It's not about programming, it's about money.
If you don't mind, A, I'm going to flip that statement slightly to make a point.
Programming is about making money, because radio is a business. It is not about entertaining every single person, it is about entertaining a majority of those who like a particular genre in music in order to keep them around when the commercials hit, and to have enough listeners in that majority to charge an advertising rate that turns a profit.
Despite what some (particularly a very vocal one) have said, the aforementioned majority audience members do not miss the songs that aren't played. If what they hear are songs they like, it doesn't matter what they didn't hear. In fact, they don't even mind the repetition of songs they like ... because they like them.
You don't like hearing "Hotel California" or "Brown Eyed Girl" frequently? Well, that's your musical taste, and that's okay ... for you.* But you also obviously are not in the aforementioned majority, because if the masses also didn't like those songs, they'd stop testing well and we'd stop playing them. (Or, if were insane enough to act as some have suggested and keep playing those songs even though people hated them, the ratings would go down.)
It really is that simple, and there is never going to be a mass appeal station in a major rated market that caters to anything other than the majority audience opinion of music (as determined by research and testing), because a station that didn't cater to the majority would be leaving money on the table by not getting the majority to listen.
* - Oh, and ... before you start telling me about "everyone else I talk to doesn't like hearing them over and over either", until you and the "everyones" comprise more than 50% of the audience, I'm not swayed by the argument.
