Emerging from the discussion over Internet music copyright royalty rates in the political realm is the notion now being pushed by the music industry that radio may be hurting rather than helping music sales (think back to decades of music industry payola to the radio industry). See, for example, Olga Kharif:
... Some experts argue that radio, long seen as an industry ally, is now more of an enemy. In a study published earlier this year, University of Texas at Dallas economics professor Stan Liebowitz argues that radio acts as a substitute for music sales. "I am not disputing that radio is very good in picking which songs are going to become very popular," says Liebowitz, the director of Center for the Analysis of Property Rights & Innovation at the university. "But if radio didn't exist, we could see a 50% to 60% increase in record sales." How so? Instead of listening to the radio in their cars, Americans might buy more CDs or digital recordings, he says. ¶ It's with such conclusions in mind that the music industry is embarking on a multipronged strategy to get all types of radio paying to play. Spearheading many of these efforts is SoundExchange, which collects royalties on behalf of labels and artists. Headed by former entertainment lawyer John Simson, the organization has emerged as a force in policing the radio side of the industry much as the RIAA has taken the lead in strong-arming illegal downloaders. ...
Liebowitz's work has received a lot of criticism in the blogosphere. See, for example, Mark Ramsey,  Surprise! The music industry lies! Link: hear2.0. And Music Industry Lies Make Radio Industry Headlines. Link: hear2.0. --Dennis