Home Blog Page 402

‘First Take’ Correctly Handled the Breaking FBI Investigation Involving Current, Former NBA Players

0

The NBA had a bad day yesterday. After all the pomp and circumstance of two of the biggest nights in the league’s recent television history, a bomb dropped. News channels, social media, and yes, even ESPN were there to cover it all, as news programs and social channels tend to do. Different shows have different methods for covering news; First Take is no different.

When news broke that Portland Trail Blazers head coach Chauncey Billups, Miami Heat guard Terry Rozier, and former NBA guard and coach Damon Jones were among more than two dozen people arrested as part of a widespread FBI investigation. There was immediately a microscope placed on how ESPN handled the story. The network is one of the league’s biggest media partners and has morning programming that garners attention for how it presents the news of the day.

However, what many in sports media pointed out as First Take hit the air at 10 a.m. Eastern — as a mistake — was exactly what should have happened. The controversy surrounding how the program handled the breaking news was driven by armchair critics looking for likes and shares. Instead of recognizing the root purpose of what makes First Take the most polarizing program in sports television.

Media continues to live in an age where being first is more important than being right. It’s a dangerous way of approaching journalism, risking errors in reporting when facts have yet to be made public. Sports media can only source so much when real-world news breaks, because sports media doesn’t operate in that lane.

Bryan Curtis of The Press Box podcast put it best on social media, tweeting, “Welcome to another edition of Insiders Try to Handle Real News.”

Knowing Your Program

The FBI called a press conference that started before First Take went on the air at 10 a.m. Eastern time. Did Get Up, the show prior to First Take, carry the press conference live? After bringing in Shams Charania with his latest on the reports, that program went back to breakdowns of A.J. Brown, Bussin’ With The Boys on college football, and picks for the weekend of NFL action.

Yet, no one in sports media said a critical word about Get Up for not taking the FBI press conference in real time.

First Take began as normal. Discussions around NBA action from the night before, circling to a preview of Aaron Rodgers playing the Green Bay Packers on Thursday Night Football. It took First Take a half hour to address the story that broke that morning. Yet sports media lit a fire under the decision to sit and wait for details to become available.

Why so hard on one show when not a peep about the other? The press conference was live during both programs, yet there’s a complete slant in the criticism of how the coverage was handled.

Waiting On The Debate

First Take is not CNN, FOX News, nor MSNBC (or whatever they’re calling that channel now). It’s not a hard news program — it was founded on embracing debate in sports. While the lines have blurred in recent times between fact and editorial, First Take made the correct play in waiting for the allegations to be revealed before pontificating on the matter at hand.

Yet, many in sports media made a mockery of that decision, taking side-by-side photos for social media and sharing exact timelines of events — minute by minute — of what First Take wasn’t doing, instead of why they chose to do it this way.

Wouldn’t it make more sense in a debate to have the facts first? I thought facts mattered most in any debate — it’s how you build your argument.

Different shows have different methods for handling breaking news.

Are people going to tune away from First Take because it didn’t mention “reports” of what was going on without actual substance to provide the audience? Would it have made more sense to take the press conference live?

ESPN Starts With Entertainment

Sports fans don’t turn to ESPN anymore for hard news coverage. The network seemingly can’t produce that kind of content like it once did, and viewers no longer expect it with the number of ways to get hard news instantly.

ESPN is an entertainment network, with First Take serving as its guiding entertainment vessel. That’s why criticism or outrage over the program deciding not to take the FBI press conference in favor of sticking to sports shows a deeper issue — a deeper resentment for a network and select personalities on that network from those who live for immediacy and the likes and shares that come with it. Social media clout only lasts so long when there’s a bigger picture to be seen.

First Take’s only take on how it handled the news of the day should serve as an example of why being first isn’t necessary — and why knowing your audience matters most. Maybe First Take didn’t jump in right away, but that’s what made it the right move. When the dust settled, viewers got what they came for — informed debate, not wild speculation. In the sports world, that’s called playing smart, not playing scared.

At its core, First Take did what responsible debate television program should do: pause, confirm, and then engage. In an era where speed often trumps substance, waiting for facts isn’t hesitation — it’s integrity. The show reminded everyone that sometimes the best “take” is patience.

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.

‘Inside the NBA’ May Be Wearing a New Jersey, but the Program Remains Legendary

0

If you closed your eyes on Wednesday night, you might have thought nothing had changed for the best studio show in sports history. The voices, the jokes, the chemistry—everything felt like classic Inside the NBA. But open your eyes, and the difference was impossible to ignore. The big, bright four-letter logo glowed in the middle of the desk on wide shots: ESPN had replaced TNT.

The letters reflected off Shaquille O’Neal’s shoulder on close-ups and flashed in the corner graphics. The legendary crew—Charles Barkley, Ernie Johnson, Kenny Smith, and Shaq—were still there but now, like a player traded in the off-season, in a new uniform.

At first, it felt like watching Shaq go from the Magic to the Lakers or Barkley from the Sixers to the Suns. The show’s debut on ESPN marked the start of a new era.

The NBA’s official opening night happened Tuesday on NBC, and it was pure spectacle.

The familiar peacock logo, Mike Tirico’s voice at the mic, and the iconic “Roundball Rock” theme set the stage for a night dripping with nostalgia. Fans watched the NBA champion Thunder (the Sonics, the last time NBC had broadcast rights in 2002) host the Rockets in an OT thriller.

Steph Curry’s Warriors faced a Lakers team sans LeBron but featuring Luka in Los Angeles. It was emotional, cinematic, and a reminder of basketball’s storied past.

The Real Opening Night

Yet just 24 hours later, the spotlight shifted. If Tuesday was the NBA’s return, Wednesday was the return of its soul. Still the same Studio J in Atlanta, it was the main attraction, with Inside the NBA’s crew outshining even the league’s brightest stars.

Fans spent the offseason wondering if Inside the NBA could keep its mojo after the move from TNT to ESPN. Charles Barkley himself questioned the shift, joking about his resistance to working for ESPN and worrying about how much freedom the show would have. The answer came quickly in the first segment of the show.

Inside the NBA launched with a montage of Barkley’s past ESPN barbs, only to reveal him grinning under the new logo. The segment was self-aware and classic Inside. The crew immediately dove into playful banter, debating who was smooching ESPN’s rear end the hardest. Barkley called it an honor, gushing that all athletes dream of working for ESPN while growing up. Kenny tossed him a napkin for all the “kissing up.”

First-night nerves were obvious. The guys were a touch tight at first after the opening network-change banter, and the first couple of segments felt like a careful test of boundaries—like a boxer in the early rounds of a prize fight. But when the new-old Inside music hit the break, it was a calming influence, like incense wafting through the set, reminding everyone it was still Inside, no matter how many letters appeared on the graphics.

By the second half-hour, the team was riffing and joking like old times, proving once again that chemistry trumps logos.

Soon after, Shaq declared Inside’s return “the real opening night.” He wasn’t wrong. Tuesday’s NBC broadcast was big, but Wednesday on ESPN felt even bigger. Same Studio J, same crew, but on a grander sports stage. You can bet Inside the NBA will force all shows on the network to step up while it strives to keep its crown at the top of the mountain.

ESPN Was Hands Off

TNT started as Hollywood and movies; ESPN has always been all-sports, all the time. The games on “real opening night”—Cavs at Knicks, Spurs at Mavs—were important, but the real show was at the desk. Chuck even delivered his first trademark NBA guarantee of the season: Knicks to the Finals. Bold, unfiltered, quintessentially Inside.

The transition to ESPN came with questions about Barkley’s workload, a much-discussed offseason topic. The star of the show was adamant: he had a certain lifestyle to maintain and wasn’t about overexposure like Stephen A. Smith. Chuck’s schedule flashed repeatedly on-screen, referencing the notorious ESPN “Car Wash”—the intense, all-day media circuit.

Would Barkley have to run the full gauntlet?

For now, he says he’s been spared. Purists rejoiced—no surprise cameos from 24/7 Stephen A. or the ever-present Kendrick Perkins. The only surprise appearance came from Mickey Mouse in the final segment. Disney is ESPN’s parent company—the only acceptable deviation from the norm.

The biggest visual change of the night, though, might not have been ESPN replacing TNT. Fans on social media quipped about a slimmer Barkley, kicking off “Ozempic Chuck” jokes. The perfect commercial break followed: RO, the telehealth GLP-1 brand, featured thin Chuck talking about his new, lesser self.

The crew couldn’t let it slide.

Barkley insisted it was his new lifestyle, not just “the shot.” Social media jokes flashed on-screen; Shaq doubted his once-larger counterpart—Inside at its comedic best, every topic fair game.

New title sponsor Popeyes Chicken also dominated the show, its orange branding flanking each side of the ESPN logo on the desk. Shaq called for “more soul” in the ad reads. Ernie noted Popeyes had been mentioned “406 times in a segment and a half.” X lit up, confirming the chain got its money’s worth—maybe for the season. The crew turned corporate integration into comedy, never letting it intrude on the show’s natural flow.

It worked so well, I had a sudden craving for a three-piece meal with red beans and rice.

As the show wrapped, it became clear that what mattered wasn’t the logo but the chemistry behind it. The music still hit. Studio J still felt like basketball’s living room. After acknowledging the past and present home of the show, the crew’s humor was as sharp as ever. ESPN didn’t remake Inside the NBA; they gave it a bigger stage and maybe a slightly tighter dress code.

For your ears, it was as if nothing changed. For your eyes, the difference was in those four bright letters—a new chapter for the best studio show in sports history.

Same team. New jersey. Different, but the same. Let’s hope it stays that way.

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.

Radio is No Longer at the Center of the Concert Ecosystem

0

Rush just sold out their 2026 Fifty Something Tour without breaking a sweat and without the traditional help needed from radio. Radio was not ignored. Brands participated, promoted, and played an important role in the tour’s rapid sellout — but spot buys weren’t what they once were for concerts.

Rush still loves and appreciates radio, that’s not what this is about. It’s just a new chapter in the long-held romance between radio, concerts, and artists.

Let’s start with a few general truths.

Seeing a great live band beats a killer movie every night of the week. You won’t find a human who doesn’t think today’s ticket prices are insane. Ad dollars spent at radio by concert promoters are shrinking. Outside of arena and stadium bands, it’s tougher for artists to make money touring.

For those of us in radio, it’s not just shrinking spot buys. Remember when bowling with a band was just a normal promotion? When radio turned down more flyaways than it accepted? Remember when having a station section at the concert was beneficial for all?

Not anymore.

Fact: Since the day I was a banner hanger and saw Tool slay at Red Rocks, the average ticket price has gone up 400% — mid-‘90s to now — $25 to $135 (for major tours).

Don’t expect it to get better.

Shirley Manson of Garbage said touring is no longer sustainable for her band due to the rising costs of being on the road, among other variables that funnel out most of the money before it ever gets to the band. On the promoter end of the spectrum. It’s been reported that Live Nation CEO Michael Rapino said concerts are “underpriced.”

But what we do know is big shows announce on social media. The Foo’s dropped details of their stadium tour yesterday morning online, not with a big ad buy. Smaller shows skip buys altogether. Comps are much harder to get. And Zoom has made getting an artist into the station more difficult than getting Sydney Sweeney to do a takeover.

Radio is no longer at the center of the concert ecosystem. This isn’t artists, Live Nation, AEG, or other promoters not believing in radio or intentionally giving the industry “the hand.”

It’s just business. Think about it.

Promoters have been collecting data on concertgoers for years. They know who the audience is. They don’t need to “mass market” when Green Day rolls into town because they can text or email all the Green Day fans on their own.

Artists can often sell out shows through their socials, but even then, they’re making far less on music sales, which makes performance fees higher and merch much more important.

Labels and managers have more promotional relationships to manage these days — not just for this tour, but for the next and the next. Neutralizing everything today saves them headaches tomorrow.

Festivals have only amplified the shift. One lineup can feature several headliners, each promoting to their own base — making big marketing unnecessary. Production costs scale better, artists save on road grind and costs, and fans get more for their money.

Radio will only help its own cause if it becomes a stronger partner. How?

Like Apple used to say — think different. It’s not about selling “airtime” or the typical spots, dots, rankers, and caller 10 contests. Today, the focus must be on audience access and curation — and bringing new, measurable, and trackable value.

Radio is still the most effective way to quickly get an important message out to the masses. There’s a reason the government established the EAS for radio. But a promoter isn’t releasing tornado information. They just want to reach Wet Leg fans in the most cost-efficient way possible.

None of this means radio can’t find ways to earn a bigger share of today’s smaller pie. Something is better than nothing.

The following aren’t written in a foreign language, but rarely are they implemented to the point of making a real difference to promoters dictating spend.

Truly grow and use the station database to create “super fan squads.” Those who are incentivized to help spread the word on pre-sales, discounts, etc.

Talk real data — not “our share is this, our cume is that.” They’ve heard the quantitative speak. But have they heard the qualitative bombs you can drop that can translate to sales?

“If we don’t sell tickets, we don’t get paid.” Create exclusive pre-sale links or short codes to drive direct sales that are trackable. Direct sales results are only going to become a bigger requirement — not just for concerts, but for all advertisers.

Bands rely on merch. Put money in both pockets. Design co-branded, drop-ship merch that brings shared revenue or charitable contributions.

With the right sales staff, all it takes is one pair of good seats to build a sponsorable package — with transportation, dinner, and hotel. That can bring more effective frequency than the typical mid-range spot buy.

There’s no shortage of ideas. Even the usual suspects like concert calendars can be refocused for a new and more targeted model.

Concerts may not need radio like they used to, but they’ll always need what radio can uniquely deliver: real fans, real emotion, real results.

See you at the show. Bring your earplugs.

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.

How AI Can Make Radio Sound Alive Again This Halloween

0

Forget “Monster Mash” and haunted house ticket giveaways. Halloween 2025 is radio’s chance to prove it’s still the master of immersive sound. This year, the monsters can talk back and I’m going to show you how.

Your Imagination Has New Production Values

For decades, radio has claimed to be “theater of the mind.”

Too many stations traded imagination for efficiency: more logs, fewer ideas.

Halloween 2025 is the moment to flip that script. Not by adding a moan and chains before “Thriller,” but by re-embracing what makes this medium electric in the first place: its ability to create worlds from sound.

Generative tools like ElevenLabs, Suno, and Fish Audio aren’t novelties anymore. They’re instruments. They can voice, score, and sculpt experiences in real time. For the first time, one creator can be an entire creative department, writer, director, voice actor, cast, and producer in a single login.

Imagine this: Dracula and the Wicked Witch hosting morning drive (The Boo Crew), Beetlejuice bringing liners to life (a daunting task given that he’s technically dead), Freddy Krueger owning nights (naturally).
That’s not a ghoulish gimmick; that’s remarkable audio you can make in minutes.

I know, because I built it, alongside Bo Matthews and Rameen Madani at Super Hi-Fi and Mark Long at Camel Creative. We’ll show you how. Dun dun dah!

How We Built a Haunted Station in 24 Hours (and Lived to Tell It)

In less than a day, we conceptualized, wrote, prompted, voice-acted, and produced an entire haunted radio station. Freddy, Beetlejuice, Dracula, Ghostface, Frankenstein, Igor, and a very judgmental witch formed our on-air staff (HR is still investigating the witch – broomstick metaphors).

The result wasn’t a playlist with sound effects. It was an audio film. Every segue felt cinematic. Each stopset had a storyline. Every element delivered the same reminder: radio can still make you feel something.

Hear the Haunting

Below are a few favorites, voiced entirely by AI:

Not Just Spooky Season. Story Season

This isn’t about themed logs or slapping your logo on a pumpkin. It’s about immersive world-building.

A news station could have Frankenstein deliver headlines:

“BREAKING: Villagers report another torchlight protest.”
(Which, if we’re honest, sounds a lot like modern life).

A sports host could debate Dracula:

“He’s got bite, but no daylight performance.”

Your Second Date Updates can go seasonal:

Caller: “We met at a haunted corn maze. Great chemistry. I texted her after… and nothing.”
Host: “Maybe she ghosted you.”

Aside: “Ghosted” is a better name than Second Date Update. It isn’t a second date update at all. It’s a phone call about the first date. Radio and its obsession with rhyming… woof, or maybe howl, more on brand.

When AI is prompted with intention, every format, music, news, sports, has a doorway into storytelling. And in a moment, I’ll give you the exact prompts I used to create this sound from my basement. (Scarier in name than reality,  it’s just where the home office lives).

Meet the New Creative Department: You

When I launched AI Ashley on KBFF in Portland, the industry asked the same predictable question: “Who owns the voice?”

That was then.

Today, the smarter question is: “Who’s writing the prompts?”

The advantage no longer belongs to whoever has the best voice or the biggest staff. It belongs to whoever can imagine, write, and produce at scale. With the right writer and toolkit, one person can now sound like a station of dozens.

The tools don’t close positions. They open possibilities for your most talented people. Reward your creatives. Empower your most gifted. Give them the resources that turn imagination into airtime.

When the Commercial Breaks Become Part of the Story

Advertisers can join the séance, too.

With a few well-aimed prompts, a local tire shop becomes Transylvania Treads, with Dracula upselling snow tires:

“They grip the road… even when you’re fleeing Van Helsing’s prying eyes.”

A pumpkin patch ad can feature Ghostface whispering, “do you like scary carvings?”

These aren’t gimmicks. They’re localized theater built in minutes instead of meetings. Generative AI lets clients perform instead of merely announce.

Summon Your Own Monsters

Try these prompts in the AI platform of your choice. Use them as-is, or twist them to fit your format.

  • Beetlejuice: “Create a male voice in a deep, lower register with a gravelly, raspy texture and no accent. The pacing should be fast and animated with playful energy, using wide pitch swings up and down for comedic effect. The personality is mischievous, sly, and unpredictable. A charismatic trickster who sounds bass-heavy, lively, and fun.”
  • Freddy: “Create a male voice in a deep, gravelly register with a burned, gritty texture and no accent. The pacing should be slow to medium with taunting rhythm, dripping with menace and dark humor. The personality is cruel, sarcastic, and sadistic. A nightmare trickster who sounds amused by fear, confident, and always in control.”
  • Ghost Face: “Create a male voice in a mid-to-low register with a smooth, menacing tone and no accent. The pacing should start calm and conversational, then shift to quick and intense when threatening and  playful but dangerous. The voice should sound as if it’s coming through a phone line, with a subtle compressed, filtered quality like a horror movie call. The personality is taunting, intelligent, and sadistic. A manipulative killer who enjoys the game and sounds amused by fear.”

The Sequel Starts Now

This Halloween, radio can sound seasonal or supernatural. While others spin “Thriller,” your station could be inside one.

We’ve spent years equipping sales teams with every advantage under the howling moon: Analytic Owl, Veritone, Efficio, attribution dashboards, one day sales, cold-call software, AI lead gen, and every other shiny tool that promises another tenth of a point in yield. Meanwhile, the creative teams? They’re left holding a Google Doc and a dream.

If we expect innovation, we have to start funding it. Let’s give the people who imagine for us the same resources we give the ones who invoice for us. Content isn’t an expense line, it’s the reason the rest of the lines exist.

The Real Ghost Haunting Radio Isn’t AI It’s Apathy

The real ghosts haunting radio aren’t digital. They’re old habits.

If your Halloween plan is still just hitting the stop set on time and saying “Happy Halloween” between songs, it’s time to exorcise your approach.

Hire writers. Hire thinkers. Add those who see audio not as a schedule, but as a story engine.

This Halloween, AI won’t ‘kill’ radio. It’ll hand you the keys to the crypt and whisper, “Go make some noise, boo.” (Said lovingly, not seasonally).

Are TikTok, YouTube Shorts, and Instagram Reels Helping or Hurting the Podcast Industry?

The podcast industry has always faced one major hurdle: discovery. How do you get someone to find your show, give it a shot, and then keep coming back? For years, the answer seemed to be guest swaps, cross-promotion, or hoping you’d somehow crack Apple’s algorithm. But now, that challenge has been largely solved by TikTok, Instagram Reels, and YouTube Shorts.

Those platforms have made podcast discovery easier, faster, and more accessible than ever before. It’s hard to deny that short-form video has helped podcasts find new audiences. But it’s worth asking — is it also hurting them?

There’s no question short clips have revolutionized how podcasts market themselves. A two-minute clip can reach millions of people who may never have even opened a podcast app. It’s a game-changer. Listeners can instantly get a sense of the show’s tone, the host’s style, and whether it’s worth their time.

For creators, it’s free exposure and engagement in places where audiences already spend their time. If your podcast can go viral on TikTok, you’ve skipped a lot of the grind that used to define the medium.

That’s the upside. The downside might be harder to see — and potentially more damaging in the long run.

Short-form video platforms are training audiences to consume content in bursts, not in full meals. Podcasts were built on long-form storytelling and deep conversation. But when a podcast’s best, most viral moments live in a 90-second clip, it raises an uncomfortable question: what’s the point of the rest of the episode? Why would a listener sit through a 60-minute discussion when the most engaging pieces are already chopped up and easily digestible in their feed?

That’s the tension the podcast industry is now facing. Discovery has never been easier, but attention has never been shorter.

It’s easy to see how we got here. The algorithm rewards quick hits. The viewer rewards brevity. Creators have adapted by designing episodes around “clipable” moments — soundbites made to fit neatly into a TikTok reel or YouTube Short. The conversation doesn’t just flow; it’s guided toward viral potential. That’s not inherently bad, but it does change the purpose of the medium. Podcasts used to thrive on depth. Now, they often thrive on shareability.

The result is that a podcast might reach millions of people without many of them ever actually listening to a full episode. A fan of a certain host or show might never open Spotify or Apple Podcasts because every highlight is already on social media. And if the best moments live outside of the traditional feed, what does that mean for the value of a download or the effectiveness of a host-read ad?

It’s not just a theoretical issue. The top podcast creators — from Joe Rogan to Theo Von to Call Her Daddy — all rely heavily on short clips to fuel awareness. Their content floods TikTok, YouTube Shorts, and Reels. For many people, those clips are the show. They might not even realize those clips come from longer episodes.

And maybe that’s fine. Maybe podcasts don’t need to be long to be effective. Maybe the format’s future isn’t in hour-long conversations but in micro-content — short, engaging bursts that feel complete on their own. That might go against the traditional idea of what a podcast is, but the industry has always evolved with technology.

Still, there’s a sense something is being lost. Podcasts were once the antidote to the fast-scroll, short-attention-span nature of modern media. They gave audiences time to listen, think, and engage deeply. Short-form video is the exact opposite — quick hits designed to keep people scrolling. The two worlds might coexist for now, but it’s fair to wonder if one will eventually eclipse the other.

The question becomes: are TikTok and other short-form platforms helping podcasts grow, or are they changing what “a podcast” even means? If a show’s reach and engagement live entirely on social media, is it still a podcast, or just a video series built around clips of conversations?

Right now, it’s hard to pin down an answer. Discovery is up, attention is down, and the definition of success is shifting. For creators, that tradeoff might be worth it — exposure drives brand deals, guests, and recognition. For listeners, it’s about convenience and time. But for the medium as a whole, it might be eroding what made podcasts valuable in the first place: longform storytelling that rewards patience and focus.

So, is the podcast industry being helped or hurt by TikTok, Instagram Reels, and YouTube Shorts? Honestly, I’m not sure. There’s no definitive answer from where I sit. Discovery is up, and that’s a massive win. But attention spans are shrinking, and that’s a problem that can’t be ignored. Like most things in media, there’s a tradeoff.

The question now is whether the medium can survive — and thrive — in a world that values minutes over hours. It’s something worth wondering about as we watch the unintended consequences play out.

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.

Proving Value and ROI in Radio’s Attention Starved Ecosystem

0

Welcome to what is now called the “Attention Economy”. This is where views from eyeballs are the new currency, scrolling is the gatekeeper, and a logo competes with puppy videos, conspiracy memes, and last night’s highlight reel. It’s not enough to just be seen anymore; you’ve got to be noticed, remembered, and as crazy as it may be – loved. That’s the new equation for ROI, and it’s messier than the junk drawer my wife complains about in the kitchen.

Once upon a time, in a galaxy not far away, sponsorships were simple. Slap a logo on a t-shirt, congratulate your team for achieving “brand visibility,” and hope someone noticed. On the air, we just came up with features like weather or traffic and gave it a five second sponsorship billboard, perhaps an adjacency and voila! Alas, that was the old world, before algorithms ruled and audiences developed the attention span of a goldfish on a double-shot espresso.

Now, proving ROI isn’t about who saw your logo; it’s about who felt something when they did.

Let’s consider the evolution of sports sponsorships. For decades, a logo on a jersey was considered prime exposure. Today, users scroll past a majority percentage of videos within the first few seconds. Yet it counts as a view. But did it amount to anything in their minds and make them feel something? That’s the real question.

These days, sponsorships succeed much more when they enhance an experience with some sort of exclusive content, backstage access, interactive apps, or social storytelling. That’s what sponsors seek more of. They demand those things that cut-through and amplify. The “pièce de resistance” is only achieved when the sponsorship creates a moment that people want to share. That’s when engagement becomes organic, and ROI is measurable in more than traditional ways.

None of this should come as a shocker! After all, the best definition of a brand is, “a promise, based on a relationship, wrapped inside some addictive, emotional experience.” It’s nothing less than a “marriage” with the consumer that touches the heart. This applies to music or sports entertainment cause-based partnerships. A beverage company sponsoring a sporting event for instance, can no longer rely on product tents and signage. But if their brand powers a meaningful initiative that provides hydration stations and is tied to social challenges, or creates content that moves beyond the venue, the sponsorship generates impact that lives long after the event ends. That’s modern sponsorship ROI. It’s truly less about a logo and more about meaningful participation. (As an aside, the cash register in my radio mind, is still the best measurement of ROI.)

Data for marketers now plays an enormous role in their ROI equation. Real-time analytics track clicks, QR scans, sentiment, and conversions are tied directly to sponsorship activations. AI-driven insights can even attribute sales spikes or engagement lifts to specific sponsored moments. The combination of emotional resonance and quantifiable data allows brands to tell a more complete story of value—one that satisfies both the CMO and the CFO. Is all the data real? We’ve heard it’s quantifiable but does it all truly qualify? No one really knows for sure, but that’s for a different article.

For media companies, this shift has called for a new sales strategy. It’s no longer about selling airtime or signage; it’s about selling solutions. I remember when I was with Saga Communications and Chris Forgy (now President/CEO) was running the Columbus Radio Group. He had a sign outside the building that read, “The Solution Store”. He saw this need a decade earlier than anyone. Today, clients want proof that their investment works. Successful media sellers now package creative storytelling, audience insights, and performance metrics into every proposal. They no longer offer exposure; they deliver outcomes.

Ultimately, proving sponsorship ROI in the attention economy means demonstrating that the partnership didn’t just capture eyes, it captured hearts and drove action. If attention seems to be the new currency, then authenticity is the exchange rate. At a time when digital consumers can skip, scroll, or block anything they don’t care about, the true ROI those sponsors care about will continue to be measured by relevance, resonance, and results.

Let’s also keep in mind that attention is not only new currency, it’s in very short supply. Most people can’t watch a full 10-second ad without frantically looking for “skip”, proving the ROI of your sponsorship has become both an art and a science, and occasionally nothing short of a high-flying trapeze act.

Proving sponsorship ROI today means moving beyond impressions to expressions and trying to measure how people feel, share, and act after being exposed to a brand. Sponsorship is already less about how loud you were and more about how deeply you connected. So, welcome to the Attention Economy, where the only thing harder than getting noticed is proving it was worth it.

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 Izzy’s One-Woman Morning Show Is Captivating Phoenix Radio Audiences

0

The thing about conventional wisdom is that it’s, well, conventional. That means everyone tends to follow it. For example, the conventional wisdom about morning drive at a radio station is that you can’t have ratings success with a solo host playing a lot of music. To compete with other stations that all have multiple-person, content intensive morning shows, you must have one too.

I’m not saying there isn’t something to that. A solo host playing a lot of music in morning drive can be a tough way to get ratings but with the right host anything is possible. Take for example, the successful run that Kelly Ferry, better known to listeners as Izzy, has been having on Hubbard’s ALT AZ 93.3/Phoenix where she is regularly in the Top five with Adults 18-34, 18-49 and 25-54.

Ferry is the only one in the studio, with no co-hosts or producer to help, but she is not alone. Her show is based on a strong connection with, and heavy participation from, the audience. “I make the show more about them than about me,” she explains. “Listeners love being heard. They love telling their stories. So, I lean on them. They’re my cohosts.”

Her signature segment Blow My Mind features a daily topic with listeners calling in to share their stories with the best call winning a prize. She posts the subject on social media ahead of time and then, after the official on-air topic is revealed during the show, the calls just come flowing in. “Honestly I don’t have to do much to get it going,” she says. “People think their story is the best story and they want to tell it.”

And those stories can be about almost anything, with a few exceptions like politics. “That is simply a no,” she laughs. “Same with religion and a few other hot topics.” But beyond that, she says, they’ll talk about anything, “drugs; sex; relationships; whatever. They’re down to share their trauma.”

Her other rule is to be wary of topics suggested by the station’s midday host, Izzy’s close friend, Mo. “It’s literally a running joke with us. Anytime she gives me a topic, I get like zero calls.”

Knowing what to ask and what to avoid, along with the audience’s willingness to tell Izzy everything has led to memorable moments ranging from serious and seriously funny. “There’s a guy who told me about losing his wife to cancer and we were both crying. I still check on him when he calls,” she says. “But there was also a woman who ran herself over because she forgot to put her car in park. She broke her ankle, and nobody helped her. It was awful and hysterical.”

Izzy’s Stories

It’s not just the audience participation that sets Ferry’s show apart from other solo morning hosts. She has a unique ability to weave her own stories, about all kinds of topics, into the show in a compelling way that brings listeners back for more.

The key, she insists, is authenticity. Ferry says she doesn’t play “radio host.” She talks to the audience like a friend. Sometimes that means being funny, but other times it’s about being vulnerable. “If it’s something that makes me laugh or something I’m learning about myself, I’ll share it. I talk about personal growth, embarrassing stuff, even moments where I’m scared or unsure. People connect to that. They care.”

Her stories start with a spark. “Something will happen during the day, and I’ll write it in my phone,” she says. “It’s the kind of stuff I used to post to social media, but now it’s for the show.” Then, once she has the idea, she’ll expand on it and practice to prepare it for the audience, “I’ll hear myself saying it in my head, like a comedian. Then when I’m on the air it just comes out naturally.”

That openness resonates off the air too. At events, fans approach her like an old friend, already knowing her pets’ names or details about her boyfriend. “It’s always weird when someone feels like they know you and you have no idea who they are,” she says, “but it’s the best compliment. It means they’re really listening. Meeting them in person just strengthens that bond.”

Izzy’s Journey

Izzy’s road to mornings in Phoenix ran through Fresno and Las Vegas, and not every stop was easy. “I definitely had to go through some fires to get here,” she says. “Collaborating with other people on a show can be tough. It’s like dating without the fun stuff.”

But just because she went through butting heads with co-hosts at previous stations doesn’t mean she instantly loved the idea of doing a solo show. In fact, it came as a surprise to her. “When they said they wanted me to do my own show, I was like, ‘Are you sure?’” she says. “Mornings is a big deal. To have all that pressure on just you is scary.”

But once she got over that initial shock she has grown to appreciate the autonomy that the management team at Hubbard has given her. She says it has led to creative freedom and personal growth. “I don’t have to defend myself. I can just be who I am on the air,” Ferry says. “It’s also the first time in my 15-year career that I feel like I’m making a difference. I’ve never felt this connected to listeners before, or this safe being myself on the radio.”

She also credits part of her success to breaking down another piece of conventional wisdom. While the industry, and morning drive are male dominated, she sees being a woman as an advantage. “I’m emotionally intelligent and can have conversations that go deep,” she says. “Sometimes people call with stories about addiction or relationships, and I can really listen and give them a safe space.”

Izzy’s Advice

Asked what she recommends for other women in the industry Ferry says strive to get your authentic voice onto the air. “Be the personality you can be. People want to hear what you have to say.” She adds that it’s important to stand up for yourself, “I hate when people say, ‘you need thick skin.’ That’s just telling you to shut up and take it.”

For other hosts of any gender aspiring to do mornings, she says to be aware that it’s a grind, “Waking up at 4am sucks.” What works for her is making sure to practice self-care and stay centered. “I do meditation, breath work, whatever I need before I get to the station. You must be grounded because the listeners deserve your full attention.”

She also feels it’s important to give yourself some grace. “Not everything’s a home run,” she admits. “Sometimes I’m in the middle of a break and think, wow, this isn’t that funny. But that’s okay. We’re human. And the listeners know you’re real when you mess up.”

But in the end, it’s all about communication. “Radio is just humans talking to other humans,” she says. “If you’re real, if you care, people feel that. And when they do, they’ll follow you anywhere, even at 4 in the morning.”

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.

How Two Different CNN Headlines Show Context Gets Lost in Today’s News Cycle

The very best journalists are typically incredible writers with a distinct flow. The very best editors adapt to that flow and enhance the writing, not disjoint it. This is when a company’s editorial voice can come in and screw everything up — like CNN did in September.

To make matters worse, the other side of the political aisle is using the flub to manipulate their audience.

“Democrats want to offer health care to undocumented migrants. Here’s what that means:” was a headline published by the outlet on September 11, 2019.

The piece, written by Tami Luhby, frames the political stance of the 2020 Democratic candidates — all ten of whom famously raised their hands at the Democratic primary debate when co-moderator Savannah Guthrie asked, “Raise your hand if your government plan would provide coverage for undocumented immigrants.”

President Donald Trump called it “an end to that race.” Spoiler alert: he lost that year.

The CNN piece also broke down how, in 2019, the undocumented — or “illegal alien” for those who prefer to use the actual legal term — could already access health care for free via state or federal funding (thanks to your tax dollars).

But if you just read the headline, all you’re going to get out of it is: Democrats want to give illegal aliens free health care. Not realizing they were already getting free health care in 2019.

Fast forward six years. On September 30, 2025, the very same CNN writer, Tami Luhby, published a piece titled, “Fact check: Trump falsely claims Democrats want to give free health care to ‘illegal aliens’ in government shutdown battle.” Now, if you’re on the right — or extreme right — you can screenshot these two headlines and have an argument. However, it’s an argument out of context (or, as I like to call it, noise for the political gabber).

The 2025 piece outlines what Democrats would like to keep funding: “federal subsidies to help Americans afford Obamacare policies and to reverse deep cuts to Medicaid and other health coverage contained in Trump’s sweeping domestic policy agenda package.” Luhby added, “But neither of those changes would provide health coverage to undocumented immigrants, since they aren’t eligible for either program.”

This last line is mostly true, with the exception of illegal aliens who came over on a boat from Cuba or Haiti, who are provided Medicaid under the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB). It is, more importantly, in Luhby’s report. She even ends the piece by saying, “But the ‘big, beautiful bill’ provision is not directly tied to coverage for undocumented immigrants.”

How does this all tie into CNN’s editorial voice screwing up two well-written and informative pieces about the events happening at the time each was written? The answer is twofold.

One, they are trying to distract readers by claiming something is false when it’s only half false. CNN previously outlined how illegal aliens can receive free health care in the aforementioned 2019 report written by Luhby under President Trump’s first term.

More importantly, it shows that context is key. Sure, the right can argue Democrats want to give health care to illegal aliens because that is a fact.

Of the ten Democrats who took part in the 2019 Democratic primary debate (Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Andrew Yang, Pete Buttigieg, Kirsten Gillibrand, Michael Bennet, Marianne Williamson, John Hickenlooper, and Eric Swalwell), four still hold office, and others have recently echoed support for the sentiment.

But the issue in question is not Medicaid or Obamacare. It’s the funding going directly to hospitals to support their “needs.” This is the funding issue neither side has touched upon, because the right wants to sweep under the rug the fact that Republicans have provided and advocated for funding of hospitals (which provide services to illegal aliens) for decades without blinking an eye.

To quote Jesus, “He who is without sin may cast the first stone.”

Sure, federal funds to hospitals might give free health care to illegals, and yeah, Republicans could be trying to stop the cash flow by claiming their policies are “America First.” But in reality, both sides of the media are acting like red and blue ants in a tube that’s been shaken by an outside force.

Editorial cajoling of headlines to appease your “fact-checking” or fact-searching audience is killing good journalism. It can also kill your brand because factual, catchy headlines from years past will now be held against you in the court of public opinion.

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.

Hits on the Horizon: Charlie Puth, Ella Langley, Cheap Trick, Hayley Williams

0

Welcome back to Hits on the Horizon! October marches on as we creep closer to Halloween. Let’s see if we can “scare” up some more potential hits for programmers and music directors to sink their fangs into!

Starting with Top40/Hot AC, the first tune that jumps out is Charlie Puth’s “Changes. It’s a really good song, which Q92.9 in Pittsburgh, Alice in Denver and San Francisco and 94.3 The Point on the Jersey Shore have lent support to. Next is Jisoo X Zayn’s “Eyes Closed. It scored 6 million streams this week, and KIIS/Los Angeles, Sirius XM-Hits 1, 99.7 Now in San Francisco and others have provided radio airplay. Finally, Khalid’s “Nahis very catchy and scored 2.3 million streams this week. It’s received some early radio love from PST in Trenton, Music Choice and K92 in Roanoke.

Moving into Country, first up is Ella Langley’s “Choosing Texas. It’s a solid song with a good hook and it’s gained radio support so far from 100.3 The Bull in Houston, 93Q Country, and New Country 96.3 in Dallas, and Z104 in Salt Lake City. Another song to get your ears on is Luke Bryan’s “Kansas”.  As the lyric says, “But if it’s a wheatfield, I’ll give you Kansas”.

Heading to Rock, I’m obsessed with Cheap Trick’s “The Riff That Won’t Quit. This song is getting early love from recent Marconi winner for “legendary station” as well as “major market station of the year” WMMR in Philadelphia. Another solid choice from the Alt world is Hayley Williams’ “Parachute. Paramore’s lead singer has generated over 800K in streams, and gained radio love from Sirius XM Alt Nation, Music Choice and WOKV-2 /Jacksonville and WTBV-2 in Tampa.

From the Triple-A format, check out Rocket’s “Another Second Chance. The current radio spin leader is WFPK in Louisville. Others on board include The Current in Minneapolis, 99.1 NXP in Nashville and a few others.

Last, Rhythm this week has two worth listening to. Karri & Kehlani’s “Gois a solid song with a good hook, “smack it up, flip it up!”. Nia Allen’s “Sunshinealso sounds like it has hit potential!

There you go, some tasty ear candy as we head towards Halloween. The best part, no calories or rotting teeth! Happy Listening!

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.

Radio Isn’t Dead — It’s Just Bad at Bragging About It

1

Wait, so you’re telling me radio isn’t dead? But social media influencers, ad agencies, and brand executives across the country are convinced that it is. Oh, so many of the same people who were convinced that the hyper-liberal worldview was here to stay in 2021–22 turned out to be wrong about something else? Color me shocked.

New data released by Nielsen and Edison Research shows that AM/FM radio still accounts for the vast majority of daily time spent listening, with 64% of all listening taking place on ad-supported audio. Of that total time, 62% was spent with AM/FM radio. An additional 20% was spent listening to podcasts, 15% listening to streaming music, and 3% listening to satellite radio.

Now, this is not to say that programmers or content creators should turn their backs on podcasting, live streaming, YouTube, or any of the other important platforms that our brands need to thrive in the future. But it is a reminder that the notion that no one listens to radio — because of what an advertising executive who rides mass transit in a high-density coastal city claims — is simply not backed by data.

And yes, the time-delayed listening to shows via podcasts and other avenues is real and continues to increase. However, radio still doesn’t do a good enough job bragging about what it brings to the table. This is the latest example of hard data that should be shouted from the rooftops.

Another narrative put to rest is the notion that, well, if there are radio listeners, they’re all old. Also not true.

For those aged 25–54, podcast listening rises to 24%, while radio sits at 59%. Meanwhile, in the 18–34 demographic, both podcasts and streaming music see significant growth. In that group, 31% of daily audio time is spent listening to podcasts, while 24% is spent with ad-supported streaming music. AM/FM radio falls to 43% in that sector.

Podcasting clearly has a larger share among the younger demographic, but AM/FM radio still leads by a wide margin with 25–54-year-olds and is even tops with 18–34-year-olds. While margins are shrinking, there is still reason for celebration—especially when considering the narrative that too many unfortunately believe.

And the news gets even better from a News/Talk perspective because talk has inherent advantages that music doesn’t.

Young people are looking for compelling talk content, and while they’re likely to find it on a podcast, the fact that they want it suggests radio has a chance to compete. These potential younger listeners may have to find your station on a social media platform first, then realize that radio is where they can consume your content in real time. But the key point is they want your kind of content: talk. They just may not know where to find you.

Last week, we had high school students stop by our Cumulus KC radio cluster. I began my conversation by asking the room who listened to podcasts. Most of the hands went up.

Then I said to them, “What if I told you that you could listen to your favorite podcaster in real time, knowing that the person on the other side is having that specific conversation with you live, at that exact moment? And if you wanted to, you could interact with that person by phone. That person would also deliver you breaking news in real time that your favorite podcaster would have to take time out to record, upload, and deliver to your phone—and you would be at the mercy of a notification from Apple or Spotify.”

All of a sudden, talk radio’s live and highly personable edge seems awfully compelling, no?

And it’s why, while there are real challenges and headwinds — and serious investment is needed in the future of the format to grow our brands on other platforms — there is still an incredibly strong and compelling case to make for radio, especially talk formats. And the recent data drop this week just backed it up.

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.