Home Blog Page 35

MIX 100.5 Pairs Anna & Raven Mornings With Bradley Ryan Afternoons

0

MIX 100.5/KPSI in Palm Springs has a new morning show. The nationally syndicated Anna & Raven Show officially launched on the station Monday, June 15.

What We Know: Connoisseur Media’s MIX 100.5 has added the Anna & Raven Show to its weekday morning lineup. As a result, longtime station personality and Program Director Bradley Ryan moves to afternoon drive. Ryan had previously held the morning slot for several years. The show airs on KPSI, one of eight Connoisseur-owned stations serving the Coachella Valley.

What They Said: Operations Manager Todd Violette framed the move as a win for both listeners and advertisers. “Anna & Raven are a fantastic addition to MIX 100.5 and bring a fresh, entertaining morning show that fits perfectly with our audience,” he said. “Combined with Bradley Ryan’s continued presence in afternoons, we’re creating a lineup that strengthens the station throughout the day.” Regional VP Sommer Frisk added that the pairing gives the market its best possible daily lineup.

What Remains Unclear: The specific ratings strategy behind the timing of this change has not been disclosed. It’s also unclear whether Ryan’s Program Director duties continue alongside his new afternoon role. Additionally, no details were shared about potential local content elements within the syndicated morning show.

What It Means: This move reflects a growing trend of mid-size markets leaning on national syndication to anchor mornings. However, MIX 100.5 is betting that pairing Anna & Raven with a trusted local voice in afternoons creates a competitive advantage. For Bradley Ryan, the shift offers a new on-air chapter after years in mornings. Overall, Connoisseur is signaling confidence in a hybrid strategy — national reach in the AM, local credibility in PM.

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.

Lesley Stahl’s 60 Minutes Extension Is a Band-Aid, Not a Fix

0

Lesley Stahl isn’t going anywhere — at least not for the next two years. The veteran 60 Minutes correspondent has signed a contract extension that runs through 2028, according to Status’ Oliver Darcy. She joins holdovers Bill Whitaker and Jon Wertheim as the only correspondents currently locked in for next season. It’s a deal that brings a sliver of stability to a newsmagazine that’s spent this entire year in turmoil.

Four correspondents won’t be back. CBS fired Scott Pelley, Cecilia Vega, and Sharyn Alfonsi, while Anderson Cooper opted not to renew his deal. That’s half the previous roster gone within a matter of weeks, and it leaves Stahl, Whitaker, and Wertheim to carry the show’s 59th season largely on their own.

Of those three, Stahl is the most interesting case. She’s also been the loudest internal critic of Paramount Skydance’s direction since the merger went through, publicly airing frustrations that most employees keep to themselves. Yet she’s also the most established name on the broadcast, with 35 years on staff. Both of those things are true, and together they make her extension worth a closer look.

A Bench That’s Wearing Thin

Stahl’s deal isn’t a knock on Stahl herself — she’s still doing fantastic work, and nobody disputes that. But she’ll turn 85 during the upcoming season, and that’s usually when a career winds down rather than ramps back up.

The bigger problem sits behind her. Pelley’s firing alone ended a CBS tenure that spanned nearly four decades. Add Vega and Alfonsi’s departures, and it’s clear just how thin the network’s bench really is. Frankly, I’d argue Vega and Alfonsi were part of the solution here, not the problem — but that doesn’t make the roster any deeper today.

For years, people compared a 60 Minutes correspondent chair to a Supreme Court seat: once you got it, it was yours for life. This year proved that’s not actually true. Still, that perception isn’t going away on its own, and it shapes how viewers and potential hires see the brand. CBS News needs younger storytellers on this broadcast, and it needs them now.

Younger Isn’t the Same as Better

This is where Bari Weiss and Nick Bilton risk missing the point entirely. I’ve argued in this space before that Weiss doesn’t fully grasp what makes 60 Minutes tick. Her approach to rebuilding the correspondent pool will test that theory. If the plan is simply to trade veteran names for younger ones, the show loses the thing that’s kept it on air for 58 seasons.

Here’s a prediction, for what it’s worth: Suzy Weiss, Bari’s sister, lands a correspondent role before next season starts. Maybe that happens, maybe it doesn’t. Either way, age isn’t the actual issue here. Whoever fills these chairs needs to tell stories the way Pelley, Cooper, Vega, and Alfonsi did, not just look younger while doing it.

Stahl’s extension buys 60 Minutes some breathing room, and that’s a real asset. However, that time only matters if CBS News spends it wisely. The network needs correspondents who can do what Stahl, Whitaker, and Wertheim have done for decades. They need to take complicated stories and make them impossible to look away from. Otherwise, this extension just delays a reckoning that’s already overdue.

In the short term, Stahl’s deal is good news for 60 Minutes. Even so, it also shines a light on a roster that’s aging fast. The leadership team hasn’t shown it has a plan to fix that. The next two seasons will decide whether this show enters its 60th anniversary as a relic or a relaunch. Right now, that outcome is anyone’s guess.

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.

Should New Podcast Credit Rules Lead To Questions About Radio’s Three Minute Qualifier?

0

Everyone wants credit for the work they put into creating content. From podcasts to every format in radio. Since Nielsen adopted the Portable People Meter (PPM) model for radio measurement, broadcasters have pushed for greater recognition of audience consumption. Just last year, Nielsen adjusted its methodology, moving from a five-minute threshold to a three-minute threshold for quarter-hour credit. The results were immediate. More stations reported larger Average Quarter Hour (AQH) audiences, fueling a broader conversation about radio’s continued value and reach.

For sports radio stations, unfortunately the results of the three-minute qualifier haven’t been great. At least, so far. According to an Inside Radio analysis released earlier this year, sports radio was one of three formats that saw year-over-year share declines from January 2025 to January 2026. The findings covered persons 6+, persons 18-34, and persons 25-54. Nationally, sports radio shares were down 11% among persons 6+, down 12% among persons 18-34, and down 6% among persons 25-54.

In short, sports radio is losing the format battle under a three-minute qualifier which creates a better route to define earning credit. In podcasting, however, the battle over who gets credit remains far less settled.

What exactly qualifies as a podcast play? Should a podcast receive credit the moment a consumer hits play? While radio and podcasting are not identical products—one is live and the other is on-demand—they compete for many of the same ears and advertising dollars. If one medium operates under clearly defined measurement standards, shouldn’t the other?

Let’s define the playing field.

Radio Credit vs Podcast Credit

Nielsen remains the company that determines audience measurement for broadcast radio. It effectively controls the industry currency used to buy and sell terrestrial radio advertising. Nielsen also measures PPM-encoded streaming audio and continues developing solutions for custom-curated and on-demand audio content, including podcasts.

When it comes to radio, the rules are straightforward. Nielsen determines what qualifies for credit.

Podcasting is a different story.

The Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB), the leading digital advertising trade association, develops measurement guidelines intended to create consistency across the podcast industry. Yet despite its influence, the IAB currently does not define what constitutes a “play” in its podcast measurement guidelines.

It’s important to understand that a play is not the same thing as a download. In podcasting, those are two distinct measurements.

Last week, the Alliance for Measurement in Podcasting (AMP) attempted to provide greater clarity on what constitutes a ‘play.’ AMP is a task force aiming to creating a common measurement framework for podcasts. Basically, it’s there to encourage additional advertising investment in podcasting. The group ratified a new framework that includes four consumption-based definitions. Among them a proposed standard for what qualifies as a ‘play.’

An Effective Tease Is All You Need

According to AMP, a podcast play—whether audio or video—should be counted when a consumer listens to or watches 30 seconds of content during a session. That’s it. Thirty seconds of consumption for a product whose average episode length is roughly 41 minutes.

On its face, that’s a positive development for the podcast industry. Standardization has been needed for a very long time. For years, podcast publishers, advertisers, and measurement companies have operated with different interpretations of what audience engagement actually means. Creating a common definition helps establish consistency and credibility.

The challenge is that not everyone is following the same rulebook.

Apple Podcasts, which is not involved with AMP, defines a play as the number of plays on unique devices where play duration exceeds zero seconds. In the words of Aerosmith, “Just Push Play.” YouTube, currently the largest platform for podcast consumption, is also not part of AMP. While many industry observers believe YouTube uses a 30-second threshold for a view or play, the company has never publicly confirmed that standard.

Spotify, however, has embraced a similar approach.

Last week, Spotify announced that podcasts on its platform will only receive a play when at least 30 seconds of content has been consumed. The company explained that its analysis of listener behavior found 30 seconds to be a strong indicator of “genuine engagement” while filtering out accidental starts and other low-intent activity.

Genuine Engagement?

That explanation raises an interesting question for radio.

If 30 seconds is enough to establish “genuine engagement” for an on-demand audio product, why shouldn’t radio at least examine whether its own thresholds remain appropriate?

To be clear, a podcast play and a radio quarter-hour rating are not identical measurements. Comparing them isn’t a perfect apples-to-apples exercise. A podcast play does not measure total listening time, just as quarter-hour credit does not simply measure whether someone sampled content for a total amount of time or listened the entire quarter hour.

But both systems are ultimately trying to answer the same question: Did a consumer intentionally engage with the product?

For years, radio operators argued that the previous five-minute threshold failed to accurately capture modern listening behavior. Nielsen agreed, lowering the requirement to three minutes. The rationale was straightforward: consumer habits had evolved, and measurement needed to evolve with them.

The move produced immediate gains in reported listening because it recognized audience behavior that had previously gone uncredited.

Now the podcast industry appears to be moving in a similar direction. AMP and Spotify have effectively determined that 30 seconds of consumption is enough to signal “genuine engagement.” Whether every platform ultimately adopts that standard remains to be seen. But the conversation has clearly shifted towards establishing a bar for earning credit.

That doesn’t automatically mean radio should follow suit. The mediums are different, the metrics are different, and the business objectives behind the measurements are different.

What it does mean is that radio has a legitimate reason to ask the question.

If a listener intentionally consuming 30 seconds of a podcast can be viewed as “genuine engagement,” then broadcasters are justified in wondering whether three minutes remains the appropriate threshold for measuring their audiences “genuine engagement.” After all, both industries are competing for attention in an increasingly fragmented audio landscape.

Whether Nielsen ever revisits the issue is another conversation entirely. How any further change lowering the threshold could help or hurt sports radio is unknown.

But measurement has always been about assigning value to consumer behavior. The credit every creator/host/talent/business desires. If the podcast industry is willing to recognize 30 seconds of listening as worthy of credit over “genuine engagement,” then radio has every right to examine whether its own standards should evolve as well. Because if “genuine engagement” can be established in half a minute, broadcasters may have a compelling case that earning credit shouldn’t require six times that amount of listening.

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.

New Music Friday Evolves As Spotify Bets On Editorial Personality

0

Spotify has spent years being defined by its algorithm.

That was not an accident. For years, the platform trained listeners to expect personalization. Discover Weekly, Release Radar, Daily Mixes, Daylist, and AI DJ all reinforced the same promise. Spotify knew what you wanted before you did.

At first, that felt like magic. Eventually, however, it started to feel a little too automatic.

The Algorithm Needed a Human Face

Now, Spotify appears to be adjusting the story. It is not abandoning the algorithm, and it is not walking away from personalization, either. Instead, it is adding something the music business has been debating and missing for years — human beings.

Spotify is adding editor-led video recommendations directly into New Music Friday. The move gives listeners a chance to see and hear from the people behind the playlist. It follows The Drop Weekly, which launched last fall. According to Spotify, that editor-driven content has produced more than double the engagement in saves and likes.

That matters because saves and likes are not passive metrics. They are signals of intent. A listener did not just hear a song in the background — they reacted, leaned in, and made a choice.

Discovery Is Becoming More Human

That suggests something important about where music discovery may be heading next. The future may not be algorithm versus human curator. Instead, it may be algorithm plus human context.

Spotify has long been seen as the ultimate machine in music discovery. That is both its strength and its problem. The platform can process massive amounts of listening behavior. It can connect songs, moods, genres, skips, saves, and habits at a scale no human programming department could ever match.

However, music has never been only about matching data points. It is also about taste, timing, story, personality, and trust. That is where human curation still has power.

What Great Curators Actually Do

A great programmer, curator, DJ, or editor does more than pick songs. They explain why something matters and put a record in context. They connect it to a scene, an artist’s story, or a cultural shift. Most importantly, they create the sense that someone is making a case. That is what Spotify is now trying to surface.

Putting editors on video inside New Music Friday is not just a feature update — it is a positioning move. Spotify is telling listeners, artists, labels, and the industry that real people are still shaping discovery. That message feels deliberate.

For years, one of the loudest criticisms of streaming discovery has been that it feels faceless. Songs appear. Songs disappear. Playlists change. Meanwhile, artists get lifted or buried, and listeners may enjoy the experience without ever knowing who made the call — or why.

The Playlist Has Been Faceless

That can make discovery feel efficient. However, it can also make it feel cold. By putting editors in front of the audience, Spotify is borrowing from something radio has understood for decades. Discovery works better when there is a trusted voice attached to it.

Radio’s best music brands were never just jukeboxes. They had people — program directors, music directors, air talent, tastemakers, and local personalities. The station’s credibility came from the belief that someone with ears and experience was helping sort through the noise.

Streaming solved the access problem. It did not fully solve the trust problem. That is why this move is worth watching.

Radio Already Knew This

Spotify does not need to convince people that it has scale — everyone knows that. It does not need to prove it has data, either. However, it may need to convince people that discovery on Spotify still has judgment behind it. That is a very different kind of message, and it comes at a time when the word “algorithm” carries real baggage.

For consumers, algorithms can feel manipulative, repetitive, or invisible. For artists, they can feel like gatekeepers no one can talk to. For the music business, they can feel like a black box. Human editors give Spotify a way to soften that perception and make the playlist feel less like a machine and more like a recommendation.

There is a difference. A machine says, “Here is what the data says you might like.” A curator says, “Here is why this song is worth your time.” The second version feels more personal, even when it happens at massive scale.

Video Changes the Experience

That is also where video becomes important. Spotify is not just adding written notes or playlist descriptions — it is putting faces and voices into the experience. As a result, the playlist moves closer to programming, commentary, and editorial storytelling. It gives the playlist a front door.

For artists, that could be meaningful. A song placement is valuable, but a song placement with context can be even more valuable. If an editor explains why a rising artist matters, listeners get another reason to care.

There is also a lesson here for radio. For years, radio has watched streaming platforms take ownership of music discovery. However, Spotify’s move toward visible human curation should remind radio of its original advantage — and that advantage was never just music access. It was personality, judgment, and trust.

The Bigger Signal

Radio still has people. The question is whether it is using them enough. Too many stations have spent the last decade trying to sound seamless, efficient, and low-friction. In the process, some have stripped away the human elements that made discovery feel alive.

If Spotify is now putting faces on playlists, radio should ask why it sometimes hides its best music people. The irony is hard to miss — streaming is adding humans while radio considers removing them.

Spotify’s New Music Friday update may look small on the surface. A few editor videos inside a flagship playlist may not sound revolutionary. However, the larger signal is clear. Spotify wants listeners to understand that discovery is not only automated — it is also curated, explained, and shaped by people with taste.

That does not mean the algorithm is going away. Instead, it means Spotify may have realized the algorithm needs a human narrator. Maybe that is where music discovery is heading — not back to the old world, not fully into the machine, but into something more interesting: data with a face, playlists with a point of view, and discovery that feels a little less robotic.

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.

What Radio Programmers Can Learn from Boring Bands About Audience Loyalty

0

I’ll be the first to admit I am a sucker for a good headline. That’s why a recent article in Hypebot caught my attention with this zinger — Boring Bands Don’t Get Booked.

The premise of the article by Charlie Recksieck is obvious from the headline. What I didn’t expect was to find a great deal of advice that, with minor adjustments, applies directly to radio stations — especially gold-based formats that don’t have new music to lean on.

Of course, winning listeners starts with playing the right music. But for the sake of this article, let’s assume you are playing a tightly rotated library of the biggest hits at your Classic Rock or Hits station. With that out of the way, let’s look at some suggestions for how bands can be more compelling that also apply to the listener experience on your station.

Let’s start with this declaration from the article: “Most bands don’t fail to take off because they are bad. They fail because nothing about the experience gives audiences a reason to come back.” If you replace bands with radio stations and consider that occasions of listening are what drive ratings in PPM and diary, this is as spot-on for radio as it is for artists.

So, let’s look at some of the areas where bands and radio stations can focus to grow repeating ticket sales and listening occasions.

Relating to the Audience

I absolutely love this quote: “don’t be a singer, be a frontman.” It’s the live music equivalent of “don’t be a DJ, be a talent.” And an important part of that challenge, as the article points out, is to remember that there is more than one way to do it.

For bands, it can be crazy antics, dancing, and climbing up the stage rigging. But relating to the audience can also mean sharing vulnerability, cultivating the ability to tell a great story, or adding depth to a song in any number of other ways.

In radio, many on-air talents think that being challenged to be a host — not a DJ — means being funny. That does work, but it’s not for everybody. Successful hosts can cultivate any number of styles, including vulnerability and storytelling, as ways to get the audience to come back to their show regularly.

The real key to all of this, though, is just to do something. What we know doesn’t work is back-selling and reading liner cards. That is the radio equivalent of being a boring band.

Stagecraft

The author of the article played in a band called The Bigfellas who cooked grilled cheese sandwiches and hot dogs on stage. While that’s a little — pardon the pun — cheesy, it is unique and hammers home the point that being known for doing something creative with your presentation is a powerful way to build attention and repeat ticket sales.

For Classic Rock, the simplest example is creating features that explore the music in ways that go beyond the standard playlist. Creating a controlled environment where you can play a song that isn’t a normal part of the rotation is akin to cooking a hot dog on stage. It will hopefully get the listener’s attention and make them want to come back to hear what else is happening on your station.

Visual Identity

While this may be more obvious for bands than for radio stations, the article talks extensively about developing a strong visual identity. On stage, that involves the right wardrobe and much more.

For radio stations, it means looking across all your touchpoints online to make sure they are not only consistent but that they convey your brand’s attitude. Look to see if the presentation of your app and website conveys the same sensibility and, more importantly, whether it’s the image you want listeners to see. Take stock of a week or a month’s worth of social posts and consider the visual elements you’ve served up to the audience. Make sure they are not only brand appropriate but also brand enhancing.

Three Questions Worth Answering

Let me leave you with three questions, modified for radio of course, that the article suggests that bands consider:

  • Why should listeners come back to your station more than once?
  • What makes your station unique?
  • Why should the listener care about your station?

If you can’t answer these questions, it’s probably a good time to do some soul-searching. If you do have answers, think about how you can amplify those qualities to propel your station to new heights.

For my part, I’m going to go grab a hot dog that wasn’t cooked by a band.

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 Show Behind the Show: What It Takes to Produce Radio’s Biggest Events

0

Within the last few weeks, artist announcements dropped for both the 2026 iHeartRadio Music Festival and HOT 97 Summer Jam.

The iHeartRadio Music Festival brings BTS, Cardi B, Kenny Chesney, Snoop Dogg, Weezer, Lainey Wilson, Muse and more to Las Vegas’ T-Mobile Arena for two nights in September. HOT 97 Summer Jam returns to Newark’s Prudential Center in July with Fetty Wap, French Montana, Max B, Ice Spice, Rick Ross and DaBaby.

For listeners, the announcement is simple: Here’s the lineup. Buy your tickets.

For radio station teams, the lineup is just one corner of the 1,000-piece jigsaw puzzle that is event production.

Been There, Done That

I spent much of my career producing large-scale music events — including six years leading HOT 97’s Summer Jam team, overseeing marketing, sponsorships, content, and more. I also worked on booking, marketing, and producing Audacy’s tentpole events. What I learned: pulling off events at this scale takes a village. And the listener experience depends on thousands of details the audience never sees.

Before the First Artist Hits the Stage

The largest radio events today operate more like major television productions than traditional concerts.

Consider what has to happen before showtime. Artist contracts. Hospitality requirements. Transportation plans. Security protocols. Credential systems. Sponsorship activations. Backstage operations. Ticketing integrations. Staffing plans. Every artist arrives with their own management team, technical specs, and expectations. Some need elaborate stage setups. Others need customized dressing rooms or special accommodations for their crews.

The Production Itself

At Summer Jam or the iHeartRadio Music Festival, changeovers between artists happen in moments — not minutes. Crews remove and rebuild entire stage configurations while thousands of fans watch from their seats. Audio, lighting, video, pyrotechnics, and broadcast teams must execute those transitions flawlessly. There is no second take.

The challenge grows when radio adds a broadcast component. Radio companies aren’t simply producing a live event — they’re creating content that extends beyond the arena. The iHeartRadio Music Festival airs across iHeartRadio stations nationwide and streams on Disney+ and Hulu. Every performance, camera angle, host segment, and sponsor integration must work for both the in-venue crowd and the remote audience. That level of coordination rivals many televised award shows.

Sponsors and Staffing

Most major radio events depend on strategic partnerships to make the economics work. Capital One’s involvement with the iHeartRadio Music Festival is a prime example. Beyond logo placement, sponsors need dedicated hospitality experiences, fan activations, exclusive performances, and custom content. Delivering those assets matters just as much as delivering a great concert.

Staffing is equally critical. On show day, hundreds of people work behind the scenes. Production managers, stage managers, runners, credential teams, security, marketing staff, social media teams, photographers, videographers, engineers, and venue employees all play a role. The audience interacts with only a handful of them. But every single person shapes the experience.

Some of my favorite memories from HOT 97’s Summer Jam at MetLife Stadium involve watching the staff move like ants across the vastness of that stadium — everyone locked into their own task, all of them pushing toward one collective goal.

Expect the Unexpected

The most important skill in producing a signature radio event? Adaptability.

No matter how much planning goes into a show, something unexpected will happen. A flight gets delayed. An artist arrives late. Equipment fails. Timelines shift. The teams that succeed aren’t the ones that avoid problems. They’re the ones who solve them fast — before the audience notices.

At HOT 97’s Summer Jam in 2018, Meek Mill decided he wanted to helicopter into MetLife Stadium and ride a dirt bike from the chopper pad to the stage. Our crew stayed late the night before and figured it out. The results were legendary.

At Audacy’s Beach Festival in 2022, we got reports of an active fire in the crowd. It turned out to be a menorah fans had brought — the event fell during Hanukkah. Fun to navigate.

I could rattle off a hundred more examples. Many involve NDAs I’ve long since lost track of.

The Unsung Heroes

The doers of this industry thrive in these moments — the market leaders willing to take risks, the promotions people, the event people, the programmers whose roles sometimes get overlooked. These are often unsung heroes. And right now, their roles are under attack. Downsizing happens monthly across our business. Producing signature events keeps getting harder.

But these events are core to station brand identity and radio’s long-term health. Having the doers on staff is what separates great radio events from good ones. It’s what creates core memories for listeners and longevity for your brand.

Fans remember seeing their favorite artist perform. They remember surprise collaborations and unforgettable moments. They won’t remember the planning meetings, production schedules, and contingency plans that made those moments possible.

That’s exactly how it should be.

The best-produced events are the ones where nobody notices the production at all.

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.

Approaching The Summit: Dave Tepper, KOA 850 and 94.1

0

Approaching The Summit is a series of special interviews created in partnership with Point to Point Marketing featuring speakers at the upcoming 2026 Barrett Media Audio Summit in New York City. Follow along with this series as prominent names surrounding the event June 30-July 2 share their insights and expectations for what’s to come in the Big Apple. The Summit takes place at the SVA Theatre on West 23rd Street. For tickets and hotel room reservations, click here or visit the Summit section at the top of the website.   

Garrett Searight: How important is it for those in the radio industry — especially the news/talk genre — to gather to discuss ideas and issues?

Dave Tepper: If you can make it work to be there, be there. I’ve proudly attended sports every year and news when it fit my schedule. Never have I left one without learning new things and gaining takeaways to make our brands better, no matter the market. From a networking standpoint, there’s nothing better. I’m always surprised how few on-air talents attend with so many local and national programmers in attendance. It always reminds me of what we hear about the NCAA Basketball Final Four weekend, where up-and-coming coaches go to mingle and share resumes with high-level programs.

GS: What are the most important things you hope to learn and hear about at the Summit?

DT: I always absorb notes from programmers of all sorts. Sports talk and news/talk — it’s all talk radio, and strategies translate. I know this firsthand from my experience in both formats. I also enjoy the high-profile guests and hearing their stories. One of my favorites was Jim Rome talking about selling vacuum parts door-to-door while chasing his goals. That’s relatable stuff as we all pursue our individual visions. Also, I never miss ratings discussions. As long as I work for companies that play that game, anything I can take away is invaluable. I still reference notes from past presentations with my team.

GS: What are the things you hope to share during your panel and while speaking with other attendees?

DT: My aim is to do for others what I receive. If I can provide just one note that someone can take back to their team and apply in their own way, that’s a win. I also want to be relatable. While we are all competitors, we are collectively working to move our industry forward. The interactions during breaks and happy hours are productive, too. It’s not just the knowledge gained on stage. Having conversations, listening, and sharing perspectives is what it’s all about.

GS: Anything else you’d like to share about what it means to attend?

DT: Come with an open and engaged mind, and you’re guaranteed to leave a stronger professional for your team and yourself.

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.

Nielsen Audio Ratings Overhaul Could Reshape Radio Measurement

Last week, I reviewed some history and offered general thoughts about Nielsen’s plans for the radio diary. This week, I’ll comment on the specifics.

First, the cringe-worthy: The deck included the point, “retain unimpeachable truth set.” The word “truth” should never be used with survey research. Nielsen could be the best survey research company on the planet (and the company is good, no matter how much we attack them), but it will never know if it has truth. Period. Referring to the diary service in 2026 as “unimpeachable” should include a laugh track.

Next, Imran Hirani, who gave the presentation, referred to Scarborough and measuring newspaper readership. He noted that Scarborough adjusts its data to make the results match readership audit figures from the Alliance for Audited Media (AAM). Imran suggested that this approach might be usable for radio. Funny, but in all my years in the business, I’ve never heard of anything equivalent to AAM for radio or audio, and frankly, it’s impossible. That’s Nielsen’s role, so Imran’s point made no sense.

Questions About Current Methodology

With that out of the way, most of his points about how current diarykeepers perform their task were on the money. A large percentage do not write down their listening as it happens, and plenty fill in the entire diary at one sitting, whether the day after the survey week or even during the week. If the postmark on the diary is after the end of the survey week, the diary can be intabbed.

And Thursday is the big day for listening because it’s the first day of the diary week. Take me back to 1970 — nothing has changed.

He mentioned a non-response study from “several years ago.” I’m not aware of one, although I’ve been away from day-to-day dealings with Nielsen for six years. Perhaps he was referring to non-response studies from last century, which would be a new definition of the word “several.”

There were two such studies. One was publicly released because it showed that non-responders were similar to those who filled out the diary with respect to radio listening. There was also a “Soviet history” non-response study from 1984 that showed bias. “Soviet history” means that the study never existed, even if it did. If there is a more recent study, Nielsen should release it, for better or worse.

The presentation covered the use of modeling, and Imran was correct that modeling exists in the diary service today. I was directly involved when we implemented a small amount of modeling around 20 years ago. Diaries with two “missing days” of listening — meaning no listening was recorded and the diarykeeper did not check the “no listening” box — could be counted.

Previously, Arbitron accepted one missing day without the box checked and assumed no listening on that day.

The Future of Nielsen Audio

This model was different because listening from another day was used for the missing day. While I can’t remember the exact system, as an example, if the diarykeeper left out Monday, listening from Wednesday may have been inserted. However, if the two missing days were Saturday and Sunday, the diary was not counted. If only one of the missing days was a weekend day, that day was assigned no listening. Got it?

Why do it? Pressure for higher response rates. It was cheap and easy to implement.

Here are the key items in Nielsen’s plans for the service. First, give up on probability sampling. The cost of probability sampling in 2026 is outrageous, and response rates are awful. Nielsen goes through a multi-stage process just to get households into the sample. What the company appears to be proposing is the use of databases to recruit respondents, especially harder-to-reach groups such as young people and minorities.

This is a big change and, as I noted last week, opens the door for any other company interested in jumping into the radio ratings game. What was left unsaid — and perhaps Nielsen hasn’t decided yet — is whether that piece of the overall sample moves from “everyone 12+ in the household” to “single person per household,” as commercial databases are typically made up of individuals rather than households.

Further, the Nielsen deck noted that because respondents opt into these databases and can choose the surveys they want to complete, this will result in “high interest and high quality data.” On one hand, this may mean radio listeners will be more likely to participate, keeping listening levels stable.

Reshaping That Future

Most of you know the term “contest pigs.” People in these databases complete surveys for one major reason: the incentive. I’m in a few myself. In fact, my flight to the Barrett Media Summit later this month was paid for through surveys I completed in exchange for airline miles.

Next is the move to a one-time survey instead of seven days. This approach is not new, just new for Nielsen. I was director of research for Birch/Scarborough’s radio ratings service before the company was shut down at the end of 1991. The Birch system was a probability-based phone survey, which was feasible at the time, and the questionnaire was straightforward:

  • What stations did you listen to in the past week?
  • Using four dayparts covering 6 a.m. until midnight, what stations did you hear yesterday?
  • For each station you heard yesterday, did you hear that station the day before yesterday during that same daypart?

That was it. The duplication allowed Birch to model a seven-day cume, which was typically close to the Arbitron seven-day diary cume. Also, because Birch was sold to what is now Nielsen, the company owns that intellectual property, which probably languishes in a file drawer somewhere.

I expect Nielsen will take the data from the single questionnaire and model it using the remaining seven-day diaries it claims it will continue to field. It makes sense and would work methodologically.

While you won’t find odds on it at Kalshi or Polymarket, it’s a safe bet that this is the second step (mSurvey was the first) toward a completely online Nielsen Audio service using convenience samples. It’s a sensible move, but it differs from the method we’ve used for the last six decades, one that has withstood challenges from multiple competitors. The results will be different.

Here’s the question: Will another research company have an opportunity to overthrow King Nielsen? Will radio and audio measurement change? I expect we’ll see a new landscape by the end of the decade.

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.

Paramount Skydance Acquisition Of Warner Bros. Discovery Reportedly Approved By Justice Department

0

The Justice Department’s Antitrust Division has reportedly approved Paramount Skydance’s $111 billion bid for Warner Bros. Discovery. The decision clears a major regulatory hurdle for one of the most closely watched media mergers.

What We Know: According to reporting by Politico, the DOJ approved the deal without requiring divestitures, behavioral remedies, or concessions. The merger would combine Paramount with the company behind CNN, HBO Max, and a major film and television studio. Paramount+ and HBO Max would merge into a new streaming platform with roughly 200 million combined subscribers. The deal also unites two historically rival Hollywood studios.

What Remains Unclear: Federal approval doesn’t end the legal scrutiny. California Attorney General Rob Bonta is still actively reviewing the deal and could sue to block it. A spokesperson confirmed to Politico the acquisition “remains an active investigation.” Additionally, state attorneys general from New York and several other states monitored Ellison’s meeting with DOJ officials.

What It Means: This merger would dramatically reshape Hollywood’s competitive landscape. Supporters argue it creates a stronger streaming rival to Netflix. Critics, however, fear mass layoffs and further industry consolidation. Paramount COO Andy Gordon previously projected over $6 billion in synergies within three years, with most savings coming from non-labor sources. The deal’s final fate still hinges, at least partly, on California’s next move.

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.

FOX Sports’ FIFA World Cup Opening Match Draws Record 6.3 Million Viewers

0

Mexico’s win over South Africa to open the 2026 FIFA World Cup on FOX Sports shatters English-language broadcast records across FOX, FOX One, and Tubi.

What We Know: Mexico’s 2-0 victory over South Africa drew 6,309,000 viewers on Thursday. That total makes it the most-watched Men’s Opening Match and non-USMNT FIFA World Cup Group Stage telecast in English-language U.S. history. Viewership peaked at 8,014,000 between 4:15–4:30 PM ET. Numbers come from preliminary Nielsen Fast Nationals, Adobe Analytics, and Tubi Analytics across all three platforms.

What The Numbers Show: (via FOX Sports PR)

What Remains Unclear: Final verified Nielsen figures have not yet replaced the preliminary fast nationals. Additionally, a breakdown of each platform’s individual contribution to the 6.3 million total remains unavailable.

What It Means: This end result is a massive early win for FOX’s World Cup investment. Viewership jumped 97% compared to the average non-USMNT group stage match from 2022, which drew just 3,210,000. Furthermore, FOX’s decision to distribute across traditional broadcast, authenticated streaming, and free ad-supported streaming clearly paid off. If non-USMNT matches are already breaking records, the tournament’s trajectory looks very promising.

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.