video killed the radio star (except not really)
Lately I’ve been giving a lot of thought to radio and how it differs from other forms of media. It’s not like television, as there’s nothing visual to draw the audience in. It’s not like a book, since we’re not interpreting a physical text. And it’s not the internet, because we’re not allowed to contribute as we usually do. Radio is something far more difficult to deal with.
With radio, we’re asked to listen to what other people have to say — which makes it that much harder for the speaker to keep the audience’s attention. We have to rely solely on what we hear, without anything else to enhance the experience. And so navigating the world of radio requires a certain…finesse.
Like, radio hosts need to have a certain degree of voice control — because they can’t use physical comedy, like weird facial expressions and wild gestures. Instead, they fall back on things like tone, pitch, music, and sound effects. It’s hard work, but when it’s done right it can be wildly successful.
This American Life, for example, thrives because Ira Glass has been honing his craft for years. He knows exactly what he’s doing — which is probably why he doesn’t use the ideas pitched by other people. When parents, friends, and even strangers on the street pitch Ira and the rest of the producers ideas, they’re not thinking about how well the story will translate to radio. More often than not, these ideas end up being “you had to be there” moments. That was how I felt about Ira’s dad’s story. It was funny to the Glass family, because they were all there and it made for a fairly memorable experience — for them. But personally, I was bored by it.
I liked Lisa’s segment, though that was only because she made it more about the reporting process rather than the stories themselves. The idea of a funny funeral is really interesting, but obviously it was fairly difficult for her to pull off, which is why she went the route that she did. But if she had found some more substantive stories, that segment would have totally rocked.
I didn’t like Nancy’s segment because The Erie Canal angle is totally unappealing to me. Who cares what happened to it? Why does it matter? I will begrudgingly admit that the song was cute, although I felt like it would have been more successful in an educational video for grade school kids.
Unlike our faithful group of producers and the sound engineer that fell asleep, I liked Alex’s dad’s idea. Corporate personhood as a concept is something I think a lot about. It’s totally weird because it has both limitations and wiggle room simultaneously. Plus, I love hearing people rant and rave about this kind of stuff like Papa Blumberg was doing. However, I’m in the minority, and so I have to concede that it was likely mind-numbing for other people.
I loved Robyn’s dad’s story. It was definitely my favorite. I loved his voice. (Is it just me, or did he sound like a jovial Morgan Freeman?) And the way it built up with the music in the background was brilliant. Even though it’s practiced – because he’s told it over and over and over again – it still maintains a natural flow. And the arc of people’s reactions only served to build it up further.
I think it was an interesting decision of Ira’s part to include Alissa’s mom’s and Sarah’s mom’s stories. Because even though they didn’t work out so well, they provided a contrast to the ones that did work. So that got me thinking about the underlying theme in this broadcast.
Jane’s dad’s idea, and the subsequent story about Petit Goave and life in Haiti after the earthquake, was really interesting to listen to. I was especially impressed by the narration, which was done very well.
So back to the idea behind this broadcast. This American Life is obviously a popular radio show. It wouldn’t have made it to 400 episodes if it wasn’t. I appreciate what the producers were trying to do with this broadcast because they were, essentially, testing the limits of radio as a medium. What works? What doesn’t? And if something doesn’t work, how do you make it work?
Again, it’s a difficult means to work with. But This American Life seems to do it pretty well every time.
3 responses so far
I liked the comment you made about the radio asking us to listen, rather than see. Video, text, and the Internet are all primarily visually interpreted. The radio has no visual to it. That’s what I felt made it so enjoyable. Instead of being told what is going on through pictures, instead, we’re given the liberty to picture in our own minds what we interpret. It’s a freedom that gives radio its charm, it doesn’t require the complete devotion that visual stimuli need. All you have is a voice, which is your sole guide. This also makes radio very different, you can’t stick a pretty face in front of a radio mic and expect success. You need someone with a strong, unique voice, who can utilize their voice to portray certain emotions.
I like how you pointed out that some of the more lackluster stories gave a contrast to the better ones. I didn’t realize that those stories really had a role in the whole segment before. I like also how you questioned the purpose of radio and how it isn’t really mainstream anymore but can still be of value in our digital age.
The one major point that I agree with you about was Alex’s portion. The segment that was rudely cut off about corporate personhood actually was interesting to me especially since I agreed with that stance. Also, he seemed to put in the most individual research, due to the difficulty of the topic. I found it interesting because you do honestly add personality to inanimate abstract concepts.