Home Blog Page 213

Where Dan Patrick’s WNBA Criticism Was Fair, But His Transparency Went Too Far

John Mamola
-
4
Where Dan Patrick’s WNBA Criticism Was Fair, But His Transparency Went Too Far

If you’ve worked in sports radio in any fashion, you’ve likely been stood up by a guest before. Whether it was a miscommunication or a scheduling mishap, the ability to lock in a guest and keep the appointment fails from time to time. That happened last week with The Dan Patrick Show and WNBA Commissioner Cathy Engelbert.

On Friday’s program, Patrick revealed that Engelbert agreed to join the show in a conversation with executive producer Todd Fritz. The agreement was between Engelbert and Patrick’s team specifically. It isn’t uncommon for personalities to agree to appearances without first running the opportunity past their representatives. That happens all the time. However, the explanation and transparency Patrick provided to his audience was something worth examining.

Make no mistake about it, having access to the top names in sports is what Dan Patrick’s program is built on. It is an interview-first program because Patrick is widely considered the best in the format at conducting conversations. Those who agree to appear on his program know questions are not provided in advance. The discussion will be tough, and softballs are rarely part of the equation.

However, every interview is more conversation than interrogation. When you join Dan Patrick, it’s not a testimony, but facts come out.

Engelbert has made national interview appearances on sports talk programs before, most recently on The Pat McAfee Show in April ahead of the current WNBA season. However, this season has been filled with incidents that demand answers, from possible expansion to recent moments involving Caitlin Clark and Alyssa Thomas.

Process Matters

From the start, the request wasn’t handled properly. Fritz did his job. Like any other intrepid producer, the goal is to secure the guest by any means necessary. According to Patrick, Engelbert made the agreement with Fritz specifically, not WNBA public relations, the league’s communications team, or any representative assigned to her at the American Century Invitational.

If that account is accurate, the people responsible for handling those arrangements were never involved. Fritz circumvented the system, which isn’t uncommon in sports media. When you build relationships with high profile people, you can gain access without the system in place being needed. Relationships are built on trust, something the Patrick program has yet to build with Engelbert.

However, those who were bypassed by the request are often the ones who ultimately hold the process to account.

Following a delay in Engelbert’s appearance, the program revealed that she explained her absence. She told the show that her communications team would “not allow her” to make the appearance.

Again, this isn’t an uncommon occurrence. Anyone who has worked in the media has experienced it. Myself included. However, Patrick’s level of transparency and his follow-through after the cancellation went a step too far.

Yes, the WNBA needs to provide answers to tough questions. The league also must do a better job of communicating statements from the commissioner when incidents warrant a response. Just three weeks ago, Patrick criticized the league for not responding to the show’s requests for comment on Caitlin Clark’s absence from a WNBA 30th anniversary poster.

“Just a note to the WNBA. Have somebody available,” said Patrick on June 26. “We were one of the few outlets that called looking for a quote. We couldn’t even get a quote out of anybody… Like, have somebody available. Alright? You have to answer tough questions sometimes. This is a time when you have to answer a tough question. But, have somebody available. That’s all.”

Professional To Personal

The error lies in the response. Following Engelbert’s no-show, Patrick made the situation more about Engelbert than the failures of the league’s communications team. Engelbert and the league employ people to shield and guide her through every issue the league faces. Their job is to grant access, provide clarification, and work with media outlets to find solutions.

It’s no different than any other league.

Are league commissioners required to answer tough questions from sports media outlets? Not necessarily. However, it is the communications staff’s job to create situations that put the commissioner in the best position possible to address those issues.

None of that happened when Engelbert was approached by the show’s production staff. Therefore, the outcome was something the program should have anticipated. Instead, Patrick made the situation more about Engelbert than the likely result of how the request was made in the first place.

“We’re just trying to be a journalist here, that’s all,” said Patrick on Friday. “Don’t say yes. Then all of a sudden, somebody probably said, in my opinion, ‘Oh. Maybe we shouldn’t do this.’ At some point, you have to do this. If you want to be treated as a serious league, this is what happens. These are tough questions. But this is a fair outlet for you, and I will treat you with respect.”

Patrick called Engelbert’s response “feeble” and insisted he would have understood if she had declined the invitation from the beginning. However, the mistake wasn’t the outcome. It began with an attempt to work around the system the league has in place.

Shifting The Spotlight

Patrick is right about one thing: The WNBA needs to become more comfortable answering difficult questions. That is part of growing into a mature sports property, and avoiding those conversations rarely serves the league well. But that’s a separate issue from what happened here.

Guests cancel. Public relations departments intervene. Interview requests that seem secure suddenly disappear because someone higher up decides the timing isn’t right. It happens in sports media every single day.

That’s why Patrick’s reaction felt so unusual. The lengthy explanation wasn’t really for the audience. It was for the host. Listeners don’t need a detailed accounting of every behind-the-scenes booking dispute because, frankly, they don’t care. They care about what comes next, not why an interview never happened.

Transparency has value, but so does perspective. In this case, Patrick devoted far more attention to a routine media occurrence than it deserved. The story wasn’t that a guest canceled. The story became Patrick’s response to it.

For a broadcaster with decades of experience, that should have been the most predictable part of the entire episode.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.

The Five’s 15th Anniversary Highlights Fox News’ Best Bet

Garrett Searight
-
0
The Five’s 15th Anniversary Highlights Fox News’ Best Bet

The Five celebrates its 15th anniversary this month, and Fox News has every reason to celebrate right alongside it. The ensemble show debuted on July 11, 2011, stepping into the 5 p.m. ET slot Glenn Beck vacated after his contentious exit from the network. Not many people expected the panel to outlast Beck’s brand of appointment television, let alone become cable news’ most reliable ratings juggernaut.

Fox News took a real gamble on an unproven format back then. Executives could’ve easily plugged another solo host into the gap Beck left behind, but instead, they bet on a five-person roundtable built around rotating chemistry rather than a singular voice. That bet has paid off in ways almost nobody could’ve predicted at the time.

Look at Fox News’ primetime lineup today, and it becomes clear how much of an outlier The Five really is. Solo hosts dominate the 8 p.m., 9 p.m., and 10 p.m. hours, and each delivers extended monologues about the ills of the Democratic Party and the ways liberals are supposedly wrecking the country. The Five, meanwhile, plays by an entirely different set of rules.

A Different Kind of Chemistry

Sure, plenty of segments still cover how awful everything done by non-conservatives supposedly is. However, there’s a fantastic chemistry between the panelists that primetime rarely bothers to replicate, along with a shared understanding that the stakes aren’t quite as high as they’ll become a few hours later. Jesse Watters, Greg Gutfeld, Dana Perino, and their rotating castmates trade jabs, crack jokes, and occasionally even find common ground, and that mix keeps the show from feeling like just another outrage cycle.

It also features more liberal voices, like Jessica Tarlov and Harold Ford Jr., than virtually any other show on the network.

That formula hasn’t changed much over 15 years, and it’s arguably grown stronger. Producers have shuffled the cast plenty of times since 2011, yet the show’s core identity — a roundtable that takes news seriously without taking itself too seriously — has remained fully intact. Consistency, more than any single personality, is what’s carried the format this far.

Ratings That Speak for Themselves

Fox News deserves genuine praise for how The Five has performed, especially lately. The show extended its run as cable news’ most-watched program for 19 consecutive quarters, drawing an average total audience of 3.58 million viewers in the second quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, it had already topped the charts as the top non-primetime program in cable news for 18 straight quarters back in March, a streak that’s only continued to grow since.

You’d be hard-pressed to find another network with a 5 PM show as its most-watched program overall. Consequently, that achievement says something meaningful about the panelists, the producers, and the network as a whole. Additionally, it says something about Fox News’ willingness to let a genuine outlier stay an outlier instead of forcing it into a more conventional mold.

Ultimately, that’s the real lesson behind 15 years of The Five. Fox News caught lightning in a bottle back in the summer of 2011, and rather than tampering with the formula, the network let it grow on its own terms. Fifteen years later, that decision still looks like one of the smartest moves in the network’s history.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.

Taylor Swift Chose Classic Rock — What That Means for Radio

Mike Stern
-
1
Taylor Swift Chose Classic Rock — What That Means for Radio

In case you missed it, Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce got married. The two tied the knot in a high-profile affair at Madison Square Garden. You’ve probably encountered this news in some form recently, but let me point out a few notable details.

For starters, both Swift and Kelce are 36 years old, meaning they were born in 1989. That means in their formative years — when most people cement their taste in music — the sounds they likely ran into were pop acts like Britney Spears and *NSYNC, R&B and hip-hop like TLC and OutKast, or emo/pop punk like Blink-182 and Fall Out Boy.

When it comes to money, the newlyweds are definitely set. Taylor’s net worth is estimated at $2 billion, while Kelce’s is worth a mere $100 million. They certainly didn’t have to cut any corners at the wedding celebration and should be able to easily make a down payment on a house.

McCartney and Nicks Take the Stage

The reason I’m stating the obvious is that, as details about the wedding start to slowly trickle out, we’ve learned there were two musical performances at the couple’s reception: Paul McCartney and Stevie Nicks.

Well, would you look at that?

Two artists who are steadfast members of the Classic Rock/Hits universe performed at the wedding of the century. And while details are sparse so far — especially about what Nicks sang — reports indicate that McCartney’s performance included “I Wanna Hold Your Hand,” a song he hasn’t performed live in almost sixty years. That’s a pretty special wedding gift.

It’s not like the pair couldn’t afford to have anyone they wanted play at the wedding. They weren’t on a tight entertainment budget. And while they are both in the target demo, they are certainly in the younger half of it — not who we generally consider to be core Classic Rock/Hits listeners.

Now, I realize some people will discount McCartney and Nicks performing at the wedding because Swift is known to be close friends with the former and has many times cited the latter as a major influence. But all that means is that the two Classic Rock superstars surely rated a highly coveted invite to the affair. It didn’t mean they had to perform. Ultimately, this was who the mid-thirties couple wanted to play at their wedding.

Classic Rock’s Cross-Generational Power

I bring this up to once again make the point that this body of music — the one Classic Rock/Hits stations live on — continues to be one of the strongest libraries with enormous cross-generational appeal.

Now, I realize that’s a recurring theme for me in this column.

Maybe I keep coming back to it because I carry some unrealized trauma from so many conversations about how the format is going to fall off the demographic cliff. Or maybe it’s due to the inevitable follow-up question about how much music from the nineties and two thousands we need to play when the core music continues to impact pop culture.

Maybe I keep returning to this theme because formats based on new music and discovery are having a harder and harder time. Just a couple of weeks ago, Matt Bailey noted in his Graphs About Songs newsletter that 2026 is looking to be the worst year for hits this decade. Between January and April, only eleven new songs reached the Billboard Top 10, when the average is more like nineteen.

And maybe I’m just a little jealous that so many other radio formats got so much timely, topical content from the wedding, while Classic Rock/Hits seemed left out — until I realized there is a natural tie-in for our stations to talk about this massive pop culture event.

Whatever the reason, the fact is that Classic Rock/Hits music and artists continue to have an outsized impact on popular culture across all demographics. We’re lucky our stations represent this music in our markets. It’s an amazing foundation — let’s keep building on it.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.

Luke Bryan, Boots, and the Future of Radio

David Hill
-
0
Luke Bryan, Boots, and the Future of Radio

I was standing in the crowd at the Luke Bryan and Shane Profitt show. At some point, I stopped watching the stage and started watching everybody else. Boots were everywhere.

There were white ones, brown ones, tan ones, and black ones. Some had clearly done real work in real mud. Others, though, looked like they were bought that afternoon. In fact, someone had probably been warned, “These are going to hurt by the encore.”

Still, it did not matter, because they all worked.

Nobody announced a dress code, and there was no pre-show memo. Yet a whole lot of people walked in already knowing the assignment. For them, the boots were simply part of the night.

That is what got me.

A Way to Say “I’m In”

It was never really about footwear. Instead, it was about feeling like you belonged in the room. The Swifties do the same thing with friendship bracelets. It is a different accessory, but it is the exact same idea. One is beads and letters. The other is leather and a questionable amount of arch support.

Either way, the message is the same: I’m in.

That is one of the best things fandom does, because it hands people small ways to spot each other.

Swifties trade bracelets, and Parrotheads had the Hawaiian shirts and shark fins. Deadheads had tie-dye, while KISS fans painted their faces. Sports fans wear the jersey. Meanwhile, country fans have boots, hats, and denim. On top of that, they share a quiet agreement that the show starts long before the first song.

It starts in the parking lot. It also starts in the group text. In fact, it starts the second somebody asks, “Are we wearing boots?” And by then, everybody already knows the answer. Note, I was that guy but opted for flip flops.

Radio Used to Do This Well

Radio used to be really good at this. There was a time when a station bumper sticker actually meant something. Back then, a station T-shirt was not just cotton the promo team fired into a crowd. Instead, it was a little badge. Call letters, catchphrases, listener clubs, van hits, concert shirts, and hometown events all added up. Together, they built a feeling that the station was not just something you listened to.

It was something you were part of.

Maybe that is harder now. After all, the audience is spread thin. There is endless audio, everywhere, all the time. So a shared moment is tough to build when everybody holds a private world in their hand.

But that is exactly why the opening is still there.

Don’t Force It — Signal It

Radio does not need to force it. Honestly, forcing it is usually where things get embarrassing. Nobody wants a corporate friendship-bracelet campaign, dreamed up by six people arguing about font size.

Still, radio can make small signals that feel local, useful, and cool.

For example, a rock station could do a limited-run patch that looks good on a jacket. A country station could make boot tags or a hat tied to its biggest summer show. Meanwhile, a Top 40 station could build collectible bracelets around the concerts that matter. A sports station could put out rivalry gear that feels like the parking lot, not the prize closet.

The whole test is simple. Would a listener wear it even if you were not handing out tickets for doing it?

Rituals Still Matter

The same goes for the rituals. After all, the best shows have always had them. There is the Friday roll call and the inside joke the audience is in on. There is the first-song-at-five tradition and the pre-concert meetup. And there is the phrase people repeat because it feels like theirs. These are little things, but little things turn into habits.

So that is still open ground.

Someone driving to work alone can still feel connected to everybody else. That has always been one of radio’s best tricks. In other words, it takes a private moment and makes it feel shared. Because of that, it makes the car a little less lonely.

Own the Local Conversation

Locally, radio still has the edge. Before the big country show, own the boot conversation. Before the game, own the jersey conversation. Before the first lake weekend, own the photos, the playlist, and the check-ins. And before the festival, do not just show up with a tent and a banner. Instead, give people a reason to say, “This is where we’re meeting.”

None of that needs a huge budget. However, it does need attention. So watch what your listeners are already doing, and then help them do it together.

That was the thing about those boots. No marketing department invented them, because they were already part of the culture. Therefore, the smart move is not to manufacture the feeling from scratch. Instead, notice it, turn it up, and hand people more ways to join in.

The Better Question

Radio has spent a long time asking how to get people to listen longer. Of course, that still matters. But here is another question worth chewing on.

What makes people feel like they are part of us?

Because when people feel included, they show up differently. Sometimes they bring signs. Other times they wear the jersey. Sometimes they trade the bracelets.

And sometimes they lace up the boots.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.

How the Radio Industry Could Benefit From Academic Research

Dr. Ed Cohen
-
0
How the Radio Industry Could Benefit From Academic Research

While it might sound like an affectation to appear more intelligent, I really do hold a Ph.D., unlike some who used the title for fun (Dr. Demento, Dr. Don Rose, etc.). Mine is in Mass Media from Michigan State, and I wrote a dissertation (“A Model of Radio Listener Choice”) that won the inaugural Ken Harwood Outstanding Dissertation Award from the Broadcast Education Association (BEA) in 1990.

Last week, The New York Times reported that the number of students admitted to Ph.D. programs this year fell by 15% at major research universities. The article blamed reduced federal research funding, although it wasn’t clear whether the decline was only in STEM subjects (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) or across all disciplines.

Regardless of the number of Ph.D. students entering this coming fall, there are plenty of academics who conduct research as part of their duties, much of which appears either in scholarly journals or is presented at academic conferences. The BEA, founded in 1955, holds an annual conference in conjunction with the NAB Show in Las Vegas. Hundreds of papers are presented, and if you’re interested, go to beaweb.org.

Academic Journals and Peer Review

Some academic journals exist in our field. The oldest is the quarterly Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media (JOBEM), started in 1957, as well as the semi-annual Journal of Radio and Audio Media (JRAM), which I had a very small part in helping to start back in the early ’90s. The founding editor, Dr. Frank Chorba, who was teaching at Washburn University in Topeka, got in touch and asked for help. I found a massive $250 in my budget as research director of Birch/Scarborough and sent it along. Eventually, BEA took on sponsorship of the journal, and after a later name change, it began publishing twice a year.

Both journals are peer-reviewed. What that means is that you send in your manuscript, and it’s read by three reviewers who should know something about the topic. The review is blind — in other words, the authors’ names are removed to prevent bias. If the reviewers like the paper, possibly suggesting changes, it will be published in a later edition.

What the Research Shows

Would any of the research in these journals be useful for your operation? The answer is a full-throated “maybe.” The most recent issue of JRAM focused on podcasting. Some of the articles would be considered “esoteric” at best by US radio and podcast pros. The most recent JOBEM has articles on everything from NBA 2K players to AI and media bias.

What sent me down this path was a paper covering JRAM’s content: “Mapping Three Decades of Radio and Audio Scholarship: A Bibliometric and Content Analysis of the Journal of Radio Studies and Journal of Radio and Audio Media (1997-2025).” Nothing like a short, catchy title, and like many books, there apparently is a worldwide law requiring a colon in the title (I deliberately did not use one in my dissertation title, and it’s a wonder that I graduated without it!). The authors are Dr. Bradley Freeman and Dr. Padma Pillai of Sunway University in Malaysia.

The article uses a “bibliometric” approach, a form of content analysis, of 570 peer-reviewed articles in JRAM. What stood out for me were the trends. It’s no surprise that US-focused articles have declined over the years as the journal’s stature has grown. Since 2008, about half of the articles concerned the US, down from over 60% in the earlier period.

For business-oriented types, articles that the authors placed in the categories of “Broadcast industry and production practices” or “Audiences and listening practices” have been a relatively small part of the journal’s articles. That’s unfortunate. I believe academia has something to add to our knowledge of audiences and how to improve the radio/audio business.

There are some very good academics in our universities who could offer new thoughts and ideas. But in my view, the business folks and the teachers don’t spend enough time together. There are some local connections, but those often relate to getting experience for students, which is a fine thing. But let’s move to the next level.

Time for an Industry-Funded Research Fund

The NAB used to sponsor a broadcast research grant program. It started in 1967, and the last announcement I can find is from 2007. It may be moribund, no doubt the victim of budget cuts, and when it existed, many of the studies never saw much publicity beyond the initial announcement of the awards. I have first-hand experience, as my dissertation was funded by an NAB research grant.

Good research costs money, and there are academics who know how to do excellent research but don’t have the resources. Perhaps I’m dreaming, but can our industry draw up a list of our biggest issues, publicize a request for proposals, and put some dollars behind it? Convene a committee of execs, pick a winner or two, set timelines, and make sure the results are presented such that everyone in audio can have access. Yeah, I’m dreaming, but couldn’t we benefit from some outside research that can help our industry?

Building a war chest for this project won’t be cheap. To start out, I’d put in a grand. That’s not much, but any initiative has to start somewhere.

Correction: The RAYBAUM Act

Last week, I mentioned the RAYBAUM Act in my column and joked about the name.

I was unaware that the act was named for Ray Baum. Baum was a former majority leader in the Oregon House of Representatives. He also served as a vice president of government relations for the NAB, and a member of Congressman Greg Walden’s staff. He had a strong interest in telecommunications and 911 services. The act was passed shortly after Ray passed away from prostate cancer in 2018.

Thanks to Dan McDonald at NAB for pointing this out. My apologies.

Let’s meet again next week.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.

Audacy Repositions Star 94 Atlanta With Brighter AC Direction

David Hill
-
0
Audacy Repositions Star 94 Atlanta With Brighter AC Direction

Audacy has repositioned rhythmic AC WSTR Smyrna/Atlanta as a brighter AC outlet. The station now carries “Atlanta’s Upbeat Variety” positioning effective today.

What We Know: Star 94 is shifting away from rhythmic toward a more balanced pop-leaning mix. The music focus now spans the past 30 years, pulling back significantly on rhythmic content. That move places the station in much closer sonic territory to Cox Media Group’s B98.5 WSB-FM. The new positioning signals a clear strategic pivot for the Audacy-owned outlet.

What’s at Stake: Star 94 and B98.5 now appear to be targeting nearly identical audiences in one of the South’s most competitive radio markets. Atlanta’s AC landscape just got tighter. Direct format overlap between two established brands creates real pressure on both sides. Ratings and billing will ultimately determine whether there’s room for two stations chasing the same listener.

What Remains Unclear: Audacy has not publicly detailed what triggered the format adjustment at this time. It’s also unknown whether additional on-air or programming staff changes will follow. How aggressively the station plans to market the repositioning remains to be seen. And whether the move reflects a broader Audacy strategy across other markets is still an open question.

What It Means: This repositioning puts Audacy in direct competition with one of Atlanta’s most established AC brands. Cox has built B98.5 into a strong market performer over the years. Audacy is clearly betting a softer, broader pop approach can carve out meaningful share. For Atlanta listeners, the market just added another familiar option — but differentiation will be the real challenge ahead.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.

Brad Elliott Joins 95.1 The Wolf in Abilene

David Hill
-
0
Brad Elliott Joins 95.1 The Wolf in Abilene

Community Broadcast Partners has added Brad Elliott as afternoon host at Country KABW “95.1 The Wolf” in Abilene, TX. Elliott is a familiar voice in the market, returning home to fill a key daypart role.

What We Know: Elliott previously worked in Abilene at Townsquare Media’s Classic Hits “100.7 Kool-FM” KULL, and also held positions in Amarillo, Kansas City, and New Mexico. He steps into the afternoon slot that opened earlier this year when VP/Programming Kaden Kimberlin transitioned to sister station Farm/Country “Q Country 96.1” KORQ. Community Broadcast Partners President David Klement confirmed the hire.

What They Said: Elliott expressed enthusiasm about the move, saying, “I’m honored to join the team at 95.1 The Wolf. Abilene has always been home, and I’m grateful for the opportunity to connect with listeners once again. I can’t wait to get behind the microphone and be part of a station that’s committed to great country music and serving the Big Country.” Klement added that Elliott’s deep market roots and strong relationships with listeners and advertisers made him a natural fit.

What Remains Unclear: No start date has been announced for Elliott’s afternoon show. Additionally, it’s unclear whether the station plans any format or programming adjustments alongside his arrival. Whether Kimberlin’s former VP/Programming duties have been permanently reassigned also remains an open question.

What It Means: Elliott’s return signals that Community Broadcast Partners knows how to program to its market. Bringing back a familiar voice with deep local roots is smart radio. For 95.1 The Wolf, this hire keeps the afternoon daypart strong and the dial where listeners expect it.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.

Dana Loesch Blasts Megyn Kelly and Candace Owens Over Charlie Kirk Coverage

Garrett Searight
-
0
Dana Loesch Blasts Megyn Kelly and Candace Owens Over Charlie Kirk Coverage

Dana Loesch escalated her criticism of Megyn Kelly and Candace Owens. She accused media figures of exploiting a high-profile murder case for attention.

What We Know: Dana Loesch used her radio show to sharply criticize Megyn Kelly, Candace Owens, and other conservative media personalities. The issue she presented was about covering the aftermath of Charlie Kirk’s murder. She argued that audiences no longer trust several commentators discussing the case. Loesch also questioned their motives, accusing them of pursuing ratings, influence, and financial gain rather than seeking the truth. Additionally, she challenged those she criticized to appear on her program and defend their positions publicly.

What They Said: “I’m done with the spineless Fox News rejects who sit on their skinny asses, look into the camera, and act like, ‘No, you can come to us. We’re going to bring you day-to-day coverage of the trial.’ No one wants to hear it because no one trusts you. No one believes you. You have no credibility here. Take that welfare card back. We don’t want it. You’re making a mockery of someone’s murder — someone we knew — because you want a fat wallet. It’s called ‘Gal Sharpton’ for a reason.

“Any of you fake-ass hustlers are welcome to come on my show and have a conversation about it. It’s not going to go well for you, but my door is open. I’m not going to run from you cowards like you run from everybody else. I’m not going to be like Tucker (Carlson). I invited Tucker to come on the show, and he absolutely refused. He wanted to argue with me over text, and he’s not the only one. I’m almost at the point where I’m about to name and shame. I’ve been trying to be classy. And I’ve been trying to be New Testament about it. But y’all are testing me now. I’m done with this.” – Dana Loesch

What Remains Unclear: Loesch didn’t identify every individual included in her criticism beyond her references to Kelly, Owens, and Tucker Carlson.

What It Means: The comments mark another escalation in the growing divide among prominent conservative media personalities following Charlie Kirk’s death. As public disagreements continue, the dispute increasingly shifts from reporting on the case itself to a broader fight over credibility, influence, and leadership within conservative media.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.

Jason Rantz to Guest Host Katie Pavlich Tonight on NewsNation

Garrett Searight
-
0
Jason Rantz to Guest Host Katie Pavlich Tonight on NewsNation

Jason Rantz is stepping into a national primetime role. NewsNation will feature the Seattle radio host on Friday night.

What We Know: Jason Rantz will guest host Katie Pavlich Tonight on Friday at 10 PM ET on NewsNation. Rantz hosts the afternoon drive program on Seattle’s Red 770 and has become a familiar face on national television through regular appearances on Katie Pavlich Tonight, as well as on CNN and Fox News. His guest-hosting assignment comes just months after NewsNation launched Katie Pavlich Tonight as part of its revamped primetime lineup. The program replaced Ashleigh Banfield’s former primetime show earlier this year, giving political commentator Katie Pavlich a nightly platform during one of cable news’ most competitive hours.

What’s At Stake: Friday’s appearance gives Rantz another opportunity to strengthen his national profile beyond radio. Moreover, it continues NewsNation’s practice of showcasing familiar contributors in expanded roles. Filling in for an established primetime host also allows the network to evaluate on-air chemistry and audience response while maintaining continuity for viewers. Meanwhile, the assignment highlights the growing crossover between talk radio and cable news.

What Remains Unclear: It’s unknown whether Rantz’s guest-hosting role could lead to additional fill-in opportunities. It’s also unclear whether the network plans to continue rotating contributors behind the desk when Pavlich is unavailable.

What It Means: Rantz has steadily expanded his national media presence while maintaining his Seattle radio audience. Consequently, this guest-hosting opportunity further reinforces his value as a multiplatform personality. For NewsNation, the move provides viewers with a recognizable contributor who already has experience discussing the day’s biggest stories. As the network continues refining its primetime lineup, trusted guest hosts can help maintain consistency while introducing audiences to additional on-air talent.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.

Google Adding AI Labels to Ads Across Search and YouTube

Garrett Searight
-
0
Google Adding AI Labels to Ads Across Search and YouTube

Google is expanding AI transparency across its advertising platforms. The company will now disclose when AI helped create an ad.

What We Know: Google is introducing a new feature inside its My Ad Center panel that tells users whether AI created or edited an advertisement. The update will appear on ads shown in Google Search, YouTube, and Google Discover. Users can access the information by clicking the three-dot menu or information icon already attached to supported ads. They’ll then see a new “How this ad was made” section explaining whether AI played a role in producing the creative. Google said ads built with its own generative AI tools will receive the disclosure automatically. However, advertisers using third-party AI platforms must voluntarily indicate AI involvement through a new control. Google won’t independently verify whether outside-generated ads used AI.

What’s at Stake: The change reflects growing concerns about transparency as AI-generated images become more common in advertising. Businesses increasingly rely on generative AI to create product imagery, reduce production costs, and develop marketing campaigns faster. Yet consumers may struggle to distinguish AI-generated visuals from authentic product photography. Although Google already prohibits deceptive advertising, synthetic content doesn’t automatically violate those policies if it accurately represents the advertised product.

What Remains Unclear: Google hasn’t explained how it will enforce compliance for advertisers using outside AI tools. Likewise, the company hasn’t detailed potential penalties for advertisers who fail to disclose AI-generated content. Local regulations may also require additional labeling in certain markets, creating different disclosure standards worldwide.

What It Means: The update signals that AI disclosure is becoming a standard part of digital advertising rather than a requirement limited to political campaigns. As AI-generated marketing content becomes more widespread, platforms like Google are placing greater emphasis on helping consumers understand how advertisements are produced. That added transparency could strengthen trust while giving advertisers clearer expectations as AI becomes a larger part of creative workflows.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.

1...212213214...2,883Page 213 of 2,883