Iíve always been fundamentally opposed to paying for radio, but I guess itís time to give in.
Mere proof that in EVERY case, YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR. The concept of "free" radio means suffering with piss-poor programming. This is what we are suffering under today with these radio stations that are run from central offices MILES AWAY from the markets the stations are in. However, don't "bet the mortgage" on satellite radio being the absolute answer--they hire terrestrial radio people--usually those who do the same piss-poor programming decisions that terrestrial radio do now. The only way the LISTENER will win in the arena of radio entertainment is if the "powers that be" start new and innovative hiring decisions (in programming). Instead of requiring unreasonable amounts of experience, they need to hire someone with the PASSION, TALENT, and DESIRE to put on quality programming that the LISTENERS are interested in.
For example, it doesn't take 10 years of "programming experience" to realize that:
1. A 100-song playlist DOES NOT APPEAL to the listening public
2. Talk radio consisting solely on the "Rush light" "liberal vs. conservative" debate is boring.
3. You don't have to be a 46-year old white man to host a successful talk show.
4. You don't have to be ignorant as hell, and slavishly entrenched on the liberal, socialist, Democrat plantation in order to be a "black" talk show host.
5. You don't have to be "in the gutter" in order to be entertaining.
6. Big markets (like Atlanta) are big enough to have highly rated, LOCALLY-based programming.
I have virtually no programming experience (officially), but I know I can program a station better than 90% of those that are RIGHT NOW...