Characteristics of The Classic Radio Experience Perceived by Young Listeners and Design Implications For Their Digital

4/7/22, 5:01 AM EBSCOhost
EBSCO Publishing Citation Format: APA 7th Edition (American Psychological Assoc.):
NOTE: Review the instructions at http://support.ebsco.com/help/?int=ehost&lang=&feature_id=APA and make any necessary corrections before using. Pay special
attention to personal names, capitalization, and dates. Always consult your library resources for the exact formatting and punctuation guidelines.
References
Hirschmeier, S., & Beule, V. (2021). Characteristics of the Classic Radio Experience Perceived by Young Listeners and Design Implications for Their Digital
Transformation. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 28(2), 231–253. https://doi.org/10.1080/19376529.2019.1652911

Characteristics of the Classic Radio Experience Perceived by Young Listeners and Design Implications for Their Digital Transformation
Nonlinear radio is sometimes perceived as being less enjoyable than traditional radio as elements like jokes, breaks, moderation, and the value-add of
editors and radio hosts are often omitted. We start thinking about the design of nonlinear digital radio services with a focus on the traditional "radio-
listening experience" from a consumer value perspective and the transformation of its characteristics to a digital context. We catalog the characteristics
that make classic radio worth listening to from the perspective of a younger audience by conducting a qualitative study. Further, we identify implications
for digital radio services based on the characteristics we elicited.
Radio is on its way to becoming a digital service. While the traditional kitchen radio might still exist in 50 or 100 years, consumption patterns evolving
through the emergence of music-streaming services like Spotify will likely persist and remain important for future radio consumption. For example,
nonlinear playout with automatically generated playlists tailored to users' interests, ubiquitous access, and systems' ability to continuously learn from
users' interactions have fundamentally changed how people consume radio.
Well-designed online radio should interact easily and speedily with a public service broadcaster, forming an inclusive, two-way listening environment
(Sinton, [55]) and should be entirely focused on meeting individual consumers' needs. However, current efforts to transform journalistic radio into a digital
service on, for instance, smartphones often fail to maintain the radio-listening experience and end up being low-appeal media libraries[ 1] (Heidmeier,
[25]). Although some broadcasters have made advancements to make their audio libraries more appealing, critics say that currently available offerings,
while comprehensive, are still just media libraries with poor ergonomics.
Thus, some say that traditional radio broadcasters lag behind in digital transformation compared to the music industry mainly because they have not had
as much innovation pressure as the music and movie industries (Hirschmeier, Tilly, & Schoder, [30]). While the business models for the latter industries
were in deep crisis after in the 2000s, requiring them to evolve, radio broadcasters still retained their traditional business model. Now, however, the
situation has changed. As mobile music streaming is becoming increasingly more popular (Spotify reported 217 million active users [Spotify, [57]] and
100 million paid subscribers in March 2019), radio broadcasters are beginning to realize that, in the end, they compete for the same customers as music
streaming services (Hirschmeier, Tilly, & Beule, [29]), because increasing music consumption might drain listeners from radio consumption and people's
time and attention toward audio media is limited (Crane, Talbott, & Hume, [10]). The younger generation's higher consumption of popular music-
streaming services might therefore lead to less or no consumption of radio at all. Younger audiences are leaving terrestrial radio for new technologies
(Albarran et al., [ 2]; Ferguson, Greer, & Reardon, [17]). As a result, the radio industry needs to consider changing its model to one that can compete with
other listening options, particularly in regard to listening choices, customization, and access (Pluskota, [51]).
Of course, broadcasters have made efforts to provide exclusive digital services (Fernández-Quijada, [18]). However, they have a harder time digitalizing
their offerings compared to music-streaming services because transforming a traditional radio station to a digital service poses much more legacy
challenges than setting up a digital music-streaming service from scratch. Hirschmeier et al. ([25]) distinguished the challenges of radio-streaming
services from those of music-streaming services with respect to content: radio is a heterogeneous mixture of diverse formats (news, features, interviews,
audio dramas, etc.) with diverse lengths (from seconds to over an hour) and diverse subject matter (entertainment, politics, music, etc.), whereas a
music stream is typically a rather homogeneous mixture of three- to five-minute songs.
Program management is hence challenging for a nonlinear digital radio service. An enjoyable sequence of heterogeneous content filled with
entertainment, jingles, jokes, and live moments is part of the "radio-listening experience" and is almost entirely lost if radio shows are chopped into
pieces and put into media libraries for selective nonlinear, or even random, playout.
Therefore, the digital transformation of radio significantly differs from the digital transformation that the music industry had to undergo—at least from a
value proposition perspective. An enjoyable radio stream is arguably much more difficult to assemble than a music stream since traditional radio
provides a particular listening experience that listeners can relate to. Therefore, if broadcasters want to preserve (all or some of) the characteristics of
traditional radio, they should elicit what constitutes the radio experience from the perspective of listeners, especially younger listeners, as linear
programs loose listeners in this segment (Thorpe, [61]). So far, in radio, though research has been done on listeners' preferences (e.g., by the
Independent Broadcasting Authority), assumptions about listeners' needs and preferences appear to have been based on little actual audience research
(Lax, [38]).
In other words, the key challenge is to define what radio is today for a younger audience (more precisely, listeners at the age of 18–35[ 2]) and what
design implications arise when radio broadcasters digitally transform their service offerings. While there exists an idea of radio characteristics from an
https://web.p.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=7077143c-a96b-4071-b360-40cb6dd05731%40redis&vid=2&ReturnUrl=https%3a%2f%2fweb.p.ebsc… 1/11
experts' view, to the best of our knowledge, there is currently no outline of these characteristics from a listeners' view, especially focusing on a younger
audience. Hence, we formulate the following research questions: What is the radio-listening experience of classical linear radio for younger listeners
aged 18–35? What implications arise for the design of nonlinear radio services if broadcasters want to hold on to these characteristics?
In our paper, we first elicit the characteristics of the classic radio-listening experience. If broadcasters want to make an informed decision which of these
characteristics to preserve and which to modify, some implications need to be considered for the design of future radio services. We identify eight
implications, concerning i) the inclusion of linear content in nonlinear offers, ii) the integration of music between nonlinear content, iii) the usage of
moderations, iv) the application of editorial value in nonlinear radio streams, v) the design of interactivity, vi) the addressing of usage patterns, and
matters of vii) accessibility and viii) configurability.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. First, we present our research approach, which consists of two phases. Then, we present the
characteristics of the radio-listening experience from a younger audience's view. On this basis, we derive the implications for the creation of nonlinear
radio as a digital service. We conclude with a discussion, limitations, and further research.
Theoretical Background and Related Work

Radio is a term with different meanings as "radio" traditionally denotes the device, the technology, and the esthetic. In addition, users associate different
things with radio depending on their cultural background. Various forms of radio emerged with different missions, different content, and different target
groups. We therefore line out the setting of this research and a definition of radio as understood in this paper.
Definition of Radio in This Paper

The concrete setting of this study is linear radio as it typically exists nowadays in Germany, where the study took place, and similar countries. In this
paper, radio refers to journalistic radio with a mix of spoken-word content and music, with the journalistic spoken-word content accounting for the majority
of content elements. We therefore do not focus on pure music radio or pure spoken-word radio. As such, a multitude of radio services (but due to the
heterogenous landscape of radio programs, not all) would fit the characteristics covered in this paper.
An increasingly large body of literature already exists regarding the digital transformation of media and entertainment services, but little work is directly
related to designing spoken-word radio services. Trying to be as specific as possible, we present related work from three adjacent fields—the digital
transformation of radio broadcasting services with focus on service design, the personalization of radio content, and the qualities of radio.
Radio Qualities and Characteristics

Radio was developed at the beginning of the 20th century as a linear distribution medium, offering the possibility to inform the public, often with political
interests. In Germany, e.g., radio was used in the 1930s and 1940s for the purpose of propaganda and the cult of mass events (Scannell, [53]). Radio
also turned out to be a key technology to distribute political perspectives across borders (Mollgaard, [45]; Nye, [46]). It was only after the Second World
War, that the broadcast character of radio transmissions began to be exploited for general social use (Scannell, [53]). In post-war times, a first
segmentation of listeners took place, and audiences were segmented into lowbrow, middlebrow, and highbrow (Scannell, [52]). Between 1945 and 1960,
radio became very popular, and groundbreaking formats were invented (Crisell, [12]). However, according to Stoller ([59]), a tension between the
demands of the elite and the too often unacknowledged needs and entitlements of the mass audience existed.
Several qualities and characteristics have been associated with linear radio in the literature. First of all, the codes of radio are described as purely
acoustic, consisting of speech, music, noise and silence, and the risk of ambivalence of messages and deficiencies of communication is considered high
(Crisell, [11]). As natural speech is complemented by paralinguistic communication, which is not possible in radio transmissions (Fiske, [19]), and sender
and receiver are distant from each other, it is hard to maintain the context in unidirectional communication (Brecht, [ 9]; Crisell, [11]). Therefore, in all
kinds of radio, efforts are made to overcome the limits of the medium and to maintain the context (Crisell, [11]). However, radio is considered to transport
more context than print media: views expressed through human voice sound singular and appear to originate from a private individual, unlike print
media, which often include a sense of impersonality (Starkey & Crisell, [58]). Generally, tone plays an important role in radio: Radio programs are
characterized by their serious and committed tone of their engagement with current affairs (Street, [60]), and radio moderators can take on several
speaker identities by changing their voice and catch listeners this way (Stoller, [59]). Radio broadcasters had to develop their own conventions regarding
tone, e.g. radio developed crooning, a style in which songs are sung in a more intimate way (Crisell, [12]).
Nowadays, radio is commonly consumed alongside other activities (so called "secondary listening" (Stoller, [59]), in contrast to attentive and conscious
"primary listening", which excludes other activities). This may be one reason why Koch ([35]) found that radio has a strong bias to form habits. This is
particularly evident when thinking of radio as a source of entertainment while driving or getting ready in the morning (Hendy, [26]). Further, a study by
Grünewald ([22]) showed that radio has strong emotional potential. Hence, radio consumers are mostly loyal customers in the long run. For example,
consumers' requests for local news determines one of radio's characteristics (Hubbard, [32]). In addition, Torosyan and Munro ([62]) observed that radio
is important for listeners to identify and integrate with their domestic region. Thus, van der Wurff ([64]) argued that radio has the opportunity to prevent its
displacement by developing new formats that are functionally equivalent to current offerings. Also Stoller ([59]) and Hendy ([26]) state that radio is a
stable medium as it still remains despite technological innovation.
With the emergence of the internet, radio content was also distributed online in form of on-demand content. The web as a social technology gives
listeners for the first time the chance to get involved in production and handling of content (Gazi, Starkey, & Jedrzejewski, [20]). The technological
transformation has brought up a new type of user: sender and receiver in one person and the transformation to a so-called selective user (Gazi et al.,
[20]). The digitalization of radio comprises tools that allow to design radio in an interactive way, and in a reflexive process using audience response.
Digital offers on the internet optimally allow for narrowcasting, a term already coined by Licklider in 1967 (Parsons, [49]), which denotes the provisioning
of information to a narrow audience. However, McEwan ([42]) states that radio is defying many of the challenges of digital media. The key driver of the
emerging industry change would be radio management, as it seeks to reinvent radio stations as flexible multiplatform brands that can leverage the
commercial opportunities of media convergence (McEwan, [42]).
Digital Transformation of Radio Broadcasting

Digital transformation is a phenomenon that has become increasingly important over the last decades (Andal-Ancion, Cartwright, & Yip, [ 3]). Digital
transformation captures those changes in economy and society that are driven by the pervasion of ever more aspects of everyday life by digital
technologies (Bharadwaj, Sawy, Omar, Pavlou, & Venkatraman, [ 7]), which also applies to radio, though the exact boundaries remain unclear
(Majchrzak, Markus, & Wareham, [40]). With digital transformation, the products and services offered to consumers change, as do business strategies
(Drnevich & Croson, [13]). Radio broadcasting has undergone digital transformation in terms of distribution channels, which are often connected to digital
audio broadcasting (DAB) and DAB+ (Ala-Fossi, Lax, O'Neill, Jauert, & Shaw, [ 1]; Anderson, [ 4]; O'Neill, [47]; Schatter & Zeller, [54]), and in terms of
content production as digital technologies have replaced traditional radio technologies (Dunaway, [14]). For example, music and other audio recordings
are recorded, stored, edited, and post-processed digitally, which allows multiple audio lines to be mixed differently during playout (Keith, [34]).
Considering the digital transformation of services, service design is a multidisciplinary field dedicated to creating new and innovative services (Grenha
Teixeira et al., [21]; Holmlid & Evenson, [31]; Ostrom et al., [48]; Patrício, Fisk, Falcão e Cunha, & Constantine, [50]) and thus fits the context of radio
well. Of special interest is the service-dominant logic (SDL) perspective (Vargo & Lusch, [65]). SDL argues that services, not goods, are the fundamental
basis of economic exchange and has been used in various fields to reconceptualize economic exchange and value creation (Vargo, Lusch, Archpru
Akaka, & He, [67]). According to SDL, the value of goods results from the service they provide, not from owning them (Kotler, [36]). Further, since value
emerges from use in this understanding, value is not created by companies alone—all they produce are value propositions (Vargo & Lusch, [65], [66]).
Value Propositions in Media Services

Whereas media services offer value propositions, it is up to the user to decide whether to accept these value propositions or not (Vargo & Lusch, [65]).
Kuppelwieser, Simpson, and Chiummo ([37]) tested the generalizability of the fundamental assumptions of SDL using the example of YouTube.
According to them, the value proposition of YouTube is not solely provided by the streaming service but also by users who upload videos (Kuppelwieser
et al., [37]). In this regard, content creators, the platform provider, and content consumers jointly create value.
Unlike YouTube, in nonlinear radio, we find two main differences: First, in nonlinear radio, users take less the role of prosumers (being both content
producer and consumer, see C. Xie, Bagozzi, & Troye, [69]). Second, video streaming platforms do not provide editorial value as radio usually does.
Therefore, findings from YouTube are transferable to nonlinear radio only to a limited extent. But still, also in radio, listeners would find themselves in the
role of value co-creators: in value co-creation for radio, the program management, which is classically an editorial task of the broadcaster, is shifted to
the user, at least partially (Eastman & Ferguson, [16]). The broadcasting organization and the user share program management, and both act as
program managers. While editors have several years of experience in compiling good and enjoyable programs (Hirschmeier, Döppner, & Schoder, [28]),
in a shared program management setting, playouts are jointly managed by the broadcaster (through offered media and algorithms) and the user. Still,
considering that it is up to the user to decide whether to accept value propositions, on a more abstract level, the YouTube example seems well
comparable to value co-creation in nonlinear radio consumption.
Personalization of Radio
In case algorithms learn from users' interactions to offer recommendations, value co-creation is tightly connected to personalization. From a
personalization perspective, the digitization of radio is often connected to the idea of nonlinear playout and the automatic assembly of individual playlists
that match users' interests. Research on personalization in the audio realm is dominated by music recommender systems such that the search term
"radio recommendation" almost exclusively relates to music recommendation (e.g., in Dziczkowski, Bougueroua, & Wegrzyn-Wolska, [15]; Hayes &
Cunningham, [23]; Hecht et al., [24]; Ignatov, Nikolenko, Abaev, & Poelmans, [33]; Turnbull et al., [63]; Zaharchuk, Ignatov, Konstantinov, & Nikolenko,
[71], as the term "radio" is also often used for pure music channels).
Focusing on the personalization of spoken-word radio, approaches exist to mix music streaming with spoken-word content. For example,
soundticker.com proposes to mix Spotify music with radio content. Similarly, Xie et al. ([70]) propose a mobile application that allows users to listen to
personalized radio with a focus on news. For linear radio, Liu ([39]) propose an approach that suggests which radio channel to switch to when in the car.
With radio personalization, one of the major challenges for nonlinear radio is not only assembling playlists that match users' interests but also creating
playlists that are enjoyable. The BBC (Sommers, [56]) focused on understanding editorial decisions in order to elicit what constitutes a good mixture of
online content. In their research, they identified a couple of rules that reflect editorial decisions in magazines and developed a general template.
Following the question whether editorial decisions can be automated, they identified 32 parameters, including categories, tone, sentiment, readability,
mobile-friendliness and the ability to know people, places and topics mentioned (Sommers, [56]).
A lot of research on radio recommender systems seems to be conducted by companies rather than by academic institutes. The European Broadcasting
Union (EBU) has established a group focusing on recommender systems in their Technology & Innovation Department. Moreover, the US National Public
Radio (NPR) has set up a prominent nonlinear radio service: NPR One has become a popular smartphone app that integrates superior usability with
individualized radio consumption. NPR has researched how to best assemble radio content (called stories) and has found that grouping stories manually
into lead stories, core stories, break stories, and invest stories (Brand, [ 8]) and then assembling those stories into a meaningful mixture works best for
them. European examples of nonlinear radio experiences with recommendations and personalization on smartphones include the Bayern2 App and
Deutschlandfunk Audiothek.
Research Methodology
Classic radio currently loses the most in the audience segment of listeners aged 18–35 (Thorpe, [61]). It has probably always been the case that radio's
appeal to younger listeners has been less broadly-based than to the middle and older audiences, but now companies have the chance to attract young
listeners by digital media. This segment represents the listeners that still listen to radio but are also surrounded by new services on a daily basis and
bring in new requirements. Their valuation for radio needs to be understood and services need to be transformed with care. To assess what radio means
to young listeners, we chose to combine ( 1) an exploratory approach to collect a large number of radio characteristics from interviews with young
listeners and ( 2) a grouping task to structure these characteristics into categories as suggested by Wang and Strong ([68]). Therefore, we followed a
two-phase research approach: The aim of Phase 1 is to identify what the radio-listening experience is and what characteristics it consists of, and the aim
of Phase 2 is to confirm a structure that groups the characteristics of radio to make them easier to address.
Phase 1
To obtain a list of characteristics describing the radio-listening experience in its entirety, we chose to carry out a qualitative interview study. Obtaining a
high saturation of young listeners' associations with radio was the most important goal in Phase 1. To collect as diverse data as possible, we developed
the following questionnaire with three open questions covering the radio-listening experience.
On what occasions do you turn on the radio?
What are your first thoughts with regard to radio as well as listening to the radio?
In what way does radio differ from other media formats?

We interviewed 59 radio listeners in face-to-face (11) and phone-based (35) interviews as well as through additional channels in written form (13). The
interviews were conducted in Germany in April 2017, and all raw data was captured digitally. The interviews had a total length of 1,746 words.
Except for targeting younger listeners (aged 18–35), our sample was chosen randomly. That is, the participants were not selected based on their radio
consumption behavior. Some of them turned out to be regular listeners and others just occasional listeners. We intended to interview at least 25 students
and 25 employees, and 25 female and 25 male participants to avoid selection biases. We only got 22 female participants instead of 25, and we got more
responses in total. However, we argue that more responses do not damage our sample, as in Phase 1, we only collect characteristics, but do not weight
or prioritize them. In the end, we received 59 responses. The age and gender of the 59 participants were distributed as shown in Figure 1. 32 of the 59
respondents were students (54%), 27 (equals 46%) were employees (mechatronics engineer, teacher [3x], carpenter, banker [2x], journalist, trainee [6x],
computer scientist, educator, trainer, consultant, medical doctor, trainee teacher, entrepreneur, laboratory technician, programmer, office clerk [2x],
research assistant, cosmetician).
PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 1. Distribution of age and gender of survey participants
For data analysis, we chose a qualitative data analysis (QDA) approach. As proposed by Mayring ([41]), in QDA, frequently mentioned catchwords and
paraphrases must be identified. We started with two coders doing free coding to get an idea of the catchwords and paraphrases that commonly occurred
in our interview data. In contrast to Mayring, we chose to identify not just frequent catchwords and paraphrases but all catchwords and paraphrases to
obtain a more complete picture. After the free coding, every coder joined and consolidated all codes, as suggested by Mayring, particularly focusing on (
1) the linguistic unification of raw data, ( 2) the generalization to the abstraction level aimed, and ( 3) the removal of duplicate codes. afterward, we
compared the two coding versions and resolved conflicts via discussion until we agreed on a final coding scheme. This methodology resulted in a coding
frame that outlines the substance of the interviews we conducted. We concluded with selective coding to ensure we covered all the characteristics stated
by the interviewees.
After identifying the characteristics, we developed preliminary categories to structure the characteristics. The categories served as the initial input for the
second phase.
Phase 2
Our aim in Phase 2 was to verify the initially selected categories and to obtain a meaningful structure of the characteristics. For this purpose, we chose a
grouping task in which participants were asked to assign the characteristics from Phase 1 into groups. The methodology of Phase 2 was similar to that
used by Wang and Strong ([68]), who divided data quality characteristics into groups.
The grouping task was performed by 20 participants. In contrast to Phase 1 (collection of characteristics), in Phase 2, we selected a set of participants
consisting of 10 students (50%), 10 employees (50%), and in terms of gender 10 male and 10 female to avoid selection biases. Participants were given
both the characteristics mentioned by listeners and the categories we initially created at the end of phase 1 without any relationships between them.
Participants were then asked to assign every characteristic to the category that they found most suitable. Participants could also propose a new category
if they felt the existing categories were not appropriate or propose a new name for categories. Similarly, they could propose new characteristics if they
felt something was missing. Thus, Phase 2 also served as a means of validation for the coding frame, ensuring that it is accepted by a wider audience
and that it comprehensively captures the characteristics of the radio-listening experience.
Results
In the final coding, we elicited 37 radio characteristics. The hierarchical structure we established in the coding frame during coding resulted in five
categories. In the grouping task, for each characteristic, the category that received the most participant allocations was mapped to it. Table 1 shows all
37 characteristics and their final mapping to categories as a result of the grouping task.
Table 1 Radio Characteristics and Their Mapping to Categories
Final category Radio characteristic (A)(B)(C)(D)(E)

(A) Attractiveness of content A1. Discussion panels on current topics 13 0 4 2 1
A2. Enjoyable commercials or moderation 11 2 0 4 2
A3. Information about local and regional events 15 4 0 1 0
Final category Radio characteristic (A)(B)(C)(D)(E)
A4. Latest news and reports 13 1 0 4 2
A5. Listen to music 14 2 0 3 1
A6. Live coverage of sport events 15 1 1 2 1
A7. Rediscover music* 10 3 0 5 2
A8. Weather forecast 10 5 0 3 2
(B) Attractiveness of editorial preparation B1. Consume a preselected playlist (carefree listening)1 13 1 3 2
B2. Fast and concise information coming regularly 7 12 0 0 1
B3. Good combination of music and news 6 13 0 0 1
B4. Variety through diverse formats 5 11 0 2 2
(C) Interactivity C1. Communicate with others (radio hosts or friends) 1 3 13 0 3
C2. Human proximity through hosts 0 1 13 4 2
C3. Interactive live shows 5 0 13 2 0
C4. Involvement of listeners in the program 0 0 18 1 1
(D) Motivation of usage D1. Avoid silence 3 2 0 15 0
D2. Background noise 2 1 0 13 4
D3. Discover latest music in several genres* 4 4 0 7 5
D4. Entertainment while driving, domestic work, or preparing meals3 1 1 14 1
D5. Establish a positive atmosphere 6 1 0 11 2
D6. Help prevent loneliness and desolation 1 0 0 12 7
D7. Help wake up through motivating content 3 2 0 14 1
D8. Nostalgia and positive memories 1 1 0 13 5
D9. Part of morning routine 5 0 0 13 2
D10. Passive, alongside consumption 0 3 0 15 2
D11. Relax and reduce stress 3 2 1 13 1
D12. Usage as an alarm clock 0 0 2 16 2
(E) Advantages over alternatives E1. Convenient to use 3 3 0 4 10
E2. Focus on main activity and avoid distraction 1 2 0 7 10
E3. Free of charge or contractual obligations 0 1 0 4 15
E4. High availability (e.g., while driving) 1 1 0 3 15
E5. Mobile data volume remains untouched 2 2 1 1 14
E6. No need for an account or signing in 0 0 0 5 15
E7. No internet access needed 0 0 0 4 16
E8. Traffic alerts and messages* 6 0 0 2 12
E9. Works right after switching it on, no configuration needed 0 1 0 6 13
1 *These characteristics were initially in another category and were reassigned during the grouping task.
None of the participants made use of the opportunity to add characteristics or to add or change any category. Therefore, we assume the preliminary
categories are confirmed. However, participants in Phase 2 mapped three characteristics to a different category than we initially expected from our
coding frame: namely, "traffic alerts" (from A to E), "re-discover music" (from D to A), and "discovery of latest music" (from E to D). Although there was
some variation in the listeners' categorizations for each of the characteristics, most of the characteristics were assigned to one dominant category each.
For 26 characteristics, more than 65% of the participants chose the same category during the grouping task.
Implications for Service Design

In service design for new digital radio services, it might be worthwhile to "preserve, and perhaps recreate the phenomenological experience of radio in its
various forms and transmutations" (Austin, [ 5], p. 1). If broadcasters want to preserve the distinctive characteristics of the classic radio-listening
experience, some implications need to be considered for the design of future radio services based on the results elicited in the previous section. Some of
the traditional characteristics of radio can be easily kept in digital radio services, while others are challenging to transform. Of particular interest are those
characteristics that distinguish an enjoyable digital radio experience from a low-appeal media library. In the following, we discuss the categories of
characteristics and the implications for their service design.
Attractiveness of Content
Content itself accounts for a major part of the listening experience. According to our findings, listeners turn on the radio not just to distract themselves
(D1, D2, D6) but with the intention to consume actual and relevant content (A1, A3, A4, A5, A8). However, the content a broadcaster offers for its
nonlinear program is not always congruent with the content the broadcaster offers for its linear program. In practice, linear content is typically sized down
for nonlinear radio. So far, media libraries contain only a subset of all content offerings that have been broadcasted. Diverse content items are missing
for different reasons: First, licensing issues prohibit stations from distributing some content online, especially music. Second, cutouts of the linear radio
stream are sometimes provided as complete radio shows (with moderations (A2), call-ins, etc.) and are sometimes sliced into smaller pieces and
provided as a collection of bare radio reports without contextual content items (i.e., "in-between" content). These include moderations between two
content pieces (A2), live events like a lottery drawing for concert tickets or listeners' on-air requests to hear a song or greet someone, longer live
broadcasts of events (A6), and weather forecast (A8). Considering the digital transformation of such in-between content, the question arises as to
whether such content should be omitted or replaced with alternative elements. Considering live content, the question arises how live content should be
integrated in non-linear radio streams. Broadcasters could a) interrupt the non-linear program (which disturbs the flow as radio traffic service does
today), b) send live content delayed, but almost live, so it fits into the non-linear playout (but listeners might be seconds or minutes behind), or c) offer
live content as recorded pieces only.
Our findings regarding radio characteristics indicate that in-between content pieces and live content represent a substantial part of the radio-listening
experience and that leaving them out fundamentally changes this experience. Hence, we formulate the following implications for service design:
Implication 1
When designing a digital nonlinear radio service, broadcasters should carefully consider to what extent linear content (e.g., in-between content and live
content) should be integrated. In-between and live content are part of the traditional radio-listening experience valued by listeners, and it might be risky
to exclude this element completely. Listeners should be given the option to choose in which way they want live content to be included in their
programming, and if they want moderations, jingles and other in-between content.
Implication 2
Music is an integral part of the radio-listening experience. Not only is the consumption of music (A5) a characteristic valued by listeners, but the
rediscovery of old music (A7) and the discovery of new music (D3) are especially important to listeners. In most broadcasting organizations, a dedicated
team works to discover new music that suits the interests of their listener segments. If broadcasters do not want to completely risk losing their position as
"music scouts," they should find ways to transform their capabilities into a digital radio offering. In this case, it might be beneficial to partner with music-
streaming services rather than to consider them as competitors. Broadcasters could allow users to integrate their favorite music-streaming service in
radio apps and, at the same time, create specific music channels with manually curated music on these streaming services so the integration of music in
radio programs can go hand in hand.
Implication 3
Broadcasters should also consider whether moderations between two content items can be modularized to make them contextually independent from
the previous and subsequent radio pieces so they can be used in different positions in the stream in nonlinear playouts. The inclusion of moderation
parts in automatic radio streams should not be underestimated as the human voice is a major component of popular media (Mensing, [43]). More
sophisticated solutions might not just integrate context-free moderations but may include context to some extent (e.g., moderations for the morning or for
the evening, moderations following a political radio piece, moderations following music, etc.). Such moderation pieces could be exclusively produced for
nonlinear playouts and, if available in different voices, may let the listeners choose his or her own station voice. Thus, this implication not only touches
the scope of the service offering but reaches back to content production.
Attractiveness of Editorial Preparation

Apart from the content itself, the editorial compilation of content is another major part of the radio-listening experience. A good mixture of content (B3)
and variety (B4) are inherent points of the appeal of radio. It seems difficult to specify in detail what constitutes a good mixture or what mix pleases a
listener. Radio editors use their experience to create a good mix and continuously improve their program-management skills for their particular audience
over the years (Sommers, [56]). The consumption of a preselected playlist (B1) is one of the core characteristics of radio. Eastman and Ferguson stated
that users "tend to choose channels ... but expect someone else to have filled those channels/sites in an expert way" (Eastman & Ferguson, [16], p. 8).
This "expert way" of assembling a radio playlist needs to be designed in digital radio. Therefore, it may help for broadcasters to establish radio patterns
for nonlinear service design that can be filled with personalized radio content, in addition to jingles, moderations, and music. A typical pattern would start
with a jingle followed by an opening moderation, a radio piece, a music embedding, another moderation, etc. Such patterns could be developed in
conjunction with radio editors or could be elicited through a data-mining approach covering all sequences of past playouts. This reasoning leads to our
next implication:
Implication 4
Playlist generation for a nonlinear digital radio service goes beyond well-known approaches of recommending homogenous types of items, such as
songs or movies. Radio streams must be capable of providing enjoyable mixtures of various content types that reflect editorial value to some extent. As
one cannot say there is editorial value in randomly assembled radio pieces, one has to admit that randomly assembled pieces cannot guarantee a good
mixture of content and variety that listeners value. Trying to automate editorial decisions therefore does not aim at replacing editors, but it is the only way
to bring editorial value into nonlinear playouts, at least to some extent.
Interactivity
Interactivity is a challenge for nonlinear digital radio services. In linear radio, typical interactions include a) interaction via mail, email, and phone calls, b)
interaction via social media, c) call-in radio shows, d) music requests, lotteries and other requests to interact, and e) interaction at public events (open
house day, stands at exhibitions). Already in 1927, Bertold Brecht, a famous German dramatist and lyricist who developed one of the first radio theories,
suggested to transform radio from a distribution medium to a communication medium (Brecht, [ 9]). While at that time, the technical prerequisites were
given only to a limited extent, now, these prerequisites are given, especially with social media.
In traditional radio, the interactions stated above were the only way to get listeners out of a pure consumer role, bringing human proximity into the
interaction (C1, C2, C3, C4) via a different channel than the radio channel itself. However, a prosumer role (C. Xie et al., [69]) is typical for today's digital
content services and allows high interaction possibilities. In between low-interaction and high-interaction possibilities, research has shown that moderate
levels of interactivity cause better memory performance compared to lower and higher levels of interactivity (Mesbah, [44]). Since digital content is often
embedded in social networks, new interaction possibilities like sharing, commenting, and liking by other prosumers might compensate for traditional
interactions with the radio host. As such, we propose the following:
Implication 5
Radio broadcasters have to consider interactivity in digital radio services—either through traditional forms of interaction with the broadcaster or through
new peer-to-peer interactions with other listeners—to avoid losing interactivity as a classic characteristic of radio. The radio experience traditionally
includes interactivity, at least to some extent, so interactivity should be adapted to digital radio in new ways.
Motivation of Usage
The motivations to turn on radio are fundamental for future use of radio. So, current motivations for turning on the radio (e.g., to have background
entertainment [D1, D2, D5, D6, D10] or to structure one's day [D7, D9]) should also be considered for future radio services. Future radio services can be
designed in a way that they still address listeners' typical motivations. With personalization and context sensitivity, future radio can adapt to individual
contexts and situations even better than now. For example, when a listener is in a car every morning for 20 minutes (D4), a nonlinear radio service can
adapt its program to that timeframe, the day of the week, and the time of day. This leads to our next implication:
Implication 6
Future digital radio services should still address traditional usage patterns. Individuals' diverse motivations to listen to radio are key to understanding
what content should be played in particular user situations, just as radio editors of today decide what content users want to hear during breakfast, on
their way to work, etc. Digital radio should not be developed apart from traditional radio situations but should include contextual factors, such as day of
week, time of day, speed, etc., that match users' specific situations.
Advantages over Alternatives

The last category addresses the advantages of radio over alternative media. Interestingly, login (E6, E1), configuration (E9), mobile data consumption
(E5, E7), and contractual obligations (E3) were mentioned as superior to other media. These findings lead to our final implications:
Implication 7
Listeners do care about mobile data consumption, contracts, and logins. As nonlinear digital radio will most likely be web-based, radio broadcasters
should consider making agreements with mobile service providers to exclude digital radio content from being counted in data volume plans, just as
Spotify managed to do with several providers.
Implication 8
Users appreciate that radio does not need to be configured. This characteristic can easily be underestimated but is perceived as a valuable part of the
traditional radio-listening experience. In contrast, current recommender systems often require users to initially like or dislike certain songs, movies, or
other content. Therefore, future radio services may offer configuration possibilities, but they should be aware that mandatory configuration (e.g., listeners
have to set up their preferences for a recommender system) may not align with the traditional radio-listening experience. Also, mandatory logins might
alienate a future radio experience from the simplicity of traditional radio.
The implications mentioned above were derived from the current radio-listening experience and are meant to support the shape and design of future
digital radio services. However, broadcasters and radio channels have particular profiles and radio characteristics, and our implications might not apply
to every broadcaster's service. Based on their specific situations, broadcasters have to decide which characteristics to preserve, which to find
alternatives for, and which to omit. The characteristics outlined above may serve as a basis for critical reflection on how to establish future digital radio
services.
Discussion and Limitations

From a radio designer's perspective, the analysis of radio characteristics provides insights into and possible guidance for how to design digital radio
services to successfully accomplish the digital transformation of radio. While the findings might not be generalizable to digital transformation in other
media contexts, they add to the plurality of approaches to the digital transformation of media services.
The aim of this research was not to reinforce the classic radio-listening experience in digital transformation. Rather, broadcasters must decide whether to
conserve their classic radio experience and transform it into a digital service or to omit that experience either partially or completely and build up a new
experience. However, by completely omitting the value propositions of the classic radio experience, broadcasters also risk losing parts of their
characteristics, their brand, and their identity. Especially narrowcasting needs to form a strong identity due to the narrow target group, which makes our
analysis not only applicable to broadcasting in general, but also to offers for specific audiences.
Beneath the general characteristics mentioned in this paper, each broadcasting agency has its own profile that makes up its brand. If brand
communication is not handled appropriately in digitally transformed radio services, broadcasters may increasingly be pigeonholed into the role of content
providers only. This is already the case for playouts in third-party aggregator apps that mix content from different radio stations. Broadcasters are better
able to control their brand when they develop their own digital radio product. As a result, they will better be able to agree on digital radio programming
content on a reflexive basis between them and their listeners.
The radio characteristics we identified by interviews mostly refer to "secondary listening" (see Stoller, [59]), indicated by the motivation of usage (D) such
as "entertainment whilst driving" (D4), "part of the morning routine" (D9), and "passive, alongside consumption" (D10). Therefore, our analysis is
supposed to be valid for "secondary listening" but may be of limited explanatory power for "primary listening".
We focused on a younger audience because radio broadcasters noticed that they lose listeners in this segment. Therefore, the radio characteristics we
elicited are not necessarily valid for the whole population. Also, because this was not an international study, the participants were all of the same cultural
background, and results are initially valid in this cultural background and setting of the research.
There was also some disagreement among participants regarding how the 37 characteristics should be assigned to the five categories. This
disagreement could indicate that categories were possibly not mutually exclusive. In fact, based on the coding procedure, the independence of
categories cannot be guaranteed. Still, the categories help to structure and understand the characteristics and therefore also help to structure and
understand the areas that need to be considered when designing a digital radio service.
This research discusses a forward projection of the traditional radio experience to a digital radio experience, which is part of a larger picture of the digital
transformation of radio. Future radio will very likely also reveal new features and characteristics that are not present in traditional radio, such as location
awareness, speed, background noise, time, surrounding light, etc. Nevertheless, to create successful digital radio experiences that resonate with current
listeners and enable the transition to new digital radio services, characteristics of the existing radio experience need to be kept in view while
experimenting with new opportunities in digital radio services.
Further Research
The design of future digital radio services is a promising area of investigation. We see several areas for future research.
Now that we have established a comprehensive overview of important characteristics of the radio-listening experience for the younger generation, future
research should investigate which of these characteristics are more important than others and in which situations. Radio broadcasters can, on the one
hand, reflect on their self-image and, on the other hand, can conduct further studies with (segments of) listeners to obtain listeners' perspective.
Further research is also needed on how to translate editorial decisions into automation. To date, as content items are typically decoupled from radio
shows in nonlinear playouts, the value-add that editors created in linear radio gets lost. Both the logic and the data that is required for automating
editorial decisions need to be elicited from existing radio programs and validated by radio editors.
On top of that, broadcasters need to identify how to communicate their brand image in digital radio. In contrast to music or movie streaming, in the digital
radio context, brand image is shaped not just by the content itself but also by content composition. Research needs to investigate the question of how to
build up radio brands in digital transformation.
Further, recommendation is a well-researched field, but typical application areas like music and movies are less similar to radio than one might expect.
The media libraries of radio content change constantly, and users generally do not want to hear similar news or content again. Accordingly, more
research on radio recommendation needs to be done for the digital transformation of radio.
In addition, requirements from public service remits and broadcasting acts need to be reflected in the nonlinear playouts of public broadcasters. Next to
the belief that "public radio, in one form or another, will survive well into the future" (Avery, [ 6], p. 1), some concrete approaches for compliance
considerations in nonlinear playouts already exist (Hirschmeier & Beule, [27]).
Finally, this study focused on radio characteristics from a perceived customer value perspective. A fundamental assumption is hence that these
characteristics might be worth maintaining. However, some broadcasters might think differently. For example, some characteristics of today's radio
experience might have emerged due to limitations of traditional radio technology. Therefore, further research could also take the limitations of traditional
radio as a research object and starting point and determine what should be changed when transforming radio to a nonlinear digital service.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by Deutschlandradio in a joint research project with University of Cologne. Many thanks to Markus Waldhauser and Dr. Nicola
Balkenhol for their support.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1 Media libraries or media centers in this paper denote large collections of media that are available on the internet as on-demand media. Within radio,
media libraries are also referred to as audio libraries.
2 In our research setting, the audience of 18–35 years was of particular interest. We are however aware that in other research contexts, listeners
segments are defined in a different way.
3 Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/hjrs.
References
Ala-Fossi, M., Lax, S., O'Neill, B., Jauert, P., & Shaw, H. (2008). The future of radio is still digital—but which one? Expert perspectives and future
scenarios for radio media in 2015. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 15 (1), 4 – 25. doi: 10.1080/19376520801971337
Albarran, A. B., Anderson, T., Bejar, L. G., Bussart, A. L., Daggett, E., Gibson, S., & Way, H. (2007). "What happened to our audience?" Radio and new
technology uses and gratifications among young adult users. Journal of Radio Studies, 14, 92 – 101. doi: 10.1080/10955040701583171
Andal-Ancion, A., Cartwright, P. A., & Yip, G. S. (2003). The digital transformation of traditional businesses. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44 (4), 34 –
41.
4 Anderson, J. N. (2013). Radio broadcasting's digital dilemma. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 19
(2).
5 Austin, M. (2016). Experiencing radio at the interface: Preserving the past and designing the future of radio. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 23, 335 –
340. doi: 10.1080/19376529.2016.1224426
6 Avery, R. K. (2017). The public broadcasting act of 1967: Radio's second chance. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 24, 189 – 199. doi:
10.1080/19376529.2017.1362851
7 Bharadwaj, A., Sawy, E., Omar, A., Pavlou, P. A., & Venkatraman, N. (2013). Digital business strategy: Toward a next generation of insights. MIS
Quarterly, 37 (2), 471 – 482. doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2013/37:2.3
8 Brand, Z. (2015). NPR digital media: lessons learned in creating and delivering a digital listening experience. Keynote presented at the Radio 2.0
Keynote, Paris.
9 Brecht, B. (1967). Gesammelte Werke in 20 Bänden - Band 18. Berlin: Suhrkamp.
Crane, E., Talbott, A., & Hume, R. (1961). Time use profiles and program strategy. Journal of Broadcasting, 5 (4), 335 – 343. doi:
10.1080/08838156109385981
Crisell, A. (1994). Understanding radio (2nd ed.). London; New York, NY : Routledge.
Crisell, A. (2002). An introductory history of British broadcasting (2nd ed.). London; New York, NY : Routledge.
Drnevich, P. L., & Croson, D. C. (2013). Information technology and business-level strategy: Toward an integrated theoretical perspective. MIS Quarterly,
37 (2), 483 – 509. doi: 10.25300/MISQ
Dunaway, D. K. (2000). Digital radio production - towards an Aesthetic. New Media & Society, 2 (1), 29 – 50. doi: 10.1177/14614440022225698
Dziczkowski, G., Bougueroua, L., & Wegrzyn-Wolska, K. (2009). Social network - an autonomous system designed for radio recommendation. 2009
International Conference on Computational Aspects of Social Networks (pp. 57 – 64). France: Fontainbleu.
Eastman, S. T., & Ferguson, D. A. (2012). Media programming: Strategies and practices. Boston: Wadsworth Publishing.
Ferguson, D. A., Greer, C. F., & Reardon, M. E. (2007). Uses and gratifications of MP3 players by college students: Are iPods more popular than radio?
Journal of Radio Studies, 14, 102 – 121. doi: 10.1080/10955040701583197
Fernández-Quijada, D. (2017). Distinctiveness of public radio in the age of digitization. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 24, 77 – 89. doi:
10.1080/19376529.2017.1297143
Fiske, J. (1990). Introduction to communication studies. London; New York, NY : Routledge.
Gazi, A., Starkey, G., & Jedrzejewski, S. (2011). Radio content in the digital age: The evolution of a sound medium. Bristol, UK: Intellect Books.
Grenha Teixeira, J., Patrício, L., Huang, K.-H., Fisk, R. P., Nóbrega, L., & Constantine, L. (2017). The MINDS method: Integrating management and
interaction design perspectives for service design. Journal of Service Research, 20 (3), 240 – 258. doi: 10.1177/1094670516680033
Grünewald, S. (2012). Radio macht glücklich. Studie zum emotionalen und werblichen Potenzials des Radios. Retrieved from http://www.rheingold-
marktforschung.de/grafik/veroeffentlichungen/Radio%5fmacht%5fgluecklich.pdf
Hayes, C., & Cunningham, P. (2001). Smart radio — community based music radio. Knowledge-Based Systems, 14 (3–4), 197 – 201. doi:
10.1016/S0950-7051(01)00097-1
Hecht, F. V., Bocek, T., Bär, N., Erdin, R., Kuster, B., Zeeshan, M., & Stiller, B. (2012). Radiommender: P2P on-line radio with a distributed recommender
system. IEEE 12th International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing (P2P) (pp. 73 – 74), Tarragona, Spain.
Heidmeier, M. (2015, August 24). Radio! Hören! Die Kulturtechnik Hören in Zeiten des Netzes. Retrieved from http://markusheidmeier.de/radio-hoeren-
die-kulturtechnik-hoeren-in-zeiten-des-netzes
Hendy, D. (2000). Radio in the global age. Cambridge, UK : Polity Press.
Hirschmeier, S., & Beule, V. (2018). Compliance of personalized radio with public-service remits. ACM User Modeling and Personalization (UMAP)
Adjunct. Singapore.
Hirschmeier, S., Döppner, D. A., & Schoder, D. (2015). Stating and discussing challenges of radio recommender systems in contrast to music
recommendation. Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Decision Making and Recommender Systems. Bolzano.
Hirschmeier, S., Tilly, R., & Beule, V. (2019). Digital transformation of radio broadcasting: An exploratory analysis of challenges and solutions for new
digital radio services. Proceedings of the Hawaiian conference on information systems (HICSS), Maui, Hawaii.
Hirschmeier, S., Tilly, R., & Schoder, D. (2017). Recommender systems for spoken word radio (pp. 71 – 75). Presented at the eKNOW 2017, The ninth
international conference on information, process, and knowledge management, Nice, France.
Holmlid, S., & Evenson, S. (2008). Bringing service design to service sciences, management and engineering. In B. Hefley, & W. Murphy (Eds.), Service
science, management and engineering education for the 21st century (pp. 341 – 345). Boston, MA : Springer.
Hubbard, G. T. (2010). Putting radio localism to the test: An experimental study of listener responses to locality of origination and ownership. Journal of
Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 54 (3), 407 – 424. doi: 10.1080/08838151.2010.498852
Ignatov, D. I., Nikolenko, S. I., Abaev, T., & Poelmans, J. (2016). Online recommender system for radio station hosting based on information fusion and
adaptive tag-aware profiling. Expert Systems with Applications, 55, 546 – 558. doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2016.02.020
Keith, M. C. (2012). The radio station (8th ed.). Waltham, Massachusetts: Focal Press.
Koch, T. (2010). Fernsehnutzung und Gewohnheiten. In T. Koch (Ed.), Macht der Gewohnheit? Der Einfluss der Habitualisierung auf die Fernsehnutzung
(pp. 17 – 68). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Kotler, P. (1977). Marketing management: analysis, planning, implementation, and control (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall.
Kuppelwieser, V. G., Simpson, M. C., & Chiummo, G. (2013). 1 + 1 does not always equal value creation: The case of YouTube. Marketing Letters, 24
(3), 311 – 321. doi: 10.1007/s11002-013-9246-1
Lax, S. (2017). Different standards: Engineers' expectations and listener adoption of digital and FM radio broadcasting. Journal of Radio & Audio Media,
24, 28 – 44. doi: 10.1080/19376529.2017.1297147
Liu, N.-H. (2014). Design of an intelligent car radio and music player system. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 72 (2), 1341 – 1361. doi:
10.1007/s11042-013-1467-z
Majchrzak, A., Markus, M. L., & Wareham, J. (2016). Designing for digital transformation: lessons for information systems research from the study of ICT
and societal challenges. MIS Quarterly, 40 (2), 267 – 278. doi: 10.25300/MISQ/2016/40:2.03
Mayring, P. (2010). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse: Grundlagen und Techniken (11th ed.). Weinheim, Germany: Beltz.
McEwan, R. (2017). Renegotiating radio work in the era of media convergence: Uncertainty, individualisation and the centrality of brands. The Political
Economy of Communication, 5 (2), 45–66.
Mensing, D. (2017). Public radio at a crossroads: Emerging trends in U.S. public media. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 24, 238 – 250. doi:
10.1080/19376529.2017.1362856
Mesbah, H. M. (2006). The impact of linear versus nonlinear listening to radio news on recall and comprehension. Journal of Radio Studies, 13, 187 –
200. doi: 10.1080/10955040701313222
Mollgaard, M. (2016). Radio New Zealand international: Reporting the Pacific in tight times. Pacific Journalism Review, 22 (2), 103. doi:
10.24135/pjr.v22i2.72
Nye, J. S. (2004). Soft power: the means to success in world politics (1st ed.). New York, NY : Public Affairs.
O'Neill, B. (2009). DAB Eureka-147: A European vision for digital radio. New Media & Society, 11 (1–2), 261 – 278. doi: 10.1177/1461444808099578
Ostrom, A. L., Bitner, M. J., Brown, S. W., Burkhard, K. A., Goul, M., Smith-Daniels, V., & Rabinovich, E. (2010). Moving forward and making a
difference: Research priorities for the science of service. Journal of Service Research, 13 (1), 4 – 36. doi: 10.1177/1094670509357611
Parsons, P. (2003). The evolution of the cable-satellite distribution system. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 47 (1), 1 – 17. doi:
10.1207/s15506878jobem4701_1
Patrício, L., Fisk, R., Falcão e Cunha, J., & Constantine, L. (2011). Multilevel service design: From customer value constellation to service experience
blueprint. Journal of Service Research, 14, 180 – 200. doi: 10.1177/1094670511401901
Pluskota, J. P. (2015). The perfect technology: Radio and mobility. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 22, 325 – 336. doi:
10.1080/19376529.2015.1083378
Scannell, P. (1989). Public service broadcasting and modern public life. Media, Culture & Society, 11 (2), 135 – 166. doi: 10.1177/016344389011002002
Scannell, P. (2007). Media and communication. London; Thousand Oaks, Calif : Sage.
Schatter, G., & Zeller, B. (2007). Design and implementation of an adaptive digital radio DAB using content personalization on the basis of standards.
IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, 53 (4), 1353 – 1361. doi: 10.1109/TCE.2007.4429224
Sinton, M. (2018). No longer one-to-many: How web 2.0 interactivity is changing public service radio's relationship with its audience. Journal of Radio &
Audio Media, 25 (1), 62 – 76. doi: 10.1080/19376529.2017.1370713
Sommers, K. (2016, June 2). Understanding editorial decisions. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/blog/2016-05-understanding-editorial-decisions
Spotify. (2019). Number of Spotify monthly active users worldwide. Retrieved from https://www.statista.com/statistics/367739/spotify-global-mau/
Starkey, G., & Crisell, A. (2009). Radio journalism. Los Angeles : SAGE.
https://web.p.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=7077143c-a96b-4071-b360-40cb6dd05731%40redis&vid=2&ReturnUrl=https%3a%2f%2fweb.p.eb… 10/11
Stoller, T. (2017). Classical music radio in the United Kingdom, 1945-1995. New York, NY : Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Street, S. (2009). The A to Z of British radio. Lanham, Md. : Scarecrow Press.
Thorpe, V. (2019, January 20). Listeners and stars up in arms as BBC sounds app backfires. The Observer. Retrieved from
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/jan/20/bbc-sounds-app-angry-listeners-complaints
Torosyan, G., & Munro, C. (2010). EARwitness testimony: Applying listener perspectives to developing a working concept of "localism" in broadcast
radio. Journal of Radio & Audio Media, 17 (1), 33 – 47. doi: 10.1080/19376521003738037
Turnbull, D. R., Zupnick, J. A., Stensland, K. B., Horwitz, A. R., Wolf, A. J., Spirgel, A. E., & Joachims, T. (2014). Using personalized radio to enhance
local music discovery. In CHI '14 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 2023 – 2028). New York, NY : ACM. doi:
10.1145/2559206.2581246
van der Wurff, R. (2011). Are news media substitutes? Gratifications, contents, and uses. Journal of Media Economics, 24 (3), 139 – 157. doi:
10.1080/08997764.2011.601974
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. Journal of Marketing, 68 (1), 1 – 17. doi: 10.1509/jmkg.68.1.1.24036
Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2008). Service-dominant logic: continuing the evolution. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 36 (1), 1 – 10. doi:
10.1007/s11747-007-0069-6
Vargo, S. L., Lusch, R. F., Archpru Akaka, M., & He, Y. (2010). Service-Dominant logic. In N. Malhotra (Ed.), Review of marketing research (Vol. 6, pp.
125 – 167). Emerald Group Publishing Limited. doi: 10.1108/S1548-6435(2009)0000006010
Wang, R. Y., & Strong, D. M. (1996). Beyond accuracy: What data quality means to data consumers. Journal of Management Information Systems, 12
(4), 5 – 33. doi: 10.1080/07421222.1996.11518099
Xie, C., Bagozzi, R., & Troye, S. (2008). Trying to prosume: Toward a theory of consumers as co-creators of value. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science, 36, 109 – 122. doi: 10.1007/s11747-007-0060-2
Xie, Y., Chen, L., Jia, K., Ji, L., & Wu, J. (2013). iNewsBox: Modeling and exploiting implicit feedback for building personalized news radio. In
Proceedings of the 22nd ACM international conference on information & knowledge management (pp. 2485 – 2488). New York, NY : ACM.
Zaharchuk, V., Ignatov, D. I., Konstantinov, A., & Nikolenko, S. (2012). A new recommender system for the interactive radio network FMhost. Retrieved
from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266461508%5fA%5fNew%5fRecommender%5fSystem%5ffor%5fthe%5fInteractive%5fRadio%5fNetwork%5fFMhost
~~~~~~~~
By Stefan Hirschmeier and Vanessa Beule
Reported by Author; Author
Stefan Hirschmeier is a research assistant at the Cologne Institute for Information Systems (CIIS), University of Cologne, Germany. He holds a degree in
computer science and is in his last year of PhD studies on the digital transformation of radio. Prior to his PhD studies, he worked at Fraunhofer Institute
of Technology.
Vanessa Beule is a research assistant at the Cologne Institute for Information Systems (CIIS), University of Cologne, Germany. She holds a master of
science in market and media research. Prior to her PhD studies, she worked for the Institute for Broadcasting Economics, Cologne.
Copyright of Journal of Radio & Audio Media is the property of Broadcast Education Association and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple
sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual
use.
https://web.p.ebscohost.com/ehost/delivery?sid=7077143c-a96b-4071-b360-40cb6dd05731%40redis&vid=2&ReturnUrl=https%3a%2f%2fweb.p.ebs… 11/11

Characteristics of The Classic Radio Experience Perceived by Young Listeners and Design Implications For Their Digital

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Characteristics of The Classic Radio Experience Perceived by Young Listeners and Design Implications For Their Digital

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

4/7/22, 5:01 AM EBSCOhost

Theoretical Background and Related Work

Definition of Radio in This Paper

Radio Qualities and Characteristics

Digital Transformation of Radio Broadcasting

Value Propositions in Media Services

On what occasions do you turn on the radio?

In what way does radio differ from other media formats?

PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 1. Distribution of age and gender of survey participants

Table 1 Radio Characteristics and Their Mapping to Categories

Final category Radio characteristic (A)(B)(C)(D)(E)

Implications for Service Design

Attractiveness of Editorial Preparation

Advantages over Alternatives

Discussion and Limitations

9 Brecht, B. (1967). Gesammelte Werke in 20 Bänden - Band 18. Berlin: Suhrkamp.

Fiske, J. (1990). Introduction to communication studies. London; New York, NY : Routledge.

Hendy, D. (2000). Radio in the global age. Cambridge, UK : Polity Press.

Street, S. (2009). The A to Z of British radio. Lanham, Md. : Scarecrow Press.

Reported by Author; Author

You might also like