio content remains the easiest content to absorb in a mobile environment – or in the midst of parallel activities, like driving. But it will be augmented by data and visuals and we will see hybrids emerge where the lines are completely fused. Arte, a TV channel in Europe now has a web-based radio service, several key newspapers now have a ‘radio’ like service online – re-positioning content back and forth in different forms – for different media. We probably have not yet found words for the hybrids that will come – television on mobile is already with us and being tagged mobTV - while podcasts on mobiles are being tagged mobcasting. The clay is still forming – the names are still being cast. Our difficulty now is to keep describing, and naming, the changes as the speed of convergence accelerates» (Shaw, 2005: 21)

A propósito de um estudo Pew:

«57 million Americans watch online video content every day. That's 19% of American adult Internet users. Americans between ages 18-29 are the most video-voracious; 31% of them watch online videos every day.  What are American adults watching? News, primarily, followed by comedy, movies or TV, music and surprisingly (to some, I imagine) commercials! 13% of American adults report they have downloaded or watched video ads. The upshot of Pew's report is that word of mouth figures prominently in the spread of online video: Two out of three viewers ages 18-29 send links to video files, compared with half of Americans age 30 and older. Forty-two percent of the 18-29 year-olds send video links a few times per month or more. »

fonte: «Why everyone wants a viral video», Church of Customer, 26/07/07

Mark Ramsey dá o exemplo de uma rádio com um canal de vídeo on line nos EUA

A propósito de um relatório da indústria publicitária norte-americana, Mark Ramsey lembra que ou a rádio convencional percebe que há uma mudança em curso ou outros farão isso por ela. Com óbvios custos. A rádio deixa de ser rádio e passa a ser a indústria do áudio.

(«In a new report being circulated to clients, MediaVest has adopted the position that terrestrial broadcast radio should no longer be looked at as a discrete medium in communications plans, but as part of a greater array of audio media--including satellite, online, mobile and a variety of personal media device technologies, such as iPods, other MP3 players, and even television, which increasingly is being used as an audio-only medium)

In my two-year-old book Fresh Air, I noted that radio was no longer "radio" but was now the "audio entertainment and information industry." It's critical for all broadcasters to get their heads around this notion because the definition of your industry determines everything about your strategy and everything about your fate.

Under a definition of radio as "audio entertainment and information" the channel by which content reaches the consumer is considerably less important than the nature of the content itself and how that content is leveraged and magnified across channels. It's the ownership and licensing of the content, not the ownership of the channel, that will make tomorrow's "audio" stars.»

fonte: «"Radio" is now "Audio" says the Ad Industry», Hear2.0, 13/08/07

Do relatório:

«(...) MediaVest's new approach to audio planning is part of a growing industry shift away from defining media based on their distribution platforms and toward understanding how consumers interact with the essential nature of their content and formats. That argument is at the heart of "StrADegy: Advertising In The Digital Age," authored by TNS Media Intelligence President-CEO Steven Fredericks. In it, he argues that in the future, "Content is defined not by its old media name, but by its core property: text, video and audio. All content, clarified and freed, can be distributed via any converged technology." In terms of audio, MediaVest seems to think we are already there. In fact, the "single source audio study" looks at how people are using audio devices like iPods to watch video, and how they are using television to listen to audio. The important thing, the agency concludes, is to understand why people are using new technologies and where they are using them. That opens new opportunities to connect people with audio content.» (fonte: «Audio Kills The Radio Noir, Agency Broadly Redefines Medium», Media Daily News, Joe Mandese, Monday, Aug 13, 2007) 

«Radio One this week named Barry Mayo president of its radio division. (...) In the announcement, Mayo stated: “We are no longer in the radio business, we are in the ‘audio entertainment business’ and we need to leverage our products well beyond the terrestrial signals we are licensed to operate.” (...) Liggins said then, “Our diversification into a broad-based media company consisting of radio, cable, Internet and print is beginning to coalesce, as we continue to identify new and myriad ways to satisfy our advertiser client base. This transition from a pure-play radio company to a media company is longer-term in nature, but I am confident that our team is up to the challenges and opportunities we have before us.” »

fonte: «Mayo: ‘We’re in Audio Entertainment, Not Radio’», Radioworld, 10/08/07

«Os vídeos online são um dos mais recentes fenómenos a nível mundial e têm vindo a revolucionar a forma de utilização dos media digitais.O visionamento de vídeos em sítios do tipo do YouTube sofreram um enorme crescimento no último ano, mostra um estudo da Magid Media Futures A popularidade dos vídeos online, colocados à disposição dos utilizadores da internet, tem vindo a sofrer um crescimento exponencial nos últimos anos. Se em 2006 eram 9% os norte-americanos entre os 12 e os 64 anos que afirmavam recorrer diariamente aos vídeos online, esse número subiu para perto de 15% em 2007. Este foi o resultado de um estudo levado a cabo pela Magid Media Futures nos Estados Unidos, ao qual o M&P teve acesso. Também a análise do uso semanal do vídeo online mostra uma subida acentuada durante o último ano. Actualmente, a maioria dos americanos entre os 12 e 64 anos (52%) afirma recorrer ao vídeo online pelo menos uma vez por semana, enquanto que em 2006 a percentagem era de 44%.»

fonte: «Boom de vídeos online nos EUA», Meios e Publicidade, 31 de Julho de 2007, por Maria João Morais

A função que o video pode desempenhar: «(...)comScore reports that in May of this year, three-fourths of Internet users watched an average of nearly three hours of online video that month.  This translates to 132 million Americans watching streaming video, with YouTube leading the way.  And of those consumers, they average two videos a day. So what does this tell us about our content and our business?  Video needs to be a component of everything we do.  It needs to be integrated into our personality shows, whether it's via webcams or listener-submitted videos.  Events need to be covered with video to capture the excitement of station events, contests, interviews, etc.  The video age online has signaled increased interest in going behind the scenes to see what happens at stations.  It involves the listener in the process, and provides her with a unique/on-demand perspective. The online video revolution also should signal the need to acquire employees (jocks, promotion people, etc.) who have basic video editing skills.  We need to be thinking video in our hires, and making sure that our stations are staffed with employees who "get" the visual side of what we do.  Every time I visit a web site that uses "photo galleries" to cover an event (often too many pictures posted that are not edited and poorly/not labeled), it screams how out-of-date stations often end up looking to listeners. In the same way that walking into a home that last had interior decoration done in the '80s simply looks tired and dated, radio needs to critically assess its websites and total approach to how it presents entertainment.  Consumers are moving at a rapid rate as the comScore data illustrates.  TV and newspapers have hopped on the video bus and are doing their best to move forward.  Radio needs to get moving, too.» (fonte: Fred Jacobs, «Theater Of The Mind», Jacoblog, 7/08/07)

«Radio is not just becoming an interactive medium: it is also becoming increasingly visual and platform operators and supporters of DAB or DMB broadcasting must address the threat of Visual Radio on mobile phones, which uses ordinary FM signals into the handsets and synchronises them with WAP/GPRS connections via the mobile network to deliver enhanced data including colour images of artists, station logos or products that are being advertised. (...) Visual Radio - pioneered by Nokia, marketed by HP but only available on a handful of systems worldwide, represents a very limited radio market today. However, it combines the efficiency of FM over-the-air broadcasts with a two-way, one-to-one connection that makes true interactivity possible, including the ability to link to websites, send emails and download ringtones or other services that can be monetised. Visual Radio looks like a killer application, especially for those targeting youth markets. It is an example of the power of mobile phones as radio devices, the emergence of significant new players in the radio industry (like Nokia as a receiver manufacturer), and an indication of how radio is quickly evolving beyond audio-only. (...) How will the DAB-based marketplace respond to Visual Radio? DAB already contains the tools, in the form of MOT (Multimedia Object Transfer) Slide Shows, to deliver still images alongside audio. But where are the colour displays that will make free-to-air digital radio broadcasts as graphically rich and compelling as Visual Radio? Are digital radio platform operators interested in delivering still colour images and is there a business model to support it, bearing in mind that mobile phone operators can draw upon subscriptions or pay-per-use GPRS connection time to fund Visual Radio? Is there an advertising/sponsorship model that could make truly visual radio possible on free-to-air digital radio? The emergence of visual radio looks so compelling, from a consumer perspective, that it begs the question: will there be any other kind of radio 20 years from now? How should radio broadcasters, content creators and platform operators view this innovation in terms of their future businesses? Perhaps the biggest potential for radio-to-mobiles is in interactivity.
Visual Radio is the pinnacle of interactive radio, delivering rich graphics on a dedicated 'back channel' and providing the means for the listener/viewer to communicate directly with the radio station, or perhaps better still for commercial radio station owners, with an advertiser. Is direct response led advertising, and records of website hits during a promotion, a realistic ambition for radio-to-mobile?»

texto de apresentação do The Digital Radio Show 2007, 11 e 12 de Junho 2007, Londres

diz Fred Jacobs:

«The video revolution is underway, led in large part by YouTube.  While most people focus on its sale to Google for .65 billion, consider this:  YouTube didn't even exist until February 2005.  This reinforces the amazing potential of web-based business concepts, as well as the meteoric rise of streaming video. This year's version of the Jacobs Media Tech Poll reinforces the video phenomenon among Rock Radio listeners.  (Consider that we didn't even ask about video streaming until this year's poll.)The data shows the rising tide for video streaming, as over half our respondents download/stream video on a frequent or occasional basis.  Of them, nearly three-fourths visit YouTube.

Of course, this has implications for radio, a world in which pictures have traditionally not existed.  But today, listeners expect to see video.  Video is everywhere, from flat-screen TVs to phones to iPods to elevators. Radio's ability to turn that corner and provide cool video of a morning show stunt, the "Rock Girl" competition, the backstage scene from concerts, or as a way to recap a great event are all new applications that can breathe life into terrestrial radio, its personalities and its communities.  But most stations don't have a webcam, can't post simple video to their websites, and often lack a person in the building with rudimentary editing skills.  (After watching my 15 year-old son and his friend edit a 5-minute video on iMovie the other night, it dawned on me that these are not skills that require a high level of tech knowledge.)» (fonte: «Video Helped The Radio Star», Jacobs Media, 7/06/07)

Video isn't a threat to radio - it's an opportunity.

In the keynote address of the convention this week, he said, "A new vocabulary will make our industry and our issues even more understandable to policymakers and the public."

Using Ibiquity as an example, he said that once the term "IBOC" was replaced in people's minds by "HD Radio," it was as if a light bulb went on. "People got it. Because they already knew what HDTV meant." He credited the name change as one reason "HD Radio is taking off."»

fonte: «Rehr: Analog Radio, TV Needs Re-Branding, Radioworldnewsbites, 20/02/07

«Radio is a classic modernist invention in the futurist tradition of the 1910s and 1920s, as evidenced by the early proclamations of the radio fantasists, such as Velimir Khlebnikov, Nicholas Tesla, Howard Armstrong, and cultural critics Bertolt Brecht and Rudolf Arnheim (Strauss, 1993). In the 1920s, before radio's style of electronic writing was fixed in the technical and public imagination, radio theorists imagined drive-in radio (the soundtrack to images projected on walls); internet-like linkages across continents as radio clubs; radio auditoria for public programs in different parts of a country; and radio libraries (Khlebnikov, 1993 [1922]).

The exercise of' rethinking radio - once the task of such artists and cultural theorists - is today in the hands of specialists versed in structuralism and poststructuralism, such as the British radio theorists Andrew Crisell (1986), Peter Lewis (1989), and Paddy Scannell (1996).

Yet radio is still more of a mechanism for bridging or contradicting pre-modern notions of countries and borders; for establishing linkages across epochs and peoples; for introducing unexpected variety or dissonance into presumed harmony than it is a medium of reflexive deconstruction. 

At first glance, digital radio technology pulls radio inextricably toward a postmodern consciousness: the process of production involves a simulacrum, in Baudrillard's terms, of sound as digits without a precise, external referent. (...)»

DAVID KING DUNAWAY, Digital Radio Production, New Media & Society, Vol. 2, No. 1, 29-50 (2000)
© 2000 SAGE Publications
  

De acordo com Mark Ramsey:

«Sirius will surely face competition from other delivery systems, but - as I have often said - when there are multiple ways to deliver content to consumers it's the strongly branded content - the good stuff, the cream of the crop - that will rise to the top.» OU seja, «When satellite radio isn't satellite radio...it's Sirius Backseat TV.» (fonte; MR, «When satellite radio isn't satellite radio...», 31/04/07)

«My only concern with Sirius Backseat TV: there are tons of ways for a substitutive product to overtake them in the marketplace. Yes, it's live streaming content while on-the-go, but - as the iPod has shown us - people are just as accepting of a cached solution (especially if it's without a monthly charge). With WiFi-enabled households becoming nearly ubiquitous, what's to stop a device to download new programs while your car is parked in the garage? I'm not saying that Sirius Backseat TV doesn't have potential, but ignoring the competitive risks is silly. But with Nickelodeon, Disney Channel and Cartoon Network on their side - as well as the key OEM partnership with Chrysler - Sirius might have a decent jump on the competition as demand for this type of service grows. (Orbicast, «Initial thoughts on Sirius Backseat TV», 31/03/07

fonte: Multimedia meets radio, «10 ideas for a successful multimedia strategy» 27/3/07

«ZURICH, Switzerland, March 27 /PRNewswire/ -- SVOX, a global supplier of text-to-speech output solutions for the automotive and mobile industries, teamed with Audi and the Fraunhofer Institute for Integrated Circuits IIS to demonstrate during CeBIT a real-time transmission chain of the first live in-car reception of NewsService Journaline(R) service over Digital Radio DAB (Digital Audio Broadcasting) according to SVOX CEO Volker Jantzen.
NewsService Journaline is the basis for Audi's Personal News service now in final testing. This "teletext for radio" provides continuously updated information for immediate access. Drivers choose text news sorted by topics from a hierarchically organized menu. Jantzen reports that Audi considers to bring the service to market soon and make it available worldwide based on market acceptance.

The real-time transmission chain consists of the new "Fraunhofer Multimedia DataServer(TM) for DAB R4" by Fraunhofer IIS and DAB receiver technology by Atmel Corporation. The Fraunhofer Multimedia DataServer automatically aggregates content for NewsService Journaline and transmits it using DAB. The powerful SVOX text-to-speech system installed in the car then presents the text messagespreviously transmitted over DAB to the driver.
The service can be managed using the Audi multimedia interface and is easy to personalize. Based on individual preferences, the system chooses only news of interest to the driver. Topics of specific interest can also be bookmarked for an easy and direct access in future.»

fonte: «Audi - SVOX Powers In-Car Digital Radio News Service Developed by Audi and Fraunhofer IIS», Auto Spectator, 2007/3/29

Ei, eu disse “vídeo”? Mas eu não estava falando sobre rádio (digital)?

Mas a TV (digital) vai continuar sendo TV, com som e imagem. E, claro, com funções interativas. Como na Internet? Talvez sim, talvez não, talvez diferente. E imagem de alta definição e som envolvente (surround). Ou então uma imagem mais normal, mas num aparelhinho que vai parecer um livro – você carrega pra lá e pra cá, pára num canto para tomar um lanche, abre o tal “livro”, e pronto: começa a assistir o seu programa favorito, seja ele um noticiário ou o capítulo de hoje da novela. Bacana. E também vai ter uns receptores ainda menores, que você vai poder carregar no bolso – seja para assistir programas numa pequena tela que não chega a dez centímetros de tamanho, seja apenas para ouvir o som, enquanto espera alguma coisa. Sim senhor! TV sem imagem, apenas som… Ei, mas não estávamos falando sobre TV… digital?

Onde termina uma coisa e começa a outra? É, estamos vivendo num mundo em que velhos conceitos não valem mais. Antigamente as coisas eram mais simples. Pão pão, queijo queijo, já dizia o ditado. Eram homens de um lado e mulheres de outro. Hoje em dia as coisas estão mais difusas, vocês entendem, não é?

Vejam por exemplo a proposta do DAB (Digital Audio Broadcasting), na Alemanha. Originalmente concebido para ser um rádio digital (ou seja, basicamente áudio), agora estão começando a transmitir jornais para serem lidos no receptor. Proposta parecida ao do DMB (Digital Multimedia Broadcasting), na Coréia: em vez de áudio, o que se transmite são programas multimídia, de video clips a joguinhos eletrônicos. E o que dizer do DVB-H (Digital Video Broadcasting for Handheld), onde o receptor é mais parecido com um pequeno computador de mão? Mais ou menos como os tais terminais de telefonia celular 3G. Ei, mas não estávamos falando de rádio, quero dizer, de televisão digital? Ah, sei lá. Esse mundo está cada vez mais confuso.»

fonte: Takashi Tome, «TV Digital, Rádio Digital e outras esquisitices no ar». 14/03/07

«(...) Anyhow, the debate has moved on and the new mantra is that radio journalists don't do video. Apparently, it's one thing to encroach on the territory of print journalists by producing text for the website, but they draw the line at video. That's TV, they claim. Sadly, they still haven't grasped multimedia and don't understand convergence.  Web video is not television - the grammar is completely different. But don't take my word for it, check out the video segments that TV news stations are shovelling onto the Web - a lot of it just doesn't work. But if done properly, online video can target niche groups and exploit the long-tail in ways that are impossible for traditional broadcast media. There is a smilar relationship between podcasting and traditional radio.

(...)BBC Five Live is rising to the challenge by providing images to accompany many of its sporting programmes. I have heard that they are turning Mark Kermode's film reviews into video podcasts. No doubt, some of my colleagues will accuse Radio Five Live of making "cheap television." Pay no attention: for the most part, they are the same people who predicted no-one would ever read a news article online. »

(fonte: Multimedia meets radio, «Why video is a must for radio stations», 19/03/07)

«McLuhan entendia que todo meio novo trata, num primeiro momento, de integrar os meios precedentes e se referir a eles. O termo hibridização foi cunhado na década de 60 para caracterizar as mudanças provocadas pela grande penetrabilidade da televisão. Trinta anos depois, permanece atual e oferece uma oportunidade especiamente favorável à observaçao dos componentes e propriedades estruturais da dinâmica do processo em curso. (...) Por esse conceito é possível entender hoje que as mutações emergentes por hibridização desencadeiam um realinhamento do sistema de comunicação, abrindo caminho para a convergência de processos e práticas. É nesse ambiente de modificações e reciclagens, onde uma forma não subsiste sem a outra, é que estão sendo moldadas na contemporaneidade as bases do processo de convergência ou integração entre novos e velhos meios» (Nélia Del Bianco, in Teorias do Rádio, 2005: 160-1) 

«If we take the classic definitions of radio, as laid out in key texts like Crisell’s Understanding Radio (1986), then we can classify lots of Podcasts as ‘radio’. Yet in some ways to identify Podcasts as ‘radio’ might be ignoring some of the qualities of each medium and perhaps terms like ‘radiogenic’ or ‘radioesque’ are more useful. Black (2001) contributes to this in his discussion of radio streaming on the internet and the debate over what it should be called, asserting that: Listeners have a lot to do with it. A medium’s identity stems in part from how it is received and treated by its users. Listeners may of course be nudged in this or that direction by the industry. But if, for whatever reason, Internet audio is treated as if it were radio, then to some irreducible extent it is radio. (Black, 2001: 398)» (...) If broadcast radio is a ‘push’ medium and internet radio is a ‘pull’ medium, then that raises an interesting debate as to how Podcasting is defined, given that it lies somewhere in between. Whilst the listener selects the content they want to subscribe to, the content arrives by a ‘pushed’ mechanism and the user ultimately decides when it is played (‘pull’). Podcasts are therefore defined as content with the lazy benefits of push media but with all personalization features of pull media. This makes Podcasting ‘personalized media’ or, as BBC ‘In Business’ presenter Peter Day would have it, ‘Radio-Me’, meaning a medium that is more accessible than web radio and more in tune with the needs of some audiences than broadcast services (Day, 2005). Like a lot of radio, Podcasts are consumed alone and, like radio, they tend to be linear in their nature in that the content is heard as though it were live but with the added convenience of being able to pause or rewind if desired. It is this feature that led many industry observers to call it ‘TiVo for Radio’ (Day, 2005).» (Berry, 155-156)

«Podcast pioneers Curry and Winer disagree about what Podcasting will do to radio. Curry feels its effect will be profound whilst Winer is more sceptical, arguing in his weblog: It’ll become radio and vice versa. Airwaves are just another method of distribution . . . What will change is who’s talking and who’s listening. Now the conversation will flow in all directions, with broadcasters listening to people they used to think of as ‘audience’. Blogs changed the architecture of written-word-journalism in the same way. (Winer, 2004)» (Berry, 158)

«(...) Las emisoras de radio comerciales estadounidenses han vislumbrado el futuro, y está, entre otras cosas, en el vídeo. Por ello, el estereotipo de locutor de voz aterciopelada como Stryker, desplomado en la silla del estudio y desmelenado, tal vez cambie radicalmente. (...) Por todo el país, las emisoras de radio incluyen vídeos en sus ciberpáginas, desde una simple cámara en la cabina de emisión para cubrir exclusivamente acontecimientos como la Super Bowl hasta videoclips, noticias y actuaciones musicales sólo para Internet. "Ahora es un medio visual", opina Dianna Jason, directora general de mercadotecnia y promociones en Power 106, una emisora de hiphop de Los Ángeles. Si bien antes se decía que el vídeo había matado a la estrella de la radio según la canción de Buggles, cuyo vídeo fue el primero emitido en MTV en 1981? ahora se presenta como inesperado salvador de un sector que afronta múltiples retos. En la era de YouTube, podría parecer que lo único notable a este respecto es que la radio haya sido inusualmente lenta en adoptar la era interactiva. Pero ahora muchas de las principales empresas radiofónicas intentan mantener su estatus cuando la atención del oyente se dispersa en muchas direcciones: i-Pods, móviles, radio por satélite y diversas ofertas de emisión y descarga de música por empresas como Yahoo y AOL. "Muchas de nuestras emisoras empiezan a introducir el vídeo y a generar nuevas corrientes de ingresos", comenta Joel Hollander, director ejecutivo de CBS Radio, la segunda empresa radiofónica de EE UU, después de Clear Channel Communications. "Espero que el vídeo ayude a la estrella de la radio. A lo mejor la radio salva a la estrella del vídeo". Más del 90% de los estadounidenses siguen escuchando la radio tradicional. Pero la cantidad de tiempo que permanecen sintonizados a lo largo de la semana se redujo 14 horas a lo largo de la pasada década, según los cálculos de Arbritron. Los ingresos del sector se han estancado, y el índice Bloomberg de acciones radiofónicas caía un 40% en los pasados tres años. Ahora el vídeo sólo aporta una diminuta fracción de los 16.000 millones de euros que la radio genera en publicidad. Pero podría representar la tan necesitada nueva fuente de crecimiento en un mercado de vídeo en Internet en rápida expansión, en el que todos, desde Google hasta los periódicos, pasando por las televisiones, quieren estar. Ejecutivos y figuras de la radio consideran que sus vídeos serán distintos porque aprovechan la ventaja tradicional del medio al usar personajes en directo y acontecimientos locales para captar oyentes. Y la radio y el vídeo encajan mejor de lo esperado. En su libro Understanding media, el teórico cultural Marshall McLuhan escribe que “el efecto de la radio es visual”.Siguiendo la clave de You-Tube y el auge de los vídeos caseros, el objetivo no es ofrecer un producto pulido, de calidad televisiva. Una emisora de rock, 94.7 FM de Portland, Oregón, empezó el año pasado la serie Vídeos de contrabando, en la que prestan a un oyente una cámara de vídeo para que grabe para la ciberpágina un clip de la actuación de un grupo nuevo. “A veces es un poco tosco, pero es lo que queremos”, comenta Mark Hamilton, director de la cadena, perteneciente a Entercom Communications. “No queremos que sea perfecto”. Los productores de Adam Carolla, el locutor matutino de Los Ángeles cuyo programa se difunde en muchas emisoras de CBS Radio, graban con regularidad vídeos reales de Carolla y algún invitado para colgarlos en Internet. Clear Channel, cuya sección de Internet está dirigida por Evan Harrison, vicepresidente ejecutivo, ofrece una elaborada programación en vídeo en las ciberpáginas de sus 1.200 emisoras. 6.000 vídeos musicales están disponibles para su descarga, pero también ha venido produciendo contenido visual original que las distintas emisoras pueden presentar en sus páginas y los dj, promocionar en antena. Por ahora, las nuevas empresas de vídeo nacidas de la radio apenas si empiezan a generar ingresos. Los directivos del sector resaltan que, por el momento, sus programas de vídeo podrían considerarse experimentales y sólo una faceta ?junto con los blogs y los archivos de sonido por suscripción y el reciente servicio denominado Radio HD? de cómo se está adaptando el sector. (...)»

fonte: «La radio (visual) se pasa a Internet», El Pais, RICHARD SIKLOS (NYTimes) - New York - 10/03/2007

«"It was a truly simple idea; video on the radio," he said. "What we wanted to do, basically, was rip off the E! network. So we did a live stream from the red carpet at the Grammys, and 140 of our radio stations picked it up. Not that it was revolutionary idea - it's been done on TV - but it blurred the lines on what radio can do, and can deliver."

He noted that this kind of programming worked across the company's stations' formats. "Radio tends to be very vertical with formats, but this was horizontal," he said.

He also noted that the radio promoted the webcast, which then was used to promote the TV network's broadcast of the awards ceremony. "The webcast was a Trojan horse to promote the TV broadcast," he said. "And it was radio that promoted the webcast. Stations were talking about it all week. And then the web drove viewers to the TV broadcast."»

fonte: radio Ink, What's The Big Idea?, 19/03/07 

Este artigo do New York Times (reproduzido pelo IHT) parece indicar que sim: a partir da fusão da Sirius com a XM, e a consequente eliminação de canais repetidos, sobraria mais espaço e dinheiro para investir na emissão de imagem/Informação

Por um lado, «The first phase of the business — beaming dedicated music, sports and talk-radio stars like Howard Stern and Opie and Anthony directly to consumers — has not proved to have a clear advantage over old technology like free radio and newer ones like the iPod. So now satellite companies are looking into what other services they can offer to make them appealing to motorists». ALém disos, «that trying to create a better iPod than Apple is a losing proposition.”

Alguns esforços já foram feitos:
«Although XM and Sirius offer radio, in theory, the systems could be adapted to distribute any kind of data. And, indeed, both companies have made limited steps in that direction. Subscribers can already choose to have selected stock quotes, as well as news and sports headlines, beamed to the tiny screens on their receivers.
Both companies beam weather data to aviators and boaters through services that cost upwards of a month. Later this year, XM will extend that by beaming weather information to a hand-held unit for hikers and hunters.
But Sirius has also made tentative steps toward offering video. At trade shows, Sirius has displayed prototype systems for sending video to back-seat displays like those now used by in-car DVD players. And the company recently, if vaguely, outlined plans to deliver some form of video programming aimed at children later this year.»

«The future services Mr. Parsons foresees are more modest. One, invisible to users, involves using the satellites to keep the data on in-car navigation systems constantly and automatically up to date. Another is a trick the iPod learned long ago: displaying album cover art when songs are playing. But there are limits to what even a combined satellite radio company can do. Satellite systems effectively do not allow two-way transmissions, ruling out services such as e-mail. And without enormous reinvestment, the systems are not likely to approach the transmission speeds of WiMax, a new wireless technology being developed by Nortel Networks and others that will probably start operating within the year. Those systems, like cellphone networks, will pass moving users from tower to tower and offer transmission speeds comparable to high-speed, wired connections in homes. Susan Kevorkian, an analyst with IDC, said that the satellite radio connections with automakers would give them a significant advantage over WiMax, at least in the short term.» 

fonte: Can Video Help Save the Satellite Radio Business?», IHT, 26/02/07 IAN AUSTEN

Etiquetas: wimax, iPod

«La radio, especialmente en Estados Unidos, se está convirtiendo poco a poco en un medio visual. ¿Contradicción? No. Un recurso más de supervivencia. Ahora que muchas estaciones tienen páginas web, las usan para ofrecer cobertura visual.
Es así, las estaciones de radio comienzan a poner programas de video en sus páginas Web: comedias musicales, clips de noticias y acontecimientos especialmente pensados para conservar relevancia. Allí, se inician también en una estrategia que hasta hace poco les era extraña: la interactividad. La radio llega tarde a la era interactiva, pero ahora aprovecha su cara en la red para incorporar todo aquello que puede atraer publicidad, público y ganancias. Lejos de matar a su antecesor,entonces, parecería que el negocio de la transmisión de imágenes se convierte ahora en salvador de la vapuleada radio tradicional.»

Mais: «The Internet does change everything. Another barrier between media has fallen. Local television stations are now competing with local radio stations and newspaper sites for online video ad revenues. According to a new report from Borrell Associates, "The New Frontier: Local Online Video Advertising," local online video advertising will more than double this year, increasing from 1 million in 2006 to 1 million.

Although local online video advertising currently accounts for less than 5% of all local online advertising — which is expected to hit approximately .7 billion in 2007 — Borrell analysts predict that in five years it will exceed billion and account for more than one-third of all local online advertising. The main driver? Increasing competition between local online newspaper, radio and TV sites, each attempting to poach one another's business.

Fonte: «Local Online Video Advertising Forecast to Double», E-Marketer FEBRUARY 16, 2007

Etiquetas: video, convergência

«Nesta conjuntura, a ameaça não é a Internet em si, mas a Internet enquanto novo suporte para a rádio, que assim pode perder ouvintes no seu suporte tradicional, para ganhar novos ouvintes on-line. O que ainda não se sabe, é se com os avanços da tecnologia, dos programas informáticos e o consequente aumento da utilização da Internet, os internautas irão ouvir as estações que estão na rede e disponibilizam a escuta das suas emissões em tempo real, ou se passarão a escutar rádio cuja existência se limite à rede e que graças às possibilidades tecnológicas, reconverte o conceito de rádio. Essa reformulação do conceito pode decorrer da adopção de um esquema de múltiplos canais, da total ausência da presença humana, ou por outros factores relacionados com a discursividade do próprio meio, que modificam o habitual esquema de recepção da comunicação radiofónica e irão desenvolver novas maneiras de usar a rádio graças ao potencial da Internet.» (Cordeiro, Paula, «A rádio de modelo multimediático e os jovens» in http://bocc.ubi.pt/pag/cordeiro-paula-radio-modelo-multimediatico.pdf (pág. 2 e 3)

ou

«Tradicionalmente conhecida como um meio imediato e irrepetível, a rádio, com o advento da Internet, pode redefinir-se. A introdução de sistemas multimédia vem alterar a natureza da rádio, podendo transformá-la de tal forma que nos obrigue a reequacionar o conceito, questionando a validade da definição do que é a rádio e a sua comunicação (...) (pag1). O conceito de rádio na Internet está ainda por definir, mas uma rádio com texto e vídeo, foge ao modelo tradicional, actualizando um formato com cerca de oitenta anosde existência e fornecendo ao utilizador, que é também o ouvinte, um amplo conjunto de potencialidades, que até aqui seriam impensáveis. (2) (...) A rádio afasta-se do seu conceito original e assume uma configuração multimédia que só a Internet pode oferecer. A convergência das tecnologias instaura novos formatos para velhos conteúdos, e obriga ao progressivo desenvolvimento do sistema de comunicações. Num futuro próximo, a rádio na Internet poderá ser banalizada a partir do momento em que o sistema digital se generalizar. A inovação mais recente, o sistema digital de radiodifusão (DAB – Digital Audio Broadcasting), abre perspectivas até aqui nunca pensadas para a rádio, pela flexibilidade de um sistema inovador, cujos limites ainda não são conhecidos. (pag7)»

fonte: Paula Cordeiro, «Rádio e Internet: novas perspectivas para um velho meio», Universidade do ALgarve, 2004

«Thirty years ago, music in your pocket meant a transistor radio with tinny mono sound. Fifteen years ago, you'd have a Walkman cassette player with stereo headphones and tape hiss. Now, thousands of clear, digital songs fit on an iPod Nano the size of a credit card.

Every form of media experiences the same transition: fidelity that starts out expensive and big gets cheaper and smaller. And those transitions are happening faster than ever»

fonte: «If you wanted to watch ‘Superman,' which would you choose now?», USA Today, By Kevin Maney, 30/08/06

«One key theme of the event, starting with Ralph Guild's introductory comments and reinforced heavily by the media buyers' panel, is that the product category should no longer be called "radio" but rather "audio information and entertainment."

This new category definition, of course, includes both satellite-delivered and Internet-delivered  radio. Along with AM, FM, and HD delivery, it's all going to be competing for the same ears and same advertising dollars.

Prospects for growth in "traditional" radio were not seen as promising by anyone (except perhaps in the statements of the radio group heads). BearStearns's Victor Miller observed that radio audience has declined 10% over the past six years and that revenues in current dollars have declined in four of the past five years (with the one "up" year looking good only because it was compared against the comps of 9/11).

For example, many speakers saw opportunities ripe for the taking in the world of digitally-delivered radio. CBS Radio CFO Walter Berger noted  that delivering programming to office workers at their PCs via the Internet offered the opportunity for "incredible value creation."»

fonte: «Net radio holds best opportunities for broadcast groups, panels say», RAIN, 5/7/06

Sinal dos tempos...

«Natalie Swed Stone, US Director of National Radio Investment at OMD, announced that her agency was adopting the term "audio" to reflect the direction they believe the "radio" market is headed. Matt Feinberg, Senior VP and Director of Interactive Broadcast for Zenith Media, said that he agreed with Ms. Swed Stone's argument. "We realized a couple years ago that [this industry] is more than radio," Feinberg said. "The lines are so blurry that no one knows where to go and what to do. If you try to define it by traditional styles, you'll go insane." "Changing the name from radio to audio is more all encompassing and I think its a move in the right direction," Feinberg added.
Swed Stone predicted that the traditional defintion of "radio" will soon be a component part of this new "audio" designation. "By the way, ' radio' isn't a cool word," Swed Stone somewhat triumphantly noted to the audience. "'Audio' is a cooler word."

fonte: «ad agencies dropping radio for audio as industry shifts», RAIN, 26/5/06, http://www.kurthanson.com/archive/news/052606/index.asp

Um excelente artigo da Billboard Radio Monitor sobre o que é a rádio hoje («decifrar o significado da rádio») e começa assim:

«Era tão fácil. Rádio: AM ou FM. But today, with high definition, podcasting, online streaming, hand-held devices and the word "digital" attached to so many platforms, defining the radio medium has become an arduous task. And with a technological roller coaster constantly reinventing the way consumers hear music, news and entertainment, determining where radio is going is an even tougher call»

Algumas citações:

«No matter how shiny and hip the new audio platforms, broadcasters must hold content above all else, our pundits stressed»

«"The best appliance ever created for dispensing music to date is the iPod, but the best appliance for delivering companionship and fun remains the radio»

«"we need to start thinking of radio as audio entertainment. We're at a crossroads where the delivery system is going to change, whether that means a cell phone, some other wireless device or something that hasn't even been invented yet. The future of radio is going to be more about the product than how it is delivered»

«we have to give the listener opportunities to feel that they have some control over what we do. Listeners need to know they make a difference."»

fonte: «Where Is It Going?» Billboard Radio Monitor April 28, 2006 By Paul Heine and Chuck Taylor