Every time a new hardware device is released radio tends to rally around a headline. It’s either the savior or the death of radio. We have faced this again with the iPad, but let’s not forget that we saw similar headlines with the iPhone, the Kindle, and just about every other multimedia device. Assessing the impact these devices have on radio is legitimate and important, but it isn’t nearly as hard or as great as many of the headlines predict. The release of the iPad is a perfect example. When assessing a new hardware device, you only really need to ask two questions:

• How does it affect my distribution?
• How does it affect my competition?

As radio is now delivered via both terrestrial airwaves and via Internet protocol (IP) streaming, there is precious little that can happen in the hardware space that will have a tangible impact on radio distribution. If you stream, you’re already on the iPad. If you stream, you’re already part of any mobile wimax solution. If you stream, you’re already on the iPhone, iPod Touch, Nexus One, Droid, and any other hardware solution you can think of.

In fact, even ebook readers are starting to see IP-delivered audio invade. The Amazon Kindle just announced it was creating an app store, and you can be sure that audio applications will be part of it. The Barnes & Noble Nook has already been hacked to provide IP-delivered audio streams via Pandora. It is safe to say that with any Internet-enabled device, the inclusion of “radio” is fait accompli.

Of course, this requires that you consider your Internet stream as a viable distribution of your terrestrial brand. If you don’t, then each of these hardware releases is a threat. But they aren’t a threat because of what they bring to market; they are a threat because you refuse to embrace them. Since, for all intents and purposes, radio distribution is as ubiquitous as the Internet, the more important question is the second one: Does this new device reduce or increase my competition? Well, let’s be honest here: The days of a single device lessening the competition for radio or improving radio’s competitive position are long gone. As devices these days are almost solely focused on delivering media to consumers via the Internet, the concept of a device improving radio’s competitive situation is—to use Mythbusters’ terms—busted.

So we know that new devices won’t help radio’s distribution, and new devices won’t help them competitively, that leaves one critical question, which is applicable for practically every new device of the past few years and moving into the future: Does this hurt my competitive situation? The good news is that, in terms of audio delivery, the answer to this is almost always “no.” Radio is already facing an unlimited number of audio choices and amount of competition on the Internet, so a new device that relies on Internet delivery doesn’t change that dynamic. Even something like a Pandora integration is more hype than reality in terms of a tangible impact. Radio needs to work from the expectation that any IP-delivered audio will be as universally available as the Internet, and no device will really change that.

The good news is that in the audio space, the competition that radio faces today will not get worse thanks to hardware. So competition as it relates to hardware is not about Pandora. It’s not about independent webcasters. It’s not about Spotify. It’s not about audio at all. What it is about, is what the new hardware devices do to total media mindshare.

Radio needs to understand that its competition today is not just other radio stations, it’s video games, online video, social networking, and all those other things vying for the attention of the consumer. When you look at radio in this sense, hardware can have a huge impact on its competitive situation. The iPad is a good example. For all its hype, the biggest change in the iPad is that it provides a larger screen. That’s really it. In terms of audio, it doesn’t change the competitive landscape at all. Users will still stream your station, they’ll still stream Pandora. Your pitched battle in the audio space on the iPad is no different than it is on the iPhone or a Dell laptop. Where it is different is in that larger screen, and that’s an important change.

The screen on the iPad means that eye-pleasing video has just become more portable. Where radio is hurt by the iPad is by it most likely leading to a greater consumption of video. In the world of media mindshare, video just scored a big coup. So this is ultimately how we need to assess the iPad, the Google tablet, the Zune phone, and whatever else you can think of in the future—how does it give an edge or facilitate further consumption of a media category. It’s that simple. For the iPad, it has made streaming video more portable and easy to consume. While this doesn’t change the audio competitive landscape, it does change the media landscape, and it changes it in a way that’s not good for radio.