Home Blog Page 294

How Broadcasting Layoffs, AI, and Creators Are Redefining the Media Industry

Jason Barrett
-
4
How Broadcasting Layoffs, AI, and Creators Are Redefining the Media Industry

2026 has arrived, and hope springs eternal for many across the broadcasting industry. But before we move forward, we must first revisit some harsh realities and understand the current climate. It’s no longer business as usual, where hard work assures an annual raise and the best talent land the open opportunities. Revenue vs. expense and job necessity vs. job luxury is a greater area of concentration.

Did you know that more than 17,000 entertainment, news, streaming, and broadcast jobs vanished in 2025? That represented an 18% spike from 2024’s already punishing numbers according to The Wrap. If you were betting on jobs increasing or decreasing in 2026, where are you putting your money? I’ll hang up and listen.

These are not isolated events or cyclical resets. They are figures that highlight a historic shift, signaling a deeper reckoning for media organizations across various areas of the business. Many executives are clinging to legacy models that weren’t built for a world of infinite content, endless creators, algorithmic distribution, and audience expectations shaped by TikTok speed and Netflix convenience. They’re protecting an old system rather than inventing what will dominate the next decade.

That defensive posture has consequences. They appear clearly in the numbers: thousands unemployed, countless productions shelved, shrinking newsrooms, abandoned digital verticals, and large organizations forced into survival mode.

And the turbulence isn’t slowing. It’s accelerating. Operators who treat disruption as a crisis instead of an opportunity can shrink themselves out of relevance. I don’t say that to generate headlines, clicks or to paint a doom and gloom visual of the industry I love. I write it because it’s a reality that many ignore.

Consolidation is NOT the Answer

Consolidation has become the storyline of the media business. But it rarely delivers long-term solutions without a broader reinvention strategy. When Paramount and Skydance merged, most of the headlines focused on leadership changes, expected synergies, and cost savings. Behind closed doors, insiders knew the truth: consolidation often serves as an emergency brake for companies that can no longer sustain their scale.

Paramount’s layoffs, Warner Bros. Discovery’s spin-off planning, NBCUniversal’s reorganization under Comcast’s Versant, Disney’s global cuts, and the thousands of additional jobs eliminated at CBS, CNN, and the broader news industry provide a clear example of what consolidation tends to produce. Companies want efficiency, but the easiest path to efficiency is payroll reduction, not strategic reinvestment. Executives remove layers, restructure divisions, and tout cost discipline. Meanwhile, the audience slips further away.

The FCC’s approval of the Paramount-Skydance merger, the competitive bids circling Warner Bros. Discovery, and the ongoing speculation around further mergers highlight how much instability lives beneath the surface. Deals may create excitement for Wall Street, but the on-the-ground consequences are predictable. Departments merge. Redundancies are eliminated. Innovation budgets shrink. Templated content strategies replace creative risk-taking that once made us special.

That’s not how you grow an audience, it’s what assures your existing one of shrinking. A merger is not a strategy unless it becomes a launchpad for something new. Too many companies treat it as the end goal rather than the beginning.

AI is Misunderstood

Industry executives love talking about AI because it signals innovation. But many higher ups deploy it like a blunt instrument. Nearly 55,000 jobs were reportedly cut for AI-related reasons this year. That number will rise as companies automate research, content drafting, editing workflows, marketing operations, and even certain aspects of production.

But AI isn’t the problem. Mismanagement is.

The World Economic Forum projects AI-related tech jobs will double by 2030. That is concentrated growth outside of traditional media because most groups still haven’t built an AI talent pipeline. Companies approach AI as a way to shrink headcount, not as a mechanism to expand products or speed up creative output. Look around, how many traditional groups use AI to grow revenue through merchandising? Who’s using it to reduce photo licensing, production music, written content, social media scheduling, software, and other key business expenses?

AI can serve journalism and entertainment in valuable ways beyond assisting sales professionals. It can accelerate workflows, boost research, enhance production, and expand experimentation. It doesn’t need to replace your talent, music or content to add value. But it’s not going to magically fix business models built around shrinking audiences and slow adaptation. Without clear guidelines, accountable and educated leadership, and teams trained to integrate the technology responsibly, AI will create reputational risks that rival the financial ones.

The winners will be the companies that treat AI as an engine, not a replacement.

The Creator Economy

The term Creator Economy is overused but it’s not going away anytime soon. As legacy media’s influence decreases, creators are taking more control of their lives and business. This is the clearest signal of where the industry is moving. The sad part is that companies have helped create this by sending away many of their top stars. More entrepreneurial-minded people will produce content in the future, some by necessity, others by choice.

Radio should be dominating the creator economy conversation, yet many companies are risk adverse. Talent development once served as radio’s growth engine and key advantage. Program directors identified raw personalities, put them in low-pressure roles, nurtured them, and built them into stars. Social platforms now play that role. Who needs to work a weekend shift for minimal dollars when they can broadcast to thousands across multiple platforms?

There are few situations where brands like Westwood One Sports invest in a new 23-year old host (Drake C. Toll) in mornings. When they do, traditional broadcasters tend to reject it because it’s unproven. Yet that’s how stars are born in music, radio, sports, politics, television, and most businesses. I was fortunate to find Joe Fortenbaugh, John Middlekauff and other rising stars during my programming career. Most internally and externally viewed those moves unfavorably initially. But people eventually came around. A host can’t become proven, trusted, and successful if nobody takes a chance to invest in what they could be.

Creators with large digital followings are the new modern “morning show”. They deliver daily content, personal storytelling, community-building, and interactive engagement. Yet many radio folks still scout air talent based on traditional demos and broadcast experience, while creators test content with millions watching. Some of the best shows I ever built were designed in my head or a production room. I didn’t need a fancy resume, slick demo or strong on-air audition to determine if it’d work. It was never about first-show acceptance. The focus was on the characters, roles, chemistry, content and how to get people interested thru consistent promotion.

Television is fighting this problem too. Networks treat streaming as their primary competitor when creator-led micro-studios are a more disruptive force. Just last week, 23-year old, Nick Shirley captured over 100 million views for his investigative work on Minnesota fraud. Many legacy TV companies ignored the story. Creator-driven content works because media overlords and friction are removed. It’s why millions took a liking to Barstool Sports, Outkick, The Daily Wire, Charlie Kirk and others. Great talent and content don’t require long development cycles, massive writing rooms, or multi-million dollar pilots. They just need to be created and distributed.

Last but not least is Podcasting. It sits at the center of the creator economy because it offers the most frictionless transition between platforms. But traditional podcast networks still recruit through conventional scouting processes too. Real growth comes from creators who bring audiences with them. Many radio groups treat podcasting as a digital add-on rather than a full-fledged creator ecosystem. That mindset has to evolve.

The next era of hit talk shows, interview series, hybrid video-audio shows, and branded content franchises will come from creators with digital-first fandoms. Podcasting is an ideal gateway for creators entering the traditional media world, and the companies that capitalize on that connection will widen the gap between those with a future and those still clinging to the past.

What Professionals Can and Must Do

If there’s one message every media professional needs to internalize today, it’s this: your employer cannot guarantee your long-term stability. That doesn’t mean the industry’s future is bleak. It means responsibility for skill diversification, brand building, and professional evolution sits with those who want to work in the business. Strong talent and relationships will help many last longer than those who lack one or both of those skills. I tried to make this point two weeks ago when detailing Bart Winkler’s sign off at the Infinity Sports Network. The feedback and how it was intended though didn’t register with some.

After losing his show at WFAN, Brandon Tierney could have sulked and asked ‘why me’. Instead, he began reinventing himself immediately. He started creating video content, working on social promotion, building a local event, improving his creative images, and using the opportunity to invest in himself rather than wait for the next phone call. He is building a direct connection to his audience and has grown his channel in one week to over 12,000 subscribers.

Another friend, Damon Bruce just hit 50K in subs on YouTube last week. Maybe they’ll return one day to traditional media, but if they do, they’ll be more skilled and able to adapt should anything change again. Once talent get a taste of controlling their own businesses though, it outweighs working for others.

I believe that professionals who succeed in the next decade will do the following:

  • Understand and adopt AI tools early
  • Build personal brand equity through social content, podcasts, newsletters, and/or creator collaborations
  • Position themselves as audience builders, not just content producers
  • Master multiple storytelling formats across video, audio, digital, and social
  • Take more control of their own businesses, selling and monetizing their own brands
  • Strengthen their ability to analyze data, interpret metrics, and adjust content strategy quickly

Closing Comments

The media business will always need creative thinkers, storytellers, strategists, editors, showrunners, producers, reporters, and content architects. But it won’t carry professionals who wait for the old model to snap back into place. It will likely have less entry level and mid-level openings, and potentially less pay for select roles too.

The job losses that defined 2025 are a warning, not an aberration. They reflect an industry that must rethink its identity from the ground up. It’s a challenging situation, but it presents opportunity too. Reinvention can feel overwhelming, but it’s far more energizing than managing a slow collapse.

Quick adapting organizations and professionals who aren’t afraid to explore and reinvent themselves will thrive in the future. The old world is not returning. This next one is going to reward those who build, collaborate, experiment, and evolve—and punish those who hesitate.

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.

Do NFL Broadcaster Conflicts of Interest Matter Anymore?

John Mamola
-
0
Do NFL Broadcaster Conflicts of Interest Matter Anymore?

Are there any rules left to follow in the NFL? Over the past few years, the bending of rules that network broadcasters once followed can be compared to a scene in The Matrix. Hold the spoon and make it bend with your mind—because there is no spoon. That sums up what broadcasters like Tom Brady and now Troy Aikman are doing with their paid ties to NFL teams.

There used to be objectivity in sports broadcasts. Conflicts of interest never influenced how a team was discussed. No special access or insights that could make their way to the conflict itself by such a broadcaster. In the words of Walter Sobchak, “This is not ‘nam, there are rules.” At least, we thought there were.

Everything evolves. Fans and broadcasters now have more information than ever. But the question remains: do rules matter, or only after they’re broken? It’s a fine line for the NFL and a potentially costly one for broadcasters.

Make no mistake. What Tom Brady has done—and what Troy Aikman is about to embark on—is a conflict of interest. Both are paid analysts employed by FOX Sports and ESPN respectively while holding financial ties to the NFL teams they call games for. The point of having a former athlete in the booth is to provide an objective perspective backed by experience. These conflicts are continuing to blur that line.

Since Brady entered broadcasting, the game has changed. Early in the season, headlines focused not on his performance for FOX Sports but on him wearing a headset in the Las Vegas Raiders’ coaching booth. Calls for Brady to choose have continued: the highest-paying analyst job in network television or a front-row seat overseeing one of the NFL’s flagship teams.

He has done both—and likely will continue. Brady has yet to call a Raiders game for FOX Sports. Time will tell if he ever will.

Aikman’s situation is different. The ESPN Monday Night Football analyst is consulting with the Miami Dolphins on their current general manager search alongside fellow Hall of Famer Dan Marino, who serves as a special advisor to Dolphins owner Stephen Ross.

Could this simply be a team seeking an informed opinion on candidates? Possibly. I’m not naive to being this doesn’t happen behind the scenes all the time. But Aikman’s role with Miami is public, raising questions about why he accepted it in the first place.

The former Dallas Cowboys quarterback is a top-tier analyst, on par with the best—including Brady. What’s puzzling is why he’s consulting for the Dolphins when he has no ties to the team, no history as a player, no ownership stake, and no permanent role, according to reports.

NFL teams often bring in outside perspectives. But when a team taps someone with access and insights gained from a network job, it creates a conflict for the employer. Without ESPN, Aikman likely wouldn’t have that access—or the valuable information the Dolphins are paying him to provide.

That is a conflict of interest if he uses any information from ESPN for the Dolphins. Rules are rules, right?

Here lies the confusion. Rules exist to prevent issues. Protocols between the NFL and its network partners have always protected the quality and integrity of broadcasts. Yet in recent years, conflicts have become more public—and neither the league nor the networks seem to notice or care.

With Aikman assisting the Dolphins, will he be allowed to call games for the team that paid him? Will broadcasters now need disclaimers before commenting on teams they helped shape?

Brady is “closely involved” in the Raiders’ head coaching search. Is that a conflict? Should we ask the same about his FOX Sports role?

Most fans likely don’t care. But few could replicate this in their own line of work—using company-gathered information to benefit someone else. That is exactly why broadcasters have conflict-of-interest clauses.

Sports norms are changing daily. Games are no longer confined to a single channel. Box scores now include analytics once ignored. Networks license talent instead of building rosters. Broadcasters are now paid advocates for NFL teams while the league begins to own the networks.

Maybe I’m just an old man yelling from the porch, but integrity used to matter. We trusted the voice on the call to be objective. With the latest bending of rules, I hope it doesn’t take a breach that destroys that trust.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. To stay updated, sign up for our newsletters and get the latest information delivered straight to your inbox.

Why Nick Kostos Is Betting on a Long Term Payoff With Westwood One Sports

John Mamola
-
0
Why Nick Kostos Is Betting on a Long Term Payoff With Westwood One Sports

The final quarter of 2025 was eventful for Nick Kostos, co-host of You Better You Bet on the BetMGM Network. After signing a contract extension in August, the plan was to continue building on the momentum the program had generated over the past six years. Those plans shifted abruptly when Audacy and Cumulus Media announced a merger of the BetMGM Network and Infinity Sports Network into a single entity.

“I did not know that this [the formation of Westwood One Sports] was coming,” said Kostos when asked if he anticipated changes when he signed his extension in August of 2025. “One of my goals is to make You Better You Bet as broadly appealing as possible to as many people as possible. So, I’ve been preparing for this without knowing it’s coming for a significant period of time.”

When the merger was announced in October of 2025, uncertainty surrounded which talent would remain from both the Infinity Sports Network and BetMGM Network. For Kostos, that uncertainty was brief. It quickly became public that You Better You Bet would move to Westwood One Sports, joining Jim Rome as the talent announced at the time.

“I was told basically around the same time all the news came down,” said Kostos. “There was no real negotiation, which is totally fine. At the time, I’m doing afternoon drive on the East Coast, and now Jim Rome is going to do that timeslot. I have as high an opinion of myself as anybody. But I’m not going to argue that Jim Rome shouldn’t do that timeslot. He’s a living legend in this industry.”

When the opportunity arose to move from afternoons to 9 a.m.–12 p.m. Eastern Time, Kostos viewed it as a “no brainer.” Conversations about joining Westwood One Sports were brief and direct, but they carried added weight. The move involved not only a new timeslot, but also a transition to a solo show.

“I really enjoyed co-hosting for years, whether it was with Ken Barkley or Femi Abebefe. The work I’ve been doing since I was hired to host You Better You Bet in 2019, and certainly over the past couple of football seasons, has been preparing me for this role,” noted Kostos. “I am very confident in my ability to put on a great solo show. This is something that I always knew I could do, and do well.”

A Fresh Opportunity

Joining Westwood One Sports also presents Kostos with the opportunity to reach a broader audience. The merged network offers wider affiliate distribution than the BetMGM Network, expanding the show’s potential reach.

Kostos, best known for coining the phrase “wagertainment,” has gradually evolved his content approach. In the show’s early years, You Better You Bet focused heavily on betting angles.

Over time, he recognized that a sports betting-only focus limited broader appeal, particularly among listeners who do not actively seek betting content. Those adjustments, Kostos believes, better positioned the show to connect with Westwood One Sports’ audience.

“You Better You Bet with Nick Kostos is a traditional sports radio show that also talks about sports betting,” explained Kostos. “Candidly, the distribution of Westwood One Sports is superior to what we had previously. More people are listening to and watching the show.”

While sports betting content has become less dominant, Kostos does not see it fully disappearing.

“Sports betting will always be part of the fabric of who I am and what I do professionally. It will always be a part of You Better You Bet,” said Kostos. “I also need to be able to make it for listeners of Westwood One Sports who don’t bet. I must cater to that person’s needs in the same way that I’m trying to cater to the needs of someone who is looking to place a wager. Trying to toe that line is something I feel we’ve done successfully and is a major goal of mine moving forward.”

Being Bold, Being Different

Westwood One Sports unveiled its weekday lineup in early December, less than two months after announcing the network’s creation. Cumulus Media senior vice president of sports audience and content Bruce Gilbert first hired Armen Williams as executive director of programming. Together, they added Drake C. Toll for morning drive and ESPN Chicago’s Chris Bleck and Adam Abdalla for middays.

The network now features the youngest daytime lineup among fellow syndicators ESPN Radio, FOX Sports Radio, and Westwood One Sports. Kostos believes the combination of youth and experienced leadership support could influence how networks approach content moving forward.

“Do I think there is a place for a network to use talent that may not be as well-known on the national scale, but that programmers believe have a chance to get there? Of course. I don’t think that’s a bad thing,” noted Kostos. “Do I think this is a good thing for the [radio] industry? I do. It’s up to us to make sure that it works.”

In a release announcing the lineup, Gilbert said Westwood One Sports features diverse and passionate voices committed to covering major sports stories through opinions, expert analysis, and fan interaction. The network aims to meet fans where they are, including within the digital creator economy.

From early in his career, Kostos has focused on building both traditional and digital audiences. While some of his peers hesitated, he aggressively pursued online growth.

“Digital is a full-time job that you have in addition to whatever show you’re doing. You can yell at a cloud all you want and not like using social media. That’s fine, and you don’t have to like it,” explained Kostos. “To give yourself the best chance for success, you must be able to use these platforms, even if you don’t want to.”

Kostos prioritizes quality over perfection, from digital strategy to guest booking. He credits his executive producer Bill Zimmerman for helping elevate You Better You Bet into a flagship program on Westwood One Sports.

“The thing that I am concerned about is making the show as good as possible. When the show is over, I want to feel that satisfaction that the program was awesome. That’s what I’m chasing every day,” said Kostos. “If we do that, I think we’re going to win.”

Reflecting While Looking Ahead

One week into the show’s launch on Westwood One Sports, Kostos reflected on a challenging transition that occurred over the past several months. The final quarter of 2025 brought opportunity amid uncertainty, as unfortunately others faced more difficult outcomes.

He looks back on his final months at the BetMGM Network with empathy and gratitude. Balancing excitement with emotion, Kostos believes he handled the transition well.

“I did the best I could at the time. It was not always easy navigating some of the emotions of the moment,” explained Kostos. “I feel a ton of empathy for the people who were affected by this, and I root for all of them. I hope they all do very well moving forward, in the same way that I hope to do well moving forward myself.”

The goal remains unchanged for Kostos: entertain, inform, and laugh, with sports betting along the way. It’s a direction he has no intention of abandoning anytime soon while planting his flag with Westwood One Sports.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. To stay updated, sign up for our newsletters and get the latest information delivered straight to your inbox.

The Industry According To….Jeffrey Naumann, Jeffrey Naumann Promotion

Keith Cunningham
-
0
The Industry According To….Jeffrey Naumann, Jeffrey Naumann Promotion

Thank you for checking out ‘The Industry According To’. This series runs each Tuesday, and features radio and record industry executives, managers, programmers, talent, artists, and professionals from all areas of the business world. To be considered as a future guest, email me at keithblackboxgroup@gmail.com.

Today we hear from one of the OGs from the label and artist promotion side of the industry, Jeffrey Naumann.

Jeffrey was working records before many in today’s circles were born. He’s witnessed everything from payola to backstage brawls, knows how the past has shaped today, and has some thoughts on what’s coming next.

Before we dive in, Jeffrey has been less vocal lately, as he spends most of his time being the caregiver for his wife, Klavdiya. They’ve set-up a GoFundMe to help cover the big costs, so if you’ve ever crossed paths with Jeffrey, as most have, he’d appreciate anything you can do to help. Here’s the link to the GoFundMe page.

Culture Movers: Then & Now

Keith: You worked records when radio moved culture, not just playlists. What did radio understand about the audiences in the ‘80s and ‘90s that today’s industry has forgotten?

Jeffrey: Phone requests for songs. More listener participation. Creative promotions were a big part of both radio and records. Not anymore. Radio took more chances on “controversial songs like “I Touch Myself” Divinyls, “Walk on the Wild Side” Lou Reed. Too many lyrical edits. I had a programmer say he needs the word “ass” removed. The culture is too politically correct now but music isn’t designed to be politically correct, especially Rock. Songs about what is happening now will probably not get airplay because they may offend someone. And you know what I mean.

Payola

Keith: It’s no secret, back in the day if a label wanted to have a #1 on its hands, it would cost a lot. Payola was very much “the thing” for a long stretch of history. While you probably never made it to that dance, what is the craziest payola story you remember hearing about — a demand, an arrangement for airplay, etc.?

Jeffrey: Too many stories to list. Here are a couple. A programmer told my female promotion director — “if you want me to add “Candy” by Iggy Pop, show me your t**s.” She called me in tears. I told her to hire a stripper and play the song during her “dance”. The record was added. I was also asked by a programmer to buy him a 3-piece suit for an add. I hate this part of this business.

Today’s Airplay Chart

Keith: How important are today’s airplay charts, and why?

Jeffrey: Unfortunately, the only chart that is left that most pay attention to is Medibase. Much of the chart is based on overnight airplay. Some stations like Octane might jack up the rotation of a song to get it familiar, then back it down to a normal rotation. This might show up as a spin drop and many chart watchers might think the record is over and drop it.

The same might happen if a station does specialty programing and doesn’t play currents during the week. Same result. Because of all the variables that factor into today’s chart, I think your ears, gut, and knowing what your audience wants and likes are the best charts.

Physical to Digital to Streaming

Keith: You’ve seen the models for music sales and artist compensation change — from vinyl to cassettes, DVDs to single downloads, and streams. Which “new model at the time” was most overhyped… and has streaming just changed everything?

Jeffrey: I don’t think any of these physical models were overhyped because they were the state of the art at their time. Vinyl has made a huge return in popularity. I think streaming has reduced people to just listening to songs and not the body of work from a full album. Concept Albums like Tommy, Quadrophenia, Dark Side of the Moon etc. might never happen in today’s music listening habits. 

Access or Survival

Keith: For labels, hiring independent promoters used to ensure PD access and a chart position (if the song was good enough). How has the role of independent promoter changed today that most outsiders never see or understand?

Jeffrey: Most of the independent promotion people were successful record execs when they were at labels. Independent promoters that last and succeed are true veterans with deep knowledge of the business and radio promotion itself, along with strong relationships that were cultivated over years of mutually beneficial work. And those are the keys, “relationships” and “experience.” There are fewer PDs and fewer label reps – so getting airplay is more difficult. It takes someone with experience…someone who can actually get a PD to answer the phone or respond to an email and take a song seriously.

Labels vs. Independents

Keith: You’ve worked both inside that walls of major-labels and also as an outside warrior on the independent front. What’s the most common non-deliverable promise labels tell artists — and what’s the biggest misbelief artists eventually learn?

Jeffrey: I have always been painfully honest with artists and set realistic expectations when taking a song to radio. For example, Lenny Kravitz was very frustrated with the results of radio support. I told him to give me a straight-ahead rock song without the funk, horns etc. He came into my office a few months later with a cassette of a new song. It was “Are You Gonna Go My Way.”  I was blown away by this track and replied to Lenny “that’s what I wanted and believe that it’s is a number 1 rock song.”  It went to #1.

His follow up from his next album was the song “Rock and Roll is Dead”. Ugh. I was asked in a marketing meeting my thoughts. I replied, “I don’t think this is a hit.” They were not happy with my response. I said I’d make sure this gets played everywhere. The week it went to Rock radio, it was #1 most added and by the way, it got more in one week than any other song that whole year. Four or five weeks later, I got a call from the PD of KUPD. He said he was dropping the song. He went on to say, not only is this the worst testing song I’m playing but it is worst testing song we have ever played at KUPD. Wow, I was right.

As other stations got their research, it was the same story. The record was dropped everywhere. Lenny called and said I was the one person at the Label and management that was right. A promotion person’s real job is to get enough of radio to play it to determine if it’s truly a hit – because they aren’t all hits.

The Gatekeepers of Past & Present

Keith: Every era had its gatekeepers. It was once just the PDs, then it was RVPs or SVPS, now it’s algorithms. Which system was hardest to break into, and how hard is it to make a career on today’s model?

Jeffrey: When I started in the music business Radio and Record people did this for their passion with music. DJs were very involved with their listeners and were live every day. Radio was a joy. Jocks were stars, sharing their passion every time they spoke on air. Now our business is very different. Most DJ’s are voice tracked with very little connection, not putting listeners on the air, not airing callers with requests.

The Labels for the most part have eliminated their promotion field jobs. Instead, they hire an independent like me. I still look at myself as a promotion man. I certainly don’t claim stations and I don’t work differently now than when I worked for labels. So many of the same problems still exist, we’re just trying to get through different gates but with far less people, and each of them doing more jobs

What Data Matters Most

Keith: You see all the data; you know the marketing campaigns and synch placements that are coming. When you’re working a record or song you believe in — what data point or story do you think truly means the most?

Jeffrey: For me, it can be several things, but it comes down to getting someone curious enough to listen to the whole song, not just up to the chorus, and not just once – a few times. Even the biggest hits often take 2 or 3 full listens to sink in. I don’t BS people, I shoot straight and I have to gather the information, whatever it is, and find ways to get programmers curious enough to really listen to the song.

Hits & Misses

Keith: I don’t expect you to name names, but you’ve worked thousands of songs in your day.  What percentage of them — going in — did you know had very little chance of breaking big, but you had to do your best anyway?

Jeffrey: We have all had that problem. I like to keep my credibility and not over hype songs I might not believe in. I’ll try to get a lot of opinions on the music, and push for tests on songs. My job is to get airplay so the audience can give their feedback. The PD and I can both like or dislike a song, but the broader audience will determine what breaks big or not, as long as we let them hear it.

Keith: Is there a song or two that you thought wouldn’t go anywhere that surprised you and is still around and kicking today?

Jeffrey: Lenny Kravitz “Fly Away,” I was wrong on that one.

What’s next?

Keith: You’re exposed to so many up-and-coming artists. Do you see some legit superstars on the horizon we should know about?

Jeffrey: Dayseeker comes to mind, I’d keep an eye on them. I work a lot of bands with huge potential, like The Haunt, Velvet Chains, Dead Sugar, Lines of Loyalty, Lylvc,to name a few. They have strong early success as baby bands. I hope they are the stars of the future.

The Uncomfortable Truth

Keith: What’s the thing about today’s music industry that no one wants to say out loud — but everyone in the room knows is true?

Jeffrey: Bought airplay. Many of the big radio groups do national programming for their stations. All markets are different and the PD should make the decision about what would  work best. The cost of running a campaign to maximize the record is absolutely fu*k*d.

The One Story

Keith: Before you go, what’s your best must tell story: success, nightmare, or pure madness.

Jeffrey: Success story: Mister Mister “Broken Wings” – I was the only person at RCA that heard this as a smash. With a lot of passion and hard work getting airplay the song got PHONES everywhere it was played, every time it was played, and RCA finally said, maybe Naumann is right. They started working the song. It went to #1. The follow up, “Kyrie” also went to #1. The album went Platinum.

Worst nightmare: Lou “Happy face” Reed. I always loved his music. When RCS resigned Lou, he immediately sued them for counting the miserable Metal Machine Music as a single record. There were 4 sides of white noise. Maybe the worst album of all time. RCA had no interest in working Lou Reed. I found a song called “I Love You Susann.” Again, I went out and locked my market up on this song. My present was to spend a day taking Lou to radio.

My first stop was KROQ with Jed the Fish. There were fans in the lobby looking to meet him and get his autograph. There was a girl with a pictorial book she wanted him to sign. I showed Lou some pictures, including his Rock N Roll Animal album which was the first time I ever saw him live. What a GREAT show and band. He pulled me aside and said, “Don’t ever show me a picture of my past again”.

The day didn’t get better. He was a true sour puss. I was so disappointed that day putting Lou Reeds music back on the radio. Thankless prick.

Pure Madness: Taking Bruce Cockburn and his band to a Denver restaurant and getting into a food fight. Much like the 3 Stooges 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.

Deconstructing the Myth That Social Media Followers Means News/Talk Radio Success

Peter Thiele
-
0
Deconstructing the Myth That Social Media Followers Means News/Talk Radio Success

Social media is a big promotional tool for radio hosts, right? Or is it?

I was speaking with a hiring manager at the BNM Summit a while ago. This manager was explaining to me that they had recently hired a new talk show host, and one of the key factors in hiring this individual was their social media footprint. Seems like a decent ingredient in making a hire. This individual essentially came from the YouTube social media space, which would seem like a good barometer, right?

I am going to be a tad bit skeptical on that.

There have been several hosts who have reached the syndicated realm with practically zero experience hosting a radio show. Using social media as your deciding factor is a huge mistake. Now, I am not saying that using a potential host’s social media following as part of the hiring process is a bad idea. I think the track record is not a successful barometer.

I have had affiliate people brag about a new host’s following as the lone measurement of whether the host should be added to my lineup. It is not. Does the person execute compelling radio, or are they a soundbite machine that is successful on Instagram? Reels and TikToks are great, but the average viewer watches only a small part of a short video. Can the person hold my attention? Will the ability to generate clicks, likes, and shares translate to radio?

If you are a hiring manager for a local host, unless that person is a known and successful commodity in your market, a social media footprint is meaningless. Speaking of the known or well-liked local radio host, I have found that the majority of listeners will automatically connect that talent with the previous station. This is especially important to note if you are in a diary market. There will be a short sales bump, and when the result is not overwhelming, sales will slump.

Frequently, stations overpay. Yes, even today, for that known local favorite. In my first programming job, the station owner highly urged hiring people outside of the market. There were a few reasons why. He felt that the in-market host had already failed or proven that they were not a ratings and revenue winner. I didn’t understand that at the time, but today I do. He was 100% right. Getting out-of-market talent will automatically connect with your brand alone. I like that. A large social media presence will have zero impact on the station’s ratings and revenue.

Your company may have social media goals, which is a great idea and smart. Considering the challenges of monetizing a personality on social media, and also recognizing that the social media platforms are not cooperative with radio in their algorithms to make successful posts, is it worth the time? Would your personality’s time be better served creating fresh podcast content, show prep, or personal appearances? I really think that concentrating on great radio and being in public is essential. Doing great radio. Imagine being the must-listen destination to your community. This should be the priority.

Social media is a different type of media. Fitting content that is not designed for clicks, likes, and shares, and hoping for the best is not a helpful use of time. If your company wants a certain number of posts per day, consider the following: are you demanding too many posts per day? I read a recent piece about how more than three posts a day can work against your page. Using social media as it is designed to work is important. Look at very successful accounts like MrBeast, Jillz Foods, The King of DIY, and more to see what is connecting. Repurposing complete shows is not going to work. Having a special video reel that you can promote will certainly have a better feel.

I tried something that is working very well on my stations. We stopped posting complete shows for my station’s morning show. I asked the producer to post important interviews and fun segments individually. We are putting up smaller segments, and the numbers are mushrooming without extra promotion. I believe it is easier for listeners to locate on the app or website. The listener may have joined an interview at the end, and now it is easier to find.

Social media is not the all-purpose indicator for news/talk success. Making a new hire can be a stressful event. Being fair to any new host, you likely will need 18 to 24 months to determine if the hire was right. With the revenue headwinds faced by many radio operators, you don’t want to make a mistake. Great companies, brand managers, and market managers occasionally miss. Here is what you don’t want to do. If the show is good but is not catching on, it just may take a while. If the show is terrible and the host isn’t connecting with the audience, and especially with clients, it will never work.

As an industry, we are often asking what is next. Many amazing hosts rubbed the audience the wrong way right at the beginning. Don’t be too impatient. Rush Limbaugh was fired by radio stations that gladly took his syndicated show years later. If the show is great, stand by the talent.

Social media following can be used as a tool. If there is no revenue tied to something, focus on ways to increase the bottom line.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. To stay updated, sign up for our newsletters and get the latest information delivered straight to your inbox.

Grading the NBC News, CBS News, and ABC News Interviews of Marco Rubio

Garrett Searight
-
0
Grading the NBC News, CBS News, and ABC News Interviews of Marco Rubio

There was a rare occurrence during the “Sunday shows” window this weekend, as Secretary of State Marco Rubio appeared on NBC News, CBS News, and ABC News.

It just doesn’t happen that often that Meet the Press, Face the Nation, and This Week with George Stephanopoulos have the same guests.

So, what better time than now to compare apples to apples and take a look at how each interview — Kristen Welker, Margaret Brennan, and Stephanopoulos — handled their discussions with the man of the hour.

ABC News

Stephanopoulos is a frequent target of those on the political right for his past history working for the Clinton Administration.

So, I think it’s fair to say Rubio’s guard was slightly up with Stephanopoulos. Not to say that it wouldn’t be a recurring theme throughout the Sunday morning political affairs gauntlet he undertook.

Stephanopoulos began his interview with a slightly different approach than the others did, asking what legal authority the United States had to “run Venezuela” — directly quoting President Donald Trump in the process.

One of my favorite attributes of George Stephanopoulos was on display in the follow-up after — and this will become a theme — Marco Rubio failed to answer the question.

Stephanopoulos’ give a damn is busted when interviewees don’t answer his questions. He doesn’t care if the viewer thinks he looks like a jerk by asking the question again. Truthfully, I like the somewhat passive-aggressive nature in which he asked the follow-up — stating “Let me ask the question again” before reiterating the question. It lets the viewer know “Hey, if you weren’t paying attention, this dude just completely sidestepped what I asked. And if you didn’t catch it, I’m gonna put him on notice that I know that he knows he didn’t answer. So we’ll do it again. He wasted your time, I didn’t.”

It is safe to say that Rubio didn’t like the line of questioning from Stephanopoulos. Because he tried to assert dominance by stating “I’ve explained it twice, I’ll explain it to you one more time.” Which is funny because he didn’t answer the question either time he “explained it.” Had he said “I got a Chick-fil-A sandwich last night. It was good. Pickles got hot while it was in that little foil pouch, though. That stunk. Nobody wants hot pickles,” it would have been as close to the “explanation” he gave to the first two questions from the This Week host.

To be transparent, I could feel my blood pressure rising while watching the interview because of the insistence of Marco Rubio’s insistence on not answering the questions asked by Stephanopoulos, and then acting incredulously when the anchor reiterated that he hadn’t answered at all.

Luckily, Stephanopoulos was much calmer than I. He remained professional, asking succinctly-worded questions of the Secretary of State, that let him no choice but to either answer the question or make a very clear sidestep.

The one knock I’ll make against the ABC News anchor is that he asked several close-ended questions. He really opened the door for Marco Rubio to give him blunt “yes” or “no” answers. Which could have brought the discussion to a standstill.

Luckily for Stephanopoulos, Rubio had clearly undergone several hours of training to hammer specific talking points and never took the exit ramp to answer with one-word responses.

Grade: B+

NBC News

Welker started her interview with what she called “the big picture question: Is the United States at war with Venezuela?”

I’m a firm believer in coming out gun’s-a-blazin’, especially when you have the Secretary of State on the other side of the screen, after the nation just captured the leader of another country.

I don’t know, however, if that’s the best question to lead with. Because, I think even the most casual observer would likely say “No, we’re not at war with Venezuela.”

And Rubio did, too, scoffing at the question.

Now, her second question is the best question of the interview, when she point-blank asked Rubio, “Are you running Venezuela right now?” Furthermore, she held Rubio’s feet to the fire when he spoke for more than 90 seconds and never even remotely approached answering the question.

So, she reframed it. And nailed Rubio down by asking, “Is it you? Is it Secretary (Pete) Hegseth? Who will be running the country, specifically?” When he tried to skirt the question again, Welker badgered him for an answer, questioning, “Are you involved in that?” when Rubio tried to make a laundry list of those who are briefed about the oversight of the South American country.

For brevity’s sake, I’ll stop there. This is a major news story. There are very few times in an interviewer’s career when they get this opportunity. Kristen Welker rose to the occasion for NBC News and Meet the Press in a big way.

Grade: A+

CBS News

Now, throughout each of the interviews, it was clear that Secretary of State Marco Rubio would rather be preparing for a colonoscopy than answering questions about the operation to capture Maduro.

That was particularly on display with Margaret Brennan on Face the Nation.

After he really didn’t answer the first two questions, Brennan questioned why the U.S. had left the majority of the Maduro regime intact, while only arresting Maduro and his wife.

I saw a lot of pushback and mockery of this question from Brennan on social media, largely from conservative influencers and media members. But those reactions have a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation: it’s a legitimate question. If reason for why the operation was approved was to topple the regime, is only removing the figurehead enough? That’s the essence of the question from Brennan.

Now, where she misstepped was her follow-up when Rubio scoffed at the question, dismissing it as absurd. Rubio’s response largely hinged upon “well, the Democrats are already complaining about this one operation, how would we pull off five of them?”

So, I think the follow-ups could be one of two options: you could either lean into the contentiousness and get mildly sarcastic and ask “Is the United States’ foreign policy influenced by how Democrats will react to military operations?” which likely doesn’t help open Rubio up to sharing any uncovered information or new ground — but would almost assuredly lead to a viral moment — or you could ask the more logical rebuttal, “If removing a regime that cozies up to narcoterrorists and foreign adversaries was the goal, do you feel like you’ve accomplished that goal when senior members of that regime are still in place and at large?”

That puts Rubio in a box that he can’t wiggle out of. Unless you let him.

In my opinion, I thought Brennan was too accommodating of Rubio. While he scoffed at her questions, she didn’t do a great job of steadying the ship and getting the question that I think she was trying to get across through to him. I also don’t know that Rubio especially wanted to field any of those questions, either.

But hindsight’s 20/20. It’s easy to judge after the fact.

One quick side note is that I usually really enjoy Margaret Brennan’s interviews because she isn’t a “remarks” interviewer. She doesn’t spend a ton of trying to impress her guests with her knowledge, she spends the time trying to get their knowledge. And she, at times, was guilty of spending just a bit too much time getting to her questions with set-up statements.

Those are the only real knocks I had. Despite the criticism from the online right, which I mentioned I don’t think is 100% fair, I thought this was a solid interview.

Grade: B

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. To stay updated, sign up for our newsletters and get the latest information delivered straight to your inbox.

A Guide To Reviving Coaching for Radio Talent and Programmers

Kevin Robinson
-
0
A Guide To Reviving Coaching for Radio Talent and Programmers

Whatever happened to coaching in radio? True coaching is a lost art and practice that has been cast aside because of a lack of coaching talent in our buildings. If you’re a programmer, you should want to consistently coach your talent. If you’re talent, you should be hungry to be coached.

Part of the problem for talent is the name – often referred to as “Air-Checking.” It was a term that felt like audio terrorism some years back. Talent would often get ambushed by their programmer, who had freshly pulled a day-of-the-week cassette off the wall, secured by a phantom skimmer. The process struck fear in talent. The only thing on their mind during their session was the time and location of the exit.

That process is nearly akin to the dreaded “hotline” call from an angry programmer to their shell-shocked talent. Talent – and some coaches – avoid this process for a number of reasons.

Judgement Fears

The first and easiest reason to understand. Radio talent often fears negative evaluation from coaches or worries about falling short of expectations. There’s also a sense of a desire for perfection. Emerging talent may set unrealistically high standards for themselves, creating unnecessary pressure and performance anxiety.

Confidence

Uncertainty about the content or delivery can significantly heighten nervousness. We need – collectively – to change the mindset. Air-checking and coaching are mixed together. However, they are far from the same thing.

Confusing the two can stunt radio talent and create a negative culture. Think of the air-check as a mirror. It’s a clear and uncomfortable playback of what content was put on their shows. Audio IS a necessary tool to improve talent performance—identifying strengths, habits, and missed timing.

Conversely, coaching is a conversation that follows a contextual, process-driven, forward-looking approach rooted in trust, where a leader helps a broadcaster turn awareness into growth.

One is about past performance, while the other builds the future career of your talent. Brand growth relies on both, but understanding the difference is crucial. Learning to coach – and learning to receive coaching – can be assimilated from non-broadcast sources.

Several times over the years, on the Barrett Media platform, we’ve quoted lauded sport psychologist Bob Rotella when discussing learning to coach and be coached. Rotella’s 10 Rules include:

Have a routine to lean on

Patience is routine. Build a relationship with talent and your leadership. Set calendar appointments and hold sessions without distractions.

Embrace your personality

We often recruit and coach programmers to put their personality into the presentation effort. You entered this rocky road we call “a radio career” because of the FUN it brought into your life. Even with Adult Formats, we’re in Show Business!

Find someone who believes in you

We’ve preached this for years. Find a mentor (coach) to bounce your ideas off. This could be someone in your format who’s highly successful, a morning show talent to add to your network, a programmer in your company, or even us!

Another superior source comes from the book The Art of Performance: The Surprising Science Behind Greatness by global strategist Jeroen De Flander.

Here are just a few of his philosophies and how they translate to broadcast coaching:

Great On-Air Performance Is Built, Not Discovered

In radio, we rarely discover “natural talent.” Strong on-air performance, whether delivering a morning show break or calling a high school football game, is the result of repeatable skills, not personality alone. Coaches who focus only on style miss the science behind consistency.

Customize your coaching to the individual and ensure they receive the message so the talent can duplicate excellence daily.

Practice – yes, PRACTICE

When we suggest that talent in broadcasting practice, the look on their face is often one of confusion. Especially with new ensemble morning shows, we encourage the programmer to place talent in a studio and practice so they hit the ground with polish. Not grow during a live show. Rehearsing doesn’t prepare talent for live conditions. Timing, interruptions, distractions, and missed cues will inevitably happen.

Air-checking isn’t coaching. Talent must practice performing along with consistent review of their performance.

Frame Stress as Readiness

Top broadcasters don’t eliminate nerves. According to De Flander, they reinterpret them. Elevated heart rate becomes energy. Timing must perform with urgency. De Flander preaches stress preparation rather than stress avoidance.

Teach talent how to use adrenaline in a live and voice-tracked setting instead of fighting it.

Focused Attention – The Most Important On-Air Skill

Great air talent focuses outward, reflecting their audience. We preach, “Be the moon – not the sun.” Reflect the light of the listener. Focus on the listener, the story, and the moment. Unfocused, insecure performers think inward: How do I sound? Did I mess that up? What will the PD think?

Coach attention, not just mechanics.

Consistency Beats Brilliance

Listeners don’t listen for perfection. They need reliability. Don’t chase occasional greatness. Consistency builds trust and listener loyalty.

Reward repeatable execution more than rare flashes.

Create Psychological Safety

Performance improves when talent is allowed to experiment and make mistakes. Fear-based coaching lowers creativity.

Your tone as a coach directly affects on-air outcomes.

Great performance isn’t solely about talent. Superior performance is about training the brain to function optimally. Anyone can improve by understanding how performance works and applying evidence-based strategies consistently. THAT process is the most important thing coaches do – people development.

When coaching in radio, take one critical issue at a time. Throwing several items at the student only confuses the result – like a reverse domino effect. If you’ve suffered through a golf, music, or improv lesson, you know the feeling. Once you’ve conquered one issue, move slowly to the next.

Custom brand building is a messy process. Somewhere on your journey, wheels are bound to loosen, bringing you off course. Having a framework to guide you brings you closer to achieving daily excellence.

It’s our job – as coaches and mentors – to give talent a safe space in coaching, know that mistakes will happen, and build their confidence in the process.

As on-air talent, you should expect coaching to be a supportive space. A consistent process where mistakes are part of your craft and confidence is built through the process.

Our way of coaching talent is only ONE of many approaches. Styles vary, and our peers enrich the process with their philosophies.

Coaching is vital to the survival of our business. Jump on THAT train the first week of 2026 if you’re not already coaching. That means – now.

Remove the name “Air-Checking.” Air-checks without coaching are tactical nitpicking sessions. Real progress happens when talent feels heard, challenged, and supported without judgment.

If we want to recruit and retain quality talent, we have to stop treating air-checking as an end process and treat coaching as the focus. Coaching is where we grow confidence, creativity, and ultimately, the elusive “great radio” we all wish for.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. To stay updated, sign up for our newsletters and get the latest information delivered straight to your inbox.

Meet the Press Interview with Marco Rubio Tops ABC News, CBS News on YouTube and TikTok

BNM Staff
-
0
Meet the Press Interview with Marco Rubio Tops ABC News, CBS News on YouTube and TikTok

NBC News saw strong digital engagement Sunday as Meet the Press featured Secretary of State Marco Rubio following the military action in Venezuela that led to the capture of Nicolas Maduro.

The appearance capped a morning in which Rubio also sat for interviews on ABC News and CBS News in the same timeslot.

In total, the Secretary of State spent more than 18 minutes with NBC News, 13 minutes with CBS News to begin Face the Nation, and 14 minutes with ABC News during the Sunday morning political affairs programs.

Across platforms, NBC led in total views, outpacing its broadcast rivals by wide margins. On YouTube, Meet the Press topped one million views for the Rubio segment alone. That figure topped ABC News’ This Week with George Stephanopoulos, which drew about 340,000 views. CBS News’ Face the Nation trailed further, finishing with roughly 184,000 YouTube views, as of this publication.

Short-form video told a similar story. Meet the Press amassed nearly 6 million TikTok views tied to the Rubio interview. CBS News posted 946,600 TikTok views, according to publicly available figures. ABC News utilized a slightly different strategy on the platform, distributing three clips that collectively generated just over 5 million views from those videos.

Full linear television ratings figures for Meet the Press, Face the Nation, and This Week with George Stephanopoulos are not yet available. They will be released by Nielsen Media Research later this week.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. To stay updated, sign up for our newsletters and get the latest information delivered straight to your inbox.

Dan Bongino Teases Talk Radio/Podcast Return: ‘We Will Have Something For You Soon’

BNM Staff
-
0
Dan Bongino Teases Talk Radio/Podcast Return: ‘We Will Have Something For You Soon’

After announcing plans to depart the FBI, former nationally syndicated news/talk radio and podcast host Dan Bongino has hinted at a return to the medium.

Bongino announced late last year that he would step down from his role as the Deputy Director of the FBI after joining the bureau in March of last year.

To join the FBI, Bongino gave up his news/talk radio show with Westwood One and his popular podcast. Then 105.9 WMAL host Vince Coglianese assumed the duties for both of those programs in Bongino’s absence.

On Monday, Dan Bongino shared a message on social media teasing at a possible return.

“Working in the administration was the experience of a lifetime,” Bongino said. “I’ll have some announcements coming up … A couple of things: Thank you for your interest in the show and its return date. We will have something for you soon.”

Bongino posted a follow up tweet later, adding, “As we get ready to make some announcements about the future of the show, I also want to warn the haters and the zeroes – we’ve been at this a long time. We live for this stuff. This isn’t our first, second or tenth rodeo. We’ve seen a lot dipshits come and go. We revel in making you angry enough to show your asses. It’s glorious.”

Bongino’s comments come after President Donald Trump shared that he believed the Deputy Director of the FBI would like to return to hosting his show as part of the reason for his departure from the bureau.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. To stay updated, sign up for our newsletters and get the latest information delivered straight to your inbox.

Detroit Sports Broadcaster Pat Caputo Reveals Cancer Diagnosis

BSM Staff
-
1
Detroit Sports Broadcaster Pat Caputo Reveals Cancer Diagnosis

Pat Caputo, a longtime Detroit sports columnist and radio personality, announced Monday that he has been diagnosed with stage 4 pancreatic cancer, describing the disease as a “death sentence.” The news came in a post on his X account, where he also referenced recent serious health complications that required intensive care.

Caputo, who built his career covering sports in the Detroit area, has been absent from both his writing and radio appearances in recent months. He last published a column on November 7 and has not been on 97.1 The Ticket since early December. Caputo contributes to the station’s Evening Sports program, and was a mainstay at The Oakland Press from 1983 until 2020.

“For those wondering where I’ve been: I have been diagnosed with Stage 4 pancreatic cancer, commonly referred to as a ‘death sentence,’ and had two other serious ailments which put me in ICU for several days. It was sudden. I’ve literally been on my back for weeks. Bless you all,” Caputo wrote.

Caputo did not disclose any additional details.

Colleagues and listeners immediately responded on social media, offering support and well wishes. Caputo’s decades-long presence in Detroit sports media has earned him a reputation as a passionate and knowledgeable voice, covering teams, players, and sports events with a mix of insight and personal perspective that resonated with fans.

Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. To stay updated, sign up for our newsletters and get the latest information delivered straight to your inbox.

1...293294295...2,645Page 294 of 2,645