Published in the Press Institute of India's quarterly magazine Vidura (Vol 44, Issue 1, Jan-Mar 2007), this article traces trends in the the strategic use of radio both globally and in India, in particular. The key question being explored here is: will radio be "killed", or become obsolete, as use of newer technologies (the internet, mobile phones, pod-casting, etc.) continues to expand?

Drawing on his 30 years of experience working for the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), the author answers this question with a definitive "no". Pointing to the fact that "printing presses didn't kill word-of-mouth or bush-telegraph" in India, and that "newspapers and books are still surviving the more recent onslaught of the internet on them", Sir Mark Tully argues that "radio is very much alive and kicking". He notes that, in Britain, for instance, 44 million people out of a total population of 60 million listen to the radio at least once every week. In the United States, he indicates, there has been a "huge boom" in radio talk shows. On a global level, the BBC estimates that 150 million people listen to The World Service regularly.

Tully attributes the "continuing popularity of radio" to various factors, including simple convenience: One can "multi-task" by listening while walking, driving, or carrying out any number of daily rituals (e.g., cooking). Thus, even when people are able to receive television pictures on their mobile phones there will be many times when they cannot watch. Based on his experience, he also argues that radio allows journalists "much more room to expand on ideas". In addition, listeners can get engaged in radio communication in a unique way; as Tully puts it, "the script is all you have so you have to listen carefully. In television a lot of the story is told by the pictures. Because of this concentration, radio tends to make a deeper impact on listeners than television." Again comparing the radio and television media, Tully argues that radio is more intimate; he says that "a good radio broadcaster often gives the impression of broadcasting to each listener individually. That is very much harder to achieve on television."

Tully notes that, while much loved, radio (especially high-quality talk radio) shares in common with television and print the problem of commercialisation. He explores this issue, highlighting his concern that radio faces challenges associated with cost cutting and multiple means of receiving signals blurring dividing lines between different media. He says, "I agree wholeheartedly that broadcasters can be skilled in both radio and television but if they don't appreciate the differences between the two skills they will be very bad broadcasters. A similar threat comes from the internet. Writing for the internet should not be the same as writing for radio."

Turning his focus to India, Tully argues that "radio will never develop its full potential here until the government allows the same freedom to the medium that television now enjoys." He argues that the government needs to go beyond revising licencing procedures and freeing FM broadcasting by ending "All India Radio's monopoly over national broadcasting. Independent national networks would find it far easier to attract the advertisement, which would pay for good radio than FM stations with their limited reach." He also endorses the idea of a genuinely independent public service broadcaster in India, to the end of supporting his belief that "the Indian people should be allowed to enjoy a truly democratic radio."