Talk:Radio drama

Visit any major book shop in Germany and you will see shelves full of 'Hoerspiele'. Be it Rankin, Mankell or Camilleri - the selection of sophistically produced radio dramas is stunning. If one considers all German speaking countries then it's fair to say that a radio drama is aired every day. In the age of MP3 players radio dramas are becoming much more popular and the huge repertoire which can be found on (state) radio recordings is being complemented by a rising number of private productions which are usually marketed by book publishers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.62.4.10 (talk) 11:57, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

In reading the description of Hörspiel, it seems like Hörspiel is radio drama with "more music." Perhaps that is compared to "old-time" radio drama. Modern radio drama and audio theatre are often much like movies for radio. If someone who is familiar with modern radio drama and can understand German were to listen to some Hörspiel he could tell us if there are any substantial differences -- other than the language. William Alan Ritch 21:50, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

No there aren't any substantial differences. --81.173.182.193 12:56, 30 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

A lot of focus is often paid to radio drama in Europe, especially Britain. Recently, however, there is an increased interest in radio drama in Africa. Most of the studies in this area focus on the functional aspects of radio drama, rather than its purely entertainment aspect, and as such, there is very little that has been done on its structural relevance. The didactic function of radio drama is necessary to acknowldege the kind of material that is consumed in Africa, as well as the way radio drama can be used in the development project. Radio drama in Africa is also often a reflection of the cultures from where they are produced.

This proposal does not seem to have been followed up with any discussion here.

I oppose. See my arguments at Talk:Audio theatre. -- Picapica 20:33, 3 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

Removed the merger proposal, which does not appear to have elicited any support. -- Picapica -- Picapica 19:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)Reply

There seems to be some confusion as to what constitutes "radio drama" and what constitutes an "audio book" or "audio theatre". Someone has inserted a number of pulp men's adventure novel series (eg. The Destroyer, The Executioner, etc.), but most of these were never radio dramas although they are available as audio books or audio dramas. IMO, they don't belong here, they belong in the audio drama article. --Canonblack 22:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

I think we need a "master article" to describe the art form of audio drama/audio theatre/radio drama -- whatever you want to call it. The art form has the same methods and conventions no matter how the result is distributed. From this master article we could branch off to old-time radio drama (like the Shadow or Suspense) and modern "audio theatre" and internet podcasts. We could even have sections or branch to the international (German, Japanese, African, etc.) forms. William Alan Ritch 22:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Opinion: Agreed

"Radio drama" and "audio theatre" are synonymous. Both are created in exactly the same ways. Both are broadcast, both come over wires, and I listen to BBC and CBC radio dramas over the internet and through my computer even as I listen to podcast audio theatre the same way. And I listen to and download OTR radio drama. It's all mixed up!

And when an audio theatre production is picked up by the BBC and broadcast, does it cease to be audio theatre and become radio drama?

This is all very silly. They are the same thing, it's semantics, and given the convergence of media and technology occurring keeping them separate is pointless.

Also, who decided that it's audio "theatre" instead of audio "theater"? Seems odd.

Lastly, to confuse the issue further (but perhaps indirectly unconfuse it), the consensus on the www between listeners and creators seems to be that "audio drama" is the phrase to use when referring to non-radio-broadcast audio plays:

http://www.audiodramatalk.com/

Yet Yuri Rasovsky, a longtime radio play pro, refers to radio plays overall as "audio drama" as well.

http://www.natf.org/wad/index.htm

http://irasov.com/home.htm

Perhaps it is all just audio drama, eh?

Visitor 71.112.42.133 (talk) 05:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)Reply

Opinion: Agreed

Agreed with previous visitor, 'audio theater' 'audio theatre' 'audio drama' are all just variations of the term 'radio drama.' Since 'radio drama' is the term with history I feel all other variation's pages should be deleted and redirected to radio drama.

On that same topic, I feel that this article should be amended to better represent modern audio drama - I see that several producers have put links to their respective organizations in the "External Links" area but there is not a qualitative discussion of the modern landscape provided.

I do have a bit of a conflict of interest as I am a producer myself (FinalRune Productions) but I also am an active promoter and well-versed listener, and think the story of modern audio drama can be better treated than this article is now - so I'll be working on it!

Finalrune (talk) 20:02, 21 March 2010 (UTC)Reply

As this article is on the English language version of Wikipedia, I propose the article be edited to refer to Radio drama from english speaking countries, and the material on Japanese radio drama be spun off into its own topic, and the proposed African radio drama be started as a separate topic, both with links from a "Radio Drama around the world" link section. -- Bubbas Brain

I concurr. A brief mention of Japanese affect on radio drama as a whole is enough, with a link to another page. The garbled text makes the page look bad. Rugz 05:55, 29 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

Examples of radio drama with the article's body should be used sparingly. I (personally) don't mind an extended links section (as discussed below), but I recently removed a link that reported to be an example of podcast radio drama. The example seemed to be there just to promote the (obscure) site. This might be a great show - but that is irrelevant. Besides, since we have draw a big line in the sand between radio drama and audio theatre (which I disagree with - but that is another discussion) this podcast is more the example of the latter, since it is not actually on ANY radio station -- even XM. -- William Alan Ritch 18:19, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

There seems to be a conflict beginning about what qualifies as an External Link for radio drama. It should be discussed here before drastic changes are made.. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rugz (talk • contribs) 23:04, 27 Sep 2006 (UTC)

This may be aimed towards me. Either way the criteria I use is firstly that Wiki is about content not links. As such links need to prove validity. Equally I tend to refer to WP:EL, {{WP:SPAM]] & WP:NOT - if you see any instance where you & I and a link don't agree (!) feel free to let me know. Regards --Nigel ^(Talk) 06:58, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Reply

What criteria was used to select the links in the "Listen to" section? Right now it seems rather arbitrary, especially when compared to the links from before. I understand about not wanting to be a link directory, but allowing some content providers to have links and others not strikes me as being biased. Raveler1 03:03, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Reply

Apparently there is no longer a "Listen to" section? Someone with the anonymous IP of 76.170.239.56 (cpe-76-170-239-56.socal.res.rr.com) has taken it upon themselves to remove "Listen to" sections to over 500 articles on Wikipedia, without explanation. Rugz 16:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

I'm replacing the "Listen to" links. We went through all this at Talk:Old-time radio. I don't know whether the remover is a vandal or really believes this is spam. But access to audio is no different here than an audio aid to pronounce a word in an online dicitionary. Further, how can it be "spam" if it's not a commercial site? Pepso 16:36, 2 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

www.wirelesstheatrecompany.co.uk does this site qualify for a link? Mariele

www.digital-eel.com/rtsf/ and how about RTSF? Thanks. Rich 20 Jan 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.144.64 (talk) 10:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

I would love to see what the folks above feel about this section as well. I'm surprised not to see some of the leading radio drama showcase podcasts (Radio Drama Revival, Sonic Society) mentioned here, but as I have a conflict of interest I do not feel in a position to add it. Some of these long-running serial podcasts have done a much more in-depth job exploring and showcasing new audio drama than the directories listed here.

Fgreenhalgh (talk) 02:20, 19 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

In the "Programs/series" list Deathstalker, The Destroyer, The Executioner, Mack Bolan, Not From Space, Outlanders, The Pond, Red Rock Mysteries and Stony Man definitely need to be vetted. If these are, or were, actual radio shows I've never heard of them, nor do the hypertext links here provide any proof of their existence. --Kirkland user, June 23, 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.37.40 (talk) 13:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

In the passage about TV shows getting radio drama revivals, I am moving the "dubious - discuss" tag from The Tomorrow People to Thunderbirds, as the first show's article describes such an incarnation in detail, but the latter does not so much as imply anything of the sort. --Tbrittreid (talk) 21:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)Reply

There appears to be a need for a fuller entry on British radio drama; perhaps a separate section -- even a new entry 'BBC Radio Drama', though this could, perhaps, go with the existing BBC Television Drama. Also what about other English language radio drama, including the CBC? Furthermore surely radio and television drama and the theatre are closely related.Rwood128 (talk) 15:03, 15 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

• • I fail to understand the reason for the deletion of the external links, listed below -- the stated reason mentions 'references', but this doesn't make sense (or perhaps the numbers -- 2 to 6 -- confused the editor?). All these links provide valuable, non-commercial resources. At the moment the article is thin, especially re the UK. I'm working on the 1930-60 period and will add it shortly.

• BBC Radio Drama on the Diversity website
• BBC - The BBC Story - The Written Archives: [2]
• British Radio Drama: [3]
• The Invisible Play - B.B.C. Radio Drama 1922-1928 - online book: [4]
• Prix Italia: Radio Drama, DIVERSITY website: [5]
• Saturday Night Theatre Home Page: [6]

Rwood128 (talk) 23:26, 5 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

I have removed the external link to dramapod as its now owned by a domain squatter -Murdats (talk) 05:05, 21 July 2009 (UTC)Reply

I have placed the merge entry on this page, because the booth articles seems to say the same. Ok, a radio drama seems to be audio dramatisation which was made by a radio broadcast. And a audio dramatisation could be made from a private company. But I suppose there must something happen in this case. Possibility: 1. The radio drama article should give a reference to the audio dramatisation article and some parts should be moved there, because a radio drama is like an audio dramatisation - or 2. the articles should be merged. I know there existing audio dramatisations in England to which are not made by a private company e.g. serial to the famous five and the three investigators (I own some of these cassettes). These plays never aired by radio broadcast company. --Soenke Rahn (talk) 18:41, 14 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

I take the merge back, because I think the merge would be better between Hörspiel and audio theatre. --Soenke Rahn (talk) 19:00, 14 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

I placed a statement on the discussion site of the article audio theatre.

--Soenke Rahn (talk) 19:43, 14 November 2010 (UTC)Reply

The introduction is overly long. In the second paragraph there is an extended quote about the playwright Seneca that is interesting but should be in the history section.

Also it seems that this should be a starting point for a category of articles about radio drama/audio drama/audio theatre/audio theater - whatever you want to call it. Think about a single article that would cover "TV drama". Instead we have many articles. William Alan Ritch 23:41, 1 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BillRitch (talk • contribs)

Simple question, I should think: Is a production a “radio drama” if it never airs on the radio? —Frungi (talk) 04:57, 11 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Frungi, my opinion is that radio drama = audio drama podcasts that can be aired digitally. However, the thrust of this Wiki page seems geared towards the historic and broadcaster versions of the art form, so my vote is that there be a new page developed that more deeply discusses the breadth and nature of the new generation of audio drama podcasts.

Fgreenhalgh (talk) 02:20, 19 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

What about audio dramas that are only available for purchase (e.g. straight to CD) and never broadcast at all? —Frungi (talk) 05:54, 20 June 2013 (UTC)Reply

It's time ago that there was an strange erase discussion. A German one (I am also German) looked into few German dictionaries and means radio drama and audio drama are the same. He changed the entry in the wikitionary and so on after his opinion. And there where also strange IP-entries and statements on the page. (Relations to an Radio station?) It was really strange, and the discussion was not good. The BBC also used Audio drama as the general word and so on , e.g.: http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2013/audiodramaawardswinners.html During the false erase we lost a lot also informations (Ok, Audio theatre was a false word; I found the the source of the word, an theory paper and placed it on the discussion site), but Audio Drama it the top word (not radio drama) and so on ... I have never seen an Tape or CD which was not aired, under the category radio drama in a shop ... You can read a rest of discussion in the section audio dramatisation (look above). --Soenke Rahn (talk) 12:45, 6 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

Is it possible to have a modern photo, for instance recording of the BBC' s The Archers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.145.176.254 (talk) 07:51, 24 July 2014 (UTC)Reply

I boldly removed the external links to shows. The policy on Linkfarms says "...excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia." I think that it doesn't add to a great understanding of the topic and has become a place for promotional accounts to dump their links. Is there any feedback?--Adam in MO Talk 00:47, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Radio drama. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140701103558/http://www.coffeetheater.com/usr/down/2_93.pdf to http://www.coffeetheater.com/usr/down/2_93.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120303114656/http://www.prixitalia.rai.it/2008/pdf/vincitori_edizionipassate_en.pdf to http://www.prixitalia.rai.it/2008/pdf/vincitori_edizionipassate_en.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://geocities.com/stiquesheik/Dead.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:40, 4 June 2017 (UTC)Reply

Radio play more accurately describes this article and its content. Radio drama does not accurately describe these radio plays. Radio play is the predominantly used word in the English language for a show with a plot written by a professional. Radio plays often retain a copyright using the phrase "radio play" to this day. It is analogous to a screenplay. While I concede that "Radio drama" does have widespread usage, it is not as popular as "Radio play" which carries the most widespread usage both currently and longitudinally.

• "radio play" About 5,620,000 results google.com
• "radio drama" About 2,570,000 results google.com

Moreover, the modifier "drama" attaches a narrow definition to radio plays and ignores the vast number of non-dramatic and/or non-theatrical works. Let's change this. 71.191.62.196 (talk) 23:57, 15 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

Isn't a "radio play" a play written specifically to be broadcast, while radio drama also includes plays originally written for the stage. Perhaps some clarification is needed in the lead? I also note that the broadcasting of musical theatre, including opera, is largely ignored here. Rwood128 (talk) 10:56, 16 April 2019 (UTC)Reply

  This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2023 and 9 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hexstia (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by I.e.jamie (talk) 17:52, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply