3 ms·

It is a shame. I think it’s especially a shame for children and young people. A counter to radio remaining relevant is “I can listen to whatever I want, via th

It is a shame. I think it’s especially a shame for children and young people. A counter to radio remaining relevant is “I can listen to whatever I want, via this digital technology”. Fine - but young people don’t yet have a complete mental map of what culture they enjoy. In the UK, funding for libraries and the arts (public radio, the BBC) has been increasingly cut in the name of austerity. I think that’s true in the US too. Despite this, young people have an unprecedented amount of access to culture. Or, at least, any form of culture that can be digitally replicated. Soulseek and Anna’s Archive are wonderful projects. But they only have as much utility as the person using them can put into the search bar. We’re increasingly entrusting cultural education - what to put into the search bar - to algorithms that are designed not (as the BBC’s mission statement is) to “inform, educate, and entertain”, but to retain attention. Even worse: many of these (eg, Spotify) hide real access behind subscription fees. If you grew up broke, like I did, you will understand how inaccessible this real access is. The most motivated young people will continue to find the workarounds piracy offers, and to find other routes for cultural education. Any young person who isn’t in that upper percentile of motivatedness might increasingly be left out. You can attribute that to a choice they have made - I think that’s wrong. I think the joy of broadening one’s horizons is available to all, and is also difficult to learn and a strain to continue to practice. I think it must be taught. I think this is especially true and important when everyone has a constantly-available option of algorithmically-selected pleasantness. Human radio DJs are not optimized for pleasantness, or to serve you relevant ads based on your conversations with them. At their best, DJs are educators. Anyone who grew up listening to radio knows that, and knows the pleasure that comes from learning not to change the channel when something new and uncomfortable-feeling comes on, just in case it ends up being something you fall in love with.

Ntrails 3mo ago
> In the UK, funding for libraries [] has been increasingly cut in the name of austerity. Focusing on one thing here, for convenience. The problem remains that costs are up far in excess of budgets - austerity be damned! We are forced to prioritise, cutting the generally useful but "non-essential". (There is often a legal duty to the essential things) https://ifs.org.uk/publications/how-have-english-councils-funding-and-spending-changed-2010-2024 https://ifs.org.uk/publications/how-have-english-councils-fu... Is a great breakdown. To illustrate my argument see Table 1. Real-terms spending per person by service area, various years (2024–25 prices) > Within total service spending, per-person spending on children’s social care services [] increased by 11% in real terms. Spending on adult social care [] was also relatively protected, falling by only 2%. This meant much larger cuts to other services: more than 40% in the case of housing, culture and leisure, and highways and transport, and nearly 60% cuts to planning and development. We cut what _could_ be cut, and that's a prioritisation call. edit: now in https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/fixing-public-services-labour-government/local-government https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/fixing... Great rabbit hole for my Wednesday morning! :D
- gabriel666smith 3mo ago
  Yeah - I used "austerity" as a slightly sloppy shorthand in my comment. My two closest local libraries were closed due to cuts made during "the credit crunch" by the coalition government (from memory!), when "austerity" was the buzzword, so I felt it'd communicate most broadly (to HN's international userbase) the phenomenon I was gesturing at. From what I can understand, these sources are saying: "because costs are up, those past cuts have not yet really been reversed, especially not in terms of real-terms funding per-capita, or funding for 'non-essential' services". Super bleak reading - it's a very dark rabbit hole!
  - Ntrails 3mo ago
    > Super bleak reading - it's a very dark rabbit hole! That it is! It will require an actual change to the societal contract to resolve as best I can tell - and it remains unclear to me what direction the change will take.
    - gabriel666smith 3mo ago
      Yes - I think the idea of 'citizenship' feels increasingly abstract and outdated to anyone who only rarely noticeably interacts with the entity they pay taxation to, typically solely in moments of extreme crisis. 'Noticeably' here meaning I'm excluding ambient aspects of life, like walking on a government-maintained pavement. I would argue those 'non-essential' services - those which you actively notice benefiting from - are extremely important for building institutional trust in the state. For young people entering the workforce today, who (for example) are a demographic that have a lower requirement for the services of the NHS, it must be genuinely confusing and alienating to be paying (what I believe is) a historically high tax rate. Citizenship, as an idea, does need to demonstrably benefit both the state and the individual. Otherwise, the state is basically asking people to draw on their reserves of empathy to have a reason not to act like a dick. That will, unfortunately, have much more varied results than empathy alongside tangible incentives. The cost of not providing those 'non-essential' services may ultimately be larger, and more difficult to calculate, I think, than are calculable today. How you provide them without the cash to do so is a question I'm not smart enough to answer. But people have now - completely anecdotally - gone a very long time with low tangible incentives toward citizenship being provided by the either the state or local authorities, and the vibe is very, very bad. I don't think this is restricted to the UK, either. The OECD’s 2024 trust survey found only 37% of respondents across 30 countries were confident their government balances the interests of current and future generations. [1] [1] https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/oecd-survey-on-drivers-of-trust-in-public-institutions-2024-results_9a20554b-en.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/oecd-survey-on-drivers-...
adammarples 3mo ago
The BBC hasn't been cut in the name of austerity. It isn't funded by general taxation it's funded by the licence fee, which has only risen, however not in line with inflation. This is basically because nobody wants to pay it, and indeed a huge number of people have stopped paying it.
- gabriel666smith 3mo ago
  You're mostly correct - I was absolutely generalising, using internationally known examples (like the BBC), to be more comprehensible to the international audience here about cuts to public arts spending. The BBC was a silly example of me to use (as was 'public radio'!) because you're right - it's mostly not funded by general taxation. That said, the license fee is directly tied to inflation (via the CPI). Whether you see that as a correct measurement is another question. [1] The BBC has also historically been funded partially by taxation. For example, taxation provided free television licenses to over-75s, until 2020, when that funding was cut, and the cost of doing this was passed to the BBC itself.[2] But yes - quibbles aside, a sloppy example for me to have used there. Your sibling comment has some great sources which better illustrate changes to arts funding, compared to the off-handed ones I initially provided. [1] https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ23 https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ23 [2] https://www.ageuk.org.uk/northumberland/about-us/volunteer-for-us/campaigning/changes-to-the-over-75-tv-licence/ https://www.ageuk.org.uk/northumberland/about-us/volunteer-f...
carlosjobim 3mo ago
> Fine - but young people don’t yet have a complete mental map of what culture they enjoy. Spotify and the likes will suggest new and different things for people to listen to. Apple has a special app just for classical music, which is the highest level of musical culture. > Even worse: many of these (eg, Spotify) hide real access behind subscription fees. If you grew up broke, like I did, you will understand how inaccessible this real access is. They have advertisements for those who don't pay the subscription. Radio has always had advertisements also. And nobody is too broke to afford Spotify. Every broke young person I've known have had a Spotify subscription, they're dirt cheap. For the past 25 years, I've turned on the radio about once a year, and every time it's been just sewage. Whether that's government produced sewage or corporate produced sewage. The quality of podcasts and music streaming is on a quality level which radio never reached. > I think the joy of broadening one’s horizons is available to all, and is also difficult to learn and a strain to continue to practice. I think it must be taught. Very much agree.
- NuclearPM 3mo ago
  > Apple has a special app just for classical music, which is the highest level of musical culture. Really? Why?
  - carlosjobim 3mo ago
    Not the app itself of course. What I meant to say is that classical music is the highest level of musical culture.
    - NuclearPM 3mo ago
      That’s what I was asking. Why do you think that is true? Seems like the most subjective thing possible.
      - carlosjobim 3mo ago
        That classical music is the highest level of musical culture? I didn't think anybody would need an explanation, it's generally understood. And for somebody who doesn't understand, it would be impossible to explain in words. It's about as subjective as saying that nothing can be more beautiful than nature. But not all classical music is great or even good. That hindered me for years from listening more to classical music, because I thought that I couldn't understand some works which I listened to. Then I realized some of it is just bad, and there's nothing more to it.

Ntrails 3mo ago

> In the UK, funding for libraries [] has been increasingly cut in the name of austerity. Focusing on one thing here, for convenience. The problem remains that costs are up far in excess of budgets - austerity be damned! We are forced to prioritise, cutting the generally useful but "non-essential". (There is often a legal duty to the essential things) https://ifs.org.uk/publications/how-have-english-councils-funding-and-spending-changed-2010-2024 https://ifs.org.uk/publications/how-have-english-councils-fu... Is a great breakdown. To illustrate my argument see Table 1. Real-terms spending per person by service area, various years (2024–25 prices) > Within total service spending, per-person spending on children’s social care services [] increased by 11% in real terms. Spending on adult social care [] was also relatively protected, falling by only 2%. This meant much larger cuts to other services: more than 40% in the case of housing, culture and leisure, and highways and transport, and nearly 60% cuts to planning and development. We cut what _could_ be cut, and that's a prioritisation call. edit: now in https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/fixing-public-services-labour-government/local-government https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publication/fixing... Great rabbit hole for my Wednesday morning! :D

gabriel666smith 3mo ago
Yeah - I used "austerity" as a slightly sloppy shorthand in my comment. My two closest local libraries were closed due to cuts made during "the credit crunch" by the coalition government (from memory!), when "austerity" was the buzzword, so I felt it'd communicate most broadly (to HN's international userbase) the phenomenon I was gesturing at. From what I can understand, these sources are saying: "because costs are up, those past cuts have not yet really been reversed, especially not in terms of real-terms funding per-capita, or funding for 'non-essential' services". Super bleak reading - it's a very dark rabbit hole!
- Ntrails 3mo ago
  > Super bleak reading - it's a very dark rabbit hole! That it is! It will require an actual change to the societal contract to resolve as best I can tell - and it remains unclear to me what direction the change will take.
  - gabriel666smith 3mo ago
    Yes - I think the idea of 'citizenship' feels increasingly abstract and outdated to anyone who only rarely noticeably interacts with the entity they pay taxation to, typically solely in moments of extreme crisis. 'Noticeably' here meaning I'm excluding ambient aspects of life, like walking on a government-maintained pavement. I would argue those 'non-essential' services - those which you actively notice benefiting from - are extremely important for building institutional trust in the state. For young people entering the workforce today, who (for example) are a demographic that have a lower requirement for the services of the NHS, it must be genuinely confusing and alienating to be paying (what I believe is) a historically high tax rate. Citizenship, as an idea, does need to demonstrably benefit both the state and the individual. Otherwise, the state is basically asking people to draw on their reserves of empathy to have a reason not to act like a dick. That will, unfortunately, have much more varied results than empathy alongside tangible incentives. The cost of not providing those 'non-essential' services may ultimately be larger, and more difficult to calculate, I think, than are calculable today. How you provide them without the cash to do so is a question I'm not smart enough to answer. But people have now - completely anecdotally - gone a very long time with low tangible incentives toward citizenship being provided by the either the state or local authorities, and the vibe is very, very bad. I don't think this is restricted to the UK, either. The OECD’s 2024 trust survey found only 37% of respondents across 30 countries were confident their government balances the interests of current and future generations. [1] [1] https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/oecd-survey-on-drivers-of-trust-in-public-institutions-2024-results_9a20554b-en.html?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/oecd-survey-on-drivers-...

adammarples 3mo ago

The BBC hasn't been cut in the name of austerity. It isn't funded by general taxation it's funded by the licence fee, which has only risen, however not in line with inflation. This is basically because nobody wants to pay it, and indeed a huge number of people have stopped paying it.

gabriel666smith 3mo ago
You're mostly correct - I was absolutely generalising, using internationally known examples (like the BBC), to be more comprehensible to the international audience here about cuts to public arts spending. The BBC was a silly example of me to use (as was 'public radio'!) because you're right - it's mostly not funded by general taxation. That said, the license fee is directly tied to inflation (via the CPI). Whether you see that as a correct measurement is another question. [1] The BBC has also historically been funded partially by taxation. For example, taxation provided free television licenses to over-75s, until 2020, when that funding was cut, and the cost of doing this was passed to the BBC itself.[2] But yes - quibbles aside, a sloppy example for me to have used there. Your sibling comment has some great sources which better illustrate changes to arts funding, compared to the off-handed ones I initially provided. [1] https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ23 https://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/faqs/FAQ23 [2] https://www.ageuk.org.uk/northumberland/about-us/volunteer-for-us/campaigning/changes-to-the-over-75-tv-licence/ https://www.ageuk.org.uk/northumberland/about-us/volunteer-f...

carlosjobim 3mo ago

> Fine - but young people don’t yet have a complete mental map of what culture they enjoy. Spotify and the likes will suggest new and different things for people to listen to. Apple has a special app just for classical music, which is the highest level of musical culture. > Even worse: many of these (eg, Spotify) hide real access behind subscription fees. If you grew up broke, like I did, you will understand how inaccessible this real access is. They have advertisements for those who don't pay the subscription. Radio has always had advertisements also. And nobody is too broke to afford Spotify. Every broke young person I've known have had a Spotify subscription, they're dirt cheap. For the past 25 years, I've turned on the radio about once a year, and every time it's been just sewage. Whether that's government produced sewage or corporate produced sewage. The quality of podcasts and music streaming is on a quality level which radio never reached. > I think the joy of broadening one’s horizons is available to all, and is also difficult to learn and a strain to continue to practice. I think it must be taught. Very much agree.

NuclearPM 3mo ago
> Apple has a special app just for classical music, which is the highest level of musical culture. Really? Why?
- carlosjobim 3mo ago
  Not the app itself of course. What I meant to say is that classical music is the highest level of musical culture.
  - NuclearPM 3mo ago
    That’s what I was asking. Why do you think that is true? Seems like the most subjective thing possible.
    - carlosjobim 3mo ago
      That classical music is the highest level of musical culture? I didn't think anybody would need an explanation, it's generally understood. And for somebody who doesn't understand, it would be impossible to explain in words. It's about as subjective as saying that nothing can be more beautiful than nature. But not all classical music is great or even good. That hindered me for years from listening more to classical music, because I thought that I couldn't understand some works which I listened to. Then I realized some of it is just bad, and there's nothing more to it.