That’s right, cell phone makers will be forced by congress to put radios in their phones. Stupid? You bet.

I say bring it on.

The problem today with radio isn’t that there aren’t enough radios. The problem is the programming. You can swing a dead iriver mp3 player without hitting a radio. They are everywhere, to the point that you can’t escape them. The technology isn’t the problem. No one wants to listen to the radio because there is so little worth listening to.

And thank you, radio industry, for demanding FM radio chips. All you will do is devalue the AM stations you already own. Which you are already doing by some of your other moves (http://www.podcastunite.com/2010/07/clear-channel-wants-more-stations/). And when AM stations are being sold for a dime a dozen, I have some ideas of where you can find fresh programming.

Here’s the kicker. It wasn’t an on air listener that complained about the episode or show, but rather someone on hold in a phone system. From the Jackson Free Press:

In a second post on the Rachel Maddow Show blog, Laura Conaway reported that MPB pulled the program after a complaint about host Terry Gross’ July 7 interview with comedian Louis C.K.

“Mississippi Public Broadcasting shares a campus with offices for the state’s colleges and universities, and we have learned that some of those offices play public radio for callers who are on hold,” Conaway wrote. “Recently, a caller got put on hold during Fresh Air and heard Terry Gross ask comedian Louis C.K. if he always has sex with his shirt on. The caller complained, the station’s zero-tolerance policy for inappropriate conduct kicked in, and away went Terry Gross and ‘Fresh Air’ for Mississippi.”

So we are clear, one person complained about what they heard on hold at the university, and MPB pulled the show down across the network? Remember what was said about Clear Channel wanting more stations? What will destroy radio faster, Clear Channel, or one person who is offended? If you aim the weapon at the right target (in this case, NPR stations and their lack of wanting to offend), you can do quite a bit of damage.

Having a “zero-tolerance policy for inappropriate conduct” is a nice idea, but in practice, it’s a utopian ideal that homogenizes the tastes of everyone. We are not that kind of society. We shouldn’t be that kind of society. I’m sure that wherever that policy came from was from the best of intentions (or fear of litigation), but it obviously doesn’t work. Frankly, sometimes people have to be offended a little. It can be a healthy thing to have your ideals challenged.

What does MPB have to say about it? From Sun-Herald.com:

“Mississippi Public Broadcasting strives to deliver educational, informative and meaningful content to its listeners,” MPB Executive Director Judith Lewis said in a statement. “After careful consideration and review, we have determined that ‘Fresh Air’ does not meet this goal over time. Too often ‘Fresh Air’s’ interviews include gratuitous discussions on issues of an explicit sexual nature.

“We believe that most of these discussions do not contribute to or meaningfully enhance serious-minded public discourse on sexual issues.

“Our listeners who wish to hear ‘Fresh Air’ may find it online.”

This I fully support. If Mississippi Public Broadcasting wants to drive it’s listeners away from it’s radio signal, and towards podcasting, I am happy to reap the benefits.

Going online for content also empowers the listeners to have their own ‘inappropriate content’ meter, allowing them to judge what they should and should not listen to. You can choose what to put on your show, and they can choose to listen to it or not.

Public radio joins the ranks of commercial radio by shooting itself in the foot.