Low tech Radio could be the most cost effective weapon in the Afghan war

The war in Afghanistan is estimated to be costing the American taxpayer about US$3.6 billion per month. Our own government has budgeted for $1.6 billion for this financial year – an estimated $133 million per month – to be part of the conflict. Yet, despite the enormous amounts being spent on high tech weaponry  and crack troops, the battle to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan population is being lost to the Taliban. But now the U.S. has begun to deploy what they hope will be 20,000 weapons of mass persuasion. They are simple radios that work on both solar power and by hand-cranking. They cost just $20 each. The all-up cost of the operation including deploying the radios, often by helicopter into remote areas, is a comparatively paltry US$500,000. The idea, AP reports, is to counter the Taliban-sponsored stations — the so called “Mullah Radios” — that operate mainly in the tribal areas along the Pakistani border and broadcast propaganda that helps turn public opinion against foreign troops and the pro-Western Afghan government. Funny how the simplest, lowest tech, things done well can often be the most effective.

Meanwhile, in Britain, The Telegraph reports that a Consumer Expert Group from the Department of Culture, Media and Sport has just brought out a study on the switchover to digital radio in the UK that says the intended switch-off of the FM radio signal should be put back well beyond 2015 because the current target is ”far too early. It is not yet time to force people to give up their old analogue FM radios. Indeed, the switchover to digital radio, when it comes, must, it says, be listener-led.”

All recent data suggests that Radio is the most resilient of all traditional media, while TV and Press is under serious threat from digital rivals even as they scramble to embrace the digital age. Yet, it is traditional FM radio, and arguably even more so AM, which is keeping Radio in such good shape.

By rushing too fast into digital could radio be abandoning its unique simplicity and familiarity in an otherwise all-too complex age?