I don't think just because a band's music becomes "radio-friendly," that the music is destined to suffer because of it. A lot of my favorite bands created their greatest works while being commercially successful (U2 w/ "The Joshua Tree," REM w/ "Automatic for the People," Matthew Good w/ "Avalanche," Depeche Mode w/ "Violator"). I do understand some artists suffer under the weight of commercialism, but I wouldn't attribute that weight to all musicians.
Also (in response to LemonMelon), I never thought "Sex on Fire" was supposed to be taken so seriously. It's a fun, catchy tune, but does the band actually think it to be a poignant single?
eh, I know it's probably going to be heresy, but I actually think U2 taking the band on the road with them was for the best. They honed their craft, created a decent set of melodies, and the music is all the better for it. It's not like they were some great "hidden secret" of a band before U2 got a hold of them; they were, imo, much more average than they are now (sounds like a paradox, but whatever).