Own a digital camera? Do you take photos with your phone?
Here's why we ask: Consultant Fred Jacobs, in his Jacoblog today, offers a nice analogy of some broadcasters' thinking in regards to Pandora and the argument that it "isn't radio." Imagine it's the 1980s, and you work at Kodak. And someone said this: 
"Digital isn’t really photography. Photography is defined as buying a roll of film, inserting it into the camera, taking pictures that exhausts the film supply, removing the film from the camera, and taking the roll of the film to a drugstore or Photomat, waiting a day or two, paying for the processing, and picking up the pictures – some of which look good but most are terrible. That’s photography. So you can’t say that 'digital photography' is really photography because it doesn’t use film and doesn’t need to be processed."
How'd that turn out for Kodak and "real" photography? See, the crux of it is: consumers don't care whether something they find entertaining or useful fits your strict definition or category. If I can watch a film on my tablet, whether or not the industry considers that "seeing a movie" couldn't be more irrelevant to me. What should be relevant to the industry is that I may do this instead of going to the theater. Or watching something on television. And if someone is playing song after song of music that may or may not be in my personal library, perhaps in my car, it doesn't really matter to me whether it fits your definition of radio. But my engagement with it should be relevant to you!

What's important is that your listeners may enjoy this in addition to (or instead of) your content.
Back to Fred Jacobs, who asks, "Instead of arguing about whether Pandora is or isn’t radio, wouldn’t it be smarter to learn what consumers are thinking, feeling, and doing – and then incorporate that learning into radio’s brands?"
Read his blog here.