When you listen to radio talk shows, you will be bombarded with talks bordering on lewdness. Radio hosts will encourage callers to expose their private lives and wash their dirty linens in public.
The hosts will turn into love doctors and experts in the matters of the heart. And so every morning, many listeners are "forced" to listen to two jilted lovers going for each other's throats, albeit in the air.
Forced because you are in this passenger service vehicle stuck in the morning jam along Mombasa road. Every passenger is busy with his or her phone.The only people talking are the radio hosts and their callers. Because you are not deaf, you will have to listen to conversations souped up with sexual innuendos.
So why do sex talks dominate our radio stations? Especially early morning radio talk shows. Are there no other important issues affecting us that we should be discussing over the radio save for talks of sexual nature. Shouldn't we be having more discourse on the progress we are making as a nation towards achieving better living standards, more jobs for the youths, better healthcare et cetera?
How about we opine what we can do to help fight corruption, crime and poor services? Why must we be subjected to conversations about a mature man and a mature woman who are not getting the most out of their sex lives?
In my opinion, here are some of the reasons why I think sex talks dominate our radio talk shows.
Sex sells and it is easier to grab people's attention with it. Since time in memorial, sex has been used as a marketing strategy. Most advertisements are leaning towards sexual appeal to attract more potential customers. From adverts of beer, phones, mattresses to mineral water, cars and even tissue papers.
In fact, the more sexual your advert is, the more people it reaches. This is true even in music videos. The more obscene the video is, the more viewers it gets on YouTube.
Another reason why trivial topics are given priorities at the expense of vital topics in our radio talk shows is the fact that many radio stations are interested more in having a "celebrity" host than a "non-celebrity" host.
What do I mean by this? Imagine two people, one has a dream of becoming a radio host. For this reason, he works hard in the relevant subjects and passes. He then proceeds to a Media school like Multimedia University to study broadcasting. The other person has dreams of becoming an artist. A comedian to be specific. He then proceeds to audition for a comedy show. He passes the auditions and is given a platform to make people laugh on a live television comedy show. After a few months, he becomes popular. A household name. The next thing he is co-hosting a radio show while his counterpart who studied broadcasting remains idle at home. Jobless.
Having a "celebrity host" makes business sense, in the short term. He or she will definitely draw in many of his or her fans to listen to the radio show. But because he or she is not a professional, the quality of the show will drastically reduce.
When radio owners settle in for quantity rather than quality, then listeners can only be subjected to trivial topics like a cheating partner who was caught pants down and topics such as the need to change the curriculum in our Universities are given a wide berth.
Not to mention frustrations of graduates of media colleges who cannot secure jobs because those hiring prefer "comedians" who will rake in for them more profits. I call it capitalism devoid of humanity. What do you call it?
The Standard Group Plc is a
multi-media organization with investments in media platforms spanning newspaper
print operations, television, radio broadcasting, digital and online services. The
Standard Group is recognized as a leading multi-media house in Kenya with a key
influence in matters of national and international interest.
join