3 ms·

Of course, for most broadcasters and regulators debating these broad delivery systems, “listeners” meant Americans who were white and middle or working class. P

Of course, for most broadcasters and regulators debating these broad delivery systems, “listeners” meant Americans who were white and middle or working class. Programming reinforced presumed middle class values. While some local stations offered programming targeted to ethnic groups, occupations, and even political beliefs, black Americans and other minority groups were largely left out of national radio, except as caricatures—usually played by white people—in comedy programs. Why is this paragraph in the article? Do we have to make everything a wokeness contest? The article is about engineering, and this paragraph is a non sequitur plopped in the middle of it for no reason.

scblock 7y ago
This is a history article, not an engineering article. It's published on the Magazine for the National Endowment of the Humanities. The article spends time discussing the perceived cultural potential of radio, as below: "Since radio’s beginnings in the early 1920s, industry and government leaders promoted it as the great homogenizer, a cultural uplift project that could, among other things, help modernize and acculturate rural areas." The paragraph you take such objection to follows that statement, and is entirely relevant in the context of the article.
at_a_remove 7y ago
It's the Magazine of the National Endowment of the Humanity publication, so there you go.
danharaj 7y ago
Dovetails nicely with the previous paragraph, I think you doth protest too much. "In the early days of broadcast development and regulation, Crosley and WLW sparked debate about what radio should and could be. Could a few clear-channel stations adequately serve—and acculturate—entire regions of listeners? Or would a national network system with local affiliates better target listener needs and interests?"
LesserEvil665 7y ago
"The Magazine of the National Endowment for the Humanities" How is this excerpt not relevant to the stated mission of the publication? The article goes beyond the scope of mere engineering.
rsynnott 7y ago
Half the article is about the cultural context; see also the stuff about rural access.

scblock 7y ago

This is a history article, not an engineering article. It's published on the Magazine for the National Endowment of the Humanities. The article spends time discussing the perceived cultural potential of radio, as below: "Since radio’s beginnings in the early 1920s, industry and government leaders promoted it as the great homogenizer, a cultural uplift project that could, among other things, help modernize and acculturate rural areas." The paragraph you take such objection to follows that statement, and is entirely relevant in the context of the article.

at_a_remove 7y ago

It's the Magazine of the National Endowment of the Humanity publication, so there you go.

danharaj 7y ago

Dovetails nicely with the previous paragraph, I think you doth protest too much. "In the early days of broadcast development and regulation, Crosley and WLW sparked debate about what radio should and could be. Could a few clear-channel stations adequately serve—and acculturate—entire regions of listeners? Or would a national network system with local affiliates better target listener needs and interests?"

LesserEvil665 7y ago

"The Magazine of the National Endowment for the Humanities" How is this excerpt not relevant to the stated mission of the publication? The article goes beyond the scope of mere engineering.

rsynnott 7y ago

Half the article is about the cultural context; see also the stuff about rural access.