A leadership transition inside one of Texas’ most competitive radio markets has created a high-profile programming vacancy at Cox Media Group’sSan Antonio cluster, as longtime market leader Rob Roberts prepares to exit at the end of March after nearly seven years overseeing the company’s Alamo City brands.
Roberts will return to Atlanta with his wife, Melinda, marking the end of a tenure that helped guide the cluster through industry disruption, ratings shifts and the continued integration of digital strategy into legacy broadcast brands.
With his departure set, CMG has opened a search for a Director of Operations, Branding & Programming — a senior-level role that places one executive at the center of music strategy, talent leadership and brand direction for a multi-format group that spans several of San Antonio’s most recognizable signals.
The incoming leader will directly program KONO 101.1 and HITS 105.3, while also overseeing Business News-Talk KONO-AM 860. In addition, the role includes oversight of the Program Directors at 99.5 KISS, 106.7 The Eagle, Y100, and KKYX. The structure centralizes strategic vision. At the same time, it preserves format expertise at each station.
CMG describes the opportunity as a chance to guide a heritage cluster in a market that remains both culturally vibrant and fiercely competitive, where audience loyalty and brand familiarity still matter but must coexist with evolving listening habits and digital consumption patterns.
The company is searching for an executive with deep knowledge of the 25-54 demographic. That audience continues to anchor revenue models across music and spoken-word formats. It requires a careful balance of familiarity, personality, and innovation. Beyond format strategy, the role calls for strong leadership. The executive must shape imaging and refine positioning statements. The job also includes coaching on-air talent to ensure connection and consistency across dayparts.
For programmers seeking a sizable market platform, the opportunity carries unique appeal. It combines heritage brands with modern performance expectations. The role also offers uncommon scale, autonomy, and influence within a competitive landscape. Interested candidates can apply through Cox Media Group’s careers portal. CMG is an equal opportunity employer.
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.
There’s no slowing down how quickly artificial intelligence (AI) is evolving into our everyday lives. With every passing day, resistance to utilizing the technology grows smaller. Companies continue to downsize human staff around the country in favor of AI models that reduce overhead and increase productivity, albeit in some cases not to the same level of quality. Now, sports is getting into the mix, with networks utilizing the technology for more user-based experiences. Yesterday, FOX Sports jumped into the AI pool with Sports AI with Colin Cowherd.
The product leans into the voice and tone of Cowherd, whose confident, debate-ready style anchors the marketing push with the tagline: “You’ve got questions. I’ve got answers.” While this could be considered a breakthrough in technology and an added experience that ties Cowherd consumers closer to the personality, it also runs a giant risk for Cowherd himself.
Dr. Ian Malcolm was a genius. He always asked the right questions when they demanded to be asked about evolution. While we’re not creating dinosaurs here, AI is the future of our society. I often wonder if those in boardrooms filled with people in positions of power are so preoccupied with whether they could create an AI tool instead of asking whether they should.
Following the announcement of the AI tool on The Herd w/Colin Cowherd, I dove into the FOX Sports app to explore the new platform. It presented a sleek, easy user interface. There were options such as ‘catch me up,’ which had AI Colin reciting what it believed were the top stories in sports at the present moment. The prompt then asked for my take on the automated balls and strikes system that MLB is utilizing, looking to strike up a conversation on the matter.
Yes, AI was interested in knowing my opinion on the new ABS technology. It made me wonder: is this more an information companion or an attempt to buy me another beer at the virtual bar?
There’s also a ‘hot take generator,’ which plays into the stereotype that encompasses the sports radio format. Punching the button gave me a Colin Cowherd ‘hot take’ on Anthony Richardson and why he’s not a long-term solution in Indianapolis. An unprompted hot take from a radio personality who’s made a career on them.
You can interrupt AI Colin by simply asking a question about anything else, and I did.
I then asked the AI version of Colin Cowherd about the Tampa Bay Rays’ outlook this season. The tool quickly produced a response. It offered a hot take on their AL East chances. It also broke down the pitching staff and asked a follow-up question to extend the exchange. Honestly, it was more sustained Rays analysis than I recall hearing from Cowherd in years. I previously carried his show on WDAE in Tampa Bay.
Then there is the ‘this day in sports history’ tab on Sports AI with Colin Cowherd, which features AI Colin delivering a sports moment from the past along with a short take on the moment in the cadence and delivery that have made Colin a Hall of Fame radio talent.
The tool gives a real-time, on-demand feel with a personal approach from one of sports radio’s biggest talents. When a game goes final, Colin can share his insight on the outcome in real time. As the Red Sox game went final with a 7-5 win over the Rays Thursday afternoon, I asked AI Colin his thoughts on the matter, which prompted a hot take on how a lopsided inning can determine the outcome of a game.
Boston scored seven runs in the fourth inning, and AI Colin was interested in hearing what I thought about the inning and whether that means good things for the Red Sox’s lineup this coming season.
That real-time feel, aiding the connective tissue between consumer and talent, was amazing to witness. However, it could come at a cost for a number of reasons.
The first is accuracy. I went back to listen to Colin Cowherd’s show on Thursday to hear his ‘hot take’ from non-AI Colin about Lamar Jackson’s contract status and whether that makes the Baltimore Ravens a bubble team for the NFL playoffs next season. On-air Colin said that signing Jackson to a new contract would eliminate the Ravens from being a playoff bubble team because of the amount it would warrant holding back the organization from winning in today’s NFL.
"The Ravens are done being a Super Bowl bubble team. There's no possible way with what they're going to pay him. His current cap hit is $74M."@colincowherd weighs in on the contract negotiations between Lamar Jackson and the Ravens pic.twitter.com/Rpmz9b2TUf
When I asked AI Colin whether the Ravens would be a playoff bubble team if the franchise extended a contract with Lamar Jackson, I got a different response. AI Colin said that the Ravens are no longer a bubble team but a contending team for the Super Bowl in a very detailed and Colin-esque presentation.
I asked the question again with the same prompt and got a completely different response, but one that was closer to what human Colin said on his radio program.
The technology isn’t perfect, nor should it be expected to be. However, Colin represents Colin. Everything he’s associated with, he represents. If AI Colin is willing to give a ‘hot take’ and engage in a personal conversation with the user, shouldn’t it match what human Colin would think all the time?
Also, why would an AI Colin user who’s interested in Colin’s thoughts on the Ravens’ playoff possibilities with a new contract for Lamar Jackson tune in to hear what human Colin believes about it? The ability now to get that content is on demand and in real time.
Ever hear the same ‘hot take’ repeated? It’s an instant tune-out, with audiences wanting something new and fresh from their favorite sports radio personalities instead of what they’ve already been given by the talent.
By allowing his voice, cadence, and sports radio tendencies to train a real-time AI model, he assumes significant responsibility. The stakes are especially high in the AI era. Digital likenesses and fabricated quotes can spread quickly. In a short-form media environment, audiences often react before verifying what is real.
It’s comparable to watching a cover band at a neighborhood bar. Instead of paying to see the headliner, fans settle for an impersonator who delivers a similar experience. For many consumers, that imitation is sufficient. The question becomes strategic. Why would FOX Sports deploy a product built on Colin Cowherd’s name, image, and likeness? The tool is free and available on demand. Yet it is not actually Cowherd. It simply replicates the tone and framework many listeners expect from a sports talk host.
Maybe FOX Sports is right, and this is the inevitable evolution of sports media. Maybe this reflects what modern audiences truly prefer. They may value instant analysis over scheduled programming. They may want customized debate tailored to their specific questions. Frictionless access to a familiar personality could outweigh waiting for a three-hour terrestrial radio window. There’s no call screener. No commercial break. No tease to “we’ll get to that after the break.” Just answers.
But that’s also the danger, even if you’re the first one into the AI party.
What makes Colin Cowherd valuable isn’t just the cadence or the hot takes. It’s the humanity. The conviction behind the opinion. It’s the accountability that comes with saying something on the air and standing by it the next day — or adjusting when you were wrong.
An AI model can replicate tone, rhythm, and the structure of a rant. What it cannot replicate is ownership. When a take lands flat, who owns it? How about when it contradicts itself, who explains it? When it goes viral for the wrong reason, who defends it?
Colin built his brand on being unmistakably Colin. The pauses, and analogies along with his self-awareness. That brand now lives in two places: the studio and the server. And one of those doesn’t sleep. The value of his words loses value when they’re on demand, with the world having his words at its fingertips.
FOX Sports may have created a powerful engagement tool. They may have built the next phase of audience interaction. However, in doing so, they’ve also blurred the line between personality and product. Between commentary and code.
The real question isn’t whether AI can sound like Colin Cowherd. It’s whether, over time, it makes Colin Cowherd sound replaceable.
Because in sports media — just like in life — once the audience believes the substitute is “close enough,” the original suddenly becomes optional.
And that’s a gamble far bigger than any hot take.
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.
Sean Hannity is one of the busiest men in news media. He hosts the nationally syndicated Sean Hannity Show on news/talk radio for Premiere Networks, in addition to his primetime cable news program with Fox News.
So, you might think that would take up most of his time. But you’d be wrong.
Beginning next week, Hang Out with Sean Hannity will debut. The podcast will release new episodes twice per week, featuring long-form conversations between Hannity and guests filmed inside his Florida man cave.
In an interview earlier this week, Sean Hannity explained why it was important for him to branch out into this lane — which is similar to his Sean program for Fox Nation — and expand to YouTube, Spotify, and other major podcast platforms.
Garrett Searight: What was the inspiration for you to want to branch out and do something like this?
Sean Hannity: It’s a great question. I started one for Fox Nation, which obviously is subscription-based, and we had great shows, and we had Sly Stallone and his wife, and Gary Brecka in the health space with Jillian Michaels and Stephen A. Smith, and Montell Williams. We just had different people, long form. Some went a couple of hours, although I don’t think they ran the whole thing the way that we will on this podcast. And I actually just offered to do it. I said I wanted to do it, and they said, do it, and it did really, really well for Nation.
I do radio. And I do TV. I have my routine. And then I have these periods of time where I just looked at my schedule and I realized I would love to do long form, very different from what I do on radio, very different from what I do on TV. And I discovered things that I never thought would happen before.
When Stephen A. told the story about having dyslexia as a kid and being held back in 3rd and 4th grade, and how that motivated him to be who he was, that really inspired me. When Jillian Michaels, here we know her as one of the greatest health, wellness, fitness people in the country, was young and she’s tiny. She’s 5 foot two. She’s small. But she weighed over 170 pounds and the impact that had on her life. It really is fascinating to hear that backstory.
When I had Tony Robbins on, and he told the story that when he was growing up, his family didn’t have a lot of money, and a neighbor came by with Thanksgiving dinner, and his father yelled at the guy for thinking that he was poor, even though Tony, as a young kid, really wanted that food. It inspired him to later in life come up with programs. He’s going to feed like a trillion people, and he’s doing it, and how it impacted his life. Or Montell Williams literally cried on the podcast when I talked about the hardest moments after he was diagnosed with MS and living with MS.
But then we also do a little bit different version of what I do on radio and TV, which is I don’t have to interrupt somebody if they want to explain why they have a political point of view that is very different from mine. I can let them have four, five, six minutes, and then we pick up the discussion from there. Can I still press them for an answer? Absolutely. I’m going to be me. But it just gives you a level of freedom. Time is freedom in that space. And I’m just looking forward to doing it, doing it a little differently.
I’m kind of looking at it like I’m beginning my radio career in as much as when I started, I was on a college station that nobody listened to. And I’m looking at it like starting a podcast and a channel that doesn’t exist. If I build a good show, I’m pretty confident that the audience will come. And I’ve kind of surveyed the podcast world. There’s things that I like out there, and there are things that I don’t like out there. I just feel like there is a place for what I have, and in terms of the vision in my mind where I want to take it.
GS: So when you say you look at your schedule and see that you have time to do a podcast, are you somebody who is constantly “on” and constantly thinking about both the radio show and the primetime show?
SH: I would say that’s a pretty accurate statement. I don’t sleep a lot. I work a lot. And I enjoy my work. I feel blessed to do what I do every day. However, in radio, you have 15-minute segments. You got to take a break, then you come back, short segment, come back, then do another long segment, and sometimes I’m interacting with callers. I’m interacting with guests. Sometimes I’m doing a long monologue on an issue of the day.
So, it’s just a way to do things differently on a more personal basis and expand my horizons a little bit. Because, believe it or not, outside of the world of politics — which both shows are heavily involved in — I have a lot of other interests in my life. And that’s an opportunity for me to pursue conversations in those arenas as well. But there will be politics. I’m not saying that that’s not going to happen. We have some really good guests that are booked to start the podcast, to launch it, and I’m taking the long view on this. I’m in this for the long haul.
I’m just excited at the prospect that I can have long conversations with people I like, people I maybe don’t know, people I disagree with, and people I agree with. And then talk about a variety of things that I’m really into that I never really have time to talk about on air. I’m very much into health, wellness, fitness, nutrition, and martial arts. So that’s going to be a big part of the podcast.
We’re going to talk a lot about other people, their lives, how they became successful. I’ll talk to people that I disagree with, but it won’t be in a six-minute segment where I have to get an answer out of somebody on an important question, and they’re trying to duck and dodge and weave. I’ll stay there for an hour until I get an answer to the question now. And I don’t have to be as interruptive, and it doesn’t have to be as contentious. So I’m really excited about it. My foray into this with Fox Nation worked out really well, and I just kind of feel like this is the beginning for me.
GS: Literally, nobody in the history of cable news has done more shows than you. So what are the things that still motivate you to get up and do a great show every day?
SH: You know what’s great about my job? Every single day is different. Every day, because every single day the news is different, and while there are certainly principles that guide my political point of view. And those principles really have not changed for me throughout my entire career. I’ve evolved on some issues. I’ve changed my view on some issues. But I started out as a Reagan conservative on air, and kind of evolved into a Reagan, MAGA conservative because times changed.
And I’m very fond of the idea that, for example, on the issue of national security, national defense. We don’t ever have to ask our national treasure, our kids, to go door to door like they did in Iraq, and step over IEDs and not have armored Humvees, because I would argue that the next generation of weaponry, that future conflicts are going to be fought in air-conditioned offices someplace in the US, and not on the battlefield.
So we’re living through an age where everything is changing at the speed of light. When people say artificial intelligence is the future, my answer to that is no, it’s the present. It’s happening right now, right before our eyes. And it is accelerated at a pace that I don’t think even people that work in the field anticipated. And that’s become a big part of my life. I don’t know if you use AI at all, but I use it every day. And I’m addicted to it.
Another topic of real keen interest of mine is technology, the future, the evolving workplace employment, how it’s going to impact pretty much every industry that everybody works in, including yours, including mine. And we’re at a point where, which I don’t do, but I could do, and I’ve played around with it. I could ask Grok, “Hey, please tell me what Sean Hannity might say on today’s economic news,” and it will come back with a pretty convincing, comprehensive answer that is something close to what I would say. I’m not replaceable yet, though, Garrett.
GS: I was going to ask: Glenn Beck is doing full-on AI podcasts or video shows. Would that be something that you would look into embracing in the future?
SH: No, it’s not something I would embrace in the future. I saw that he did it, and I was curious about what he did, and I found it interesting. I think it’s a great way to educate the public about how impactful this is going to be. And I know that there are a lot of worries and concerns on Wall Street and the impact that it’s going to have on the economy, the impact that may have in terms of jobs.
Look, for example, at, how jobs in the auto industry have been taken over by robotics. The robotics that are coming are absolutely beyond, I think, what most people understand. If you, for example, if Tesla has a robot that they keep every year, they come out with a new series, the new iteration, the new advancements of it. And for example, the more difficult thing a couple of years ago was to get the robot to have dexterity in its hands to do simple tasks. And they’ve been able to overcome that obstacle dramatically. So that might impact manufacturing jobs of people. But on the other side of it, it’s going to create a whole other group of jobs for people that we didn’t anticipate either.
GS: When you sit down and see a story, how do you weigh what works best on radio and what works best on TV?
SH: Boy, that’s a great question. On radio, it’s all energy. And the only way that I have to communicate with the audience, which I love, is through my voice, inflection, cadence, pitch, and tone. On TV, I could just look at somebody, and I could roll my eyes up, and I can communicate a lot to my audience. So they’re both powerful mediums.
I think in radio, you really have to connect with somebody’s heart and mind. And I think on TV, you just have other tools available for communication. And I think with a podcast, I think people are going to see me dressed down the way I usually dress in life. I don’t like to wear a tie, which I don’t wear on TV anymore. I don’t like to wear a jacket, and I don’t like to wear a stiff collar shirt. So I might wear either a t-shirt or I’m going to wear a linen cotton shirt and jeans, and just be hanging out, and that’s kind of the atmosphere that I’m going to try and create on the podcast.
Actually, I have three Democrats booked for the first two weeks of the podcast that I think would surprise you. But they know me well enough to know that I will be fair to them and give them an opportunity to express their point of view, and give them time to talk. Maybe one of the criticisms you get is that when you have shorter segments, TV or radio, especially if you disagree with somebody, you have to be a little bit more interruptive than you want to be.
I would rather let them finish their answer than say, “but you still didn’t answer my question,” and then do it that way. Give them time to finish their entire thought, go off on a completely different tangent than what I was asking them about. But then I’m going to think it’ll be more impactful to say, “You just spent five minutes answering a question without answering my question.” And then at that point, they’re going to feel a little more pressure to answer the question. So I’m hoping for that.
I went to the set for the first time yesterday. I couldn’t have been more excited. And there’s going to be some social media videos coming out on that.
A first look inside the new podcast studio.
Hang Out with Sean Hannity premieres March 3. Subscribe now on Youtube and Spotify. pic.twitter.com/J0FeIBC6ES
When I started out in my adult life, I came from a lower-middle-class family where my parents grew up very poor. And my mom, who grew up in the South Bronx, who was valedictorian of her high school class and could do the New York Times crossword puzzle in ink, didn’t have money to go to college. So she ended up being a prison guard, working 16-hour shifts her whole life. And my dad, who grew up in Bed-Stuy, again very poor. All four of my grandparents came from Ireland — legally, if you’re interested, because that’s such a big issue these days — and came to Ellis Island.
My dad had a very tough life. He grew up there in the Depression, fought four years in the Pacific in World War II, and it was a big deal when they moved out to a little 50 by 100 lot Levitt house, Cape Cod, on Long Island, in Franklin Square.
The one thing that they really instilled in me, that sticks with me to this day, because I don’t have to do this. I’ve made enough money. I’ve been fortunate enough in my career. But I didn’t get into it because I wanted to make money or ever thought I’d be successful. I do it because I love it. And the minute that that mic went on, the red light went on, at a radio station back in the 80s, it just changed my life. What I realized is that’s where I want to be. And I realized that there are still things I want to accomplish that I can’t accomplish in the current formats that I’m working in. And the idea that Fox is going to let me do it makes me happy. I want to do it. I’m embracing it.
My parents taught me one thing: a work ethic. At eight, I was delivering papers. At 12 years old, I was washing dishes in a restaurant every Friday, Saturday, Sunday night until two in the morning. And at 13, I was a cook. Then I was a bus boy, a bartender. I spent 10 years of my life in construction, got behind a radio mic, and my life changed. And that’s all I ever wanted to do, and that passion has not left.
The only thing I can compare it to — without daring to compare myself to Rush, because there never will be another Rush Limbaugh — is if you recall when Rush got sick and announced that he had stage four advanced lung cancer, it took my breath away. Because you’d think that people are going to be with you forever. And people that you admire and people that you love, and I knew Rush, and he couldn’t have been nicer to me throughout my career.
If you really look at it, here’s a guy that had a Gulfstream, a guy that had a huge mansion in Palm Beach, a guy that by every outside measure had achieved everything he wanted to achieve in life. And yet, he would go through the most brutal chemotherapy, radiation treatments you could ever imagine. And what was Rush’s bucket list? Was it to go to Europe? Was it to go to Australia? Or was it to take a big trip? No. His bucket list was just to get well enough that he could get back on the air and do his show.
And that was how he spent the last year of his life. So really, his bucket list was what he was doing every day. And as I reflect back on my life and the opportunities that I’ve had in the 30 years now that I’ve been at Fox, and all the years I’ve been on radio, to have this opportunity for me is just another level of excitement for me. And nothing has changed from that first day that I cracked a microphone. Nothing. I feel the same way today as I felt then. If anything, I’d like to think that I can do it better than I did then.
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.
No two syndicated radio shows ever follow the exact same path to stardom, but many share the same goal. Some want the biggest national reach to build their profile as a talent. Others are looking for a way to make more money than what’s available at just one station. Some just want to talk all over the world. For Greg “Woody” Wood, Chris Wilcox, and Chelsea Paxton, better known as The Woody and Wilcox Show, their entry into syndication was more about ‘career stability.’
“Self-preservation is why we decided to syndicate. We figured maybe if we’re on enough stations they can’t fire us,” explained Wilcox.
For many shows, that would be a facetious answer. But talk to the team for a while and you get the sense they really mean it. In one form or another, Woody and Wilcox had already been fired by iHeartRadio and CBS before they landed together in Anchorage at Classic Rock KBFX, where the show truly came together.
“What sold me about going to Anchorage was when I asked how much music they wanted us to play,” said Wilcox. “The response was ‘I guess you can play some if you want to.’”
Woody says being given that freedom was important to the growth of the show. He referenced it to being given the set of keys to the car before the big race. The program stayed at KFBX for four years before making it known inside iHeartMedia that they wanted to return to the lower forty-eight.
“When we told them we wanted to move the answer was ‘of course you do, we never thought you’d stay that long,’” said Wilcox.
Eventually, that request brought them to WEND in Charlotte. The move unexpectedly kickstarted their syndication when the company decided to continue airing their show in Anchorage. Everyone associated with the program expected that initial simulcast to last a year or two. Twenty years later, it’s now the market’s longest-running show.
Charlotte is also where Chelsea joined the team and quickly gelled with the program. That instant friendship and chemistry led them to increase their syndication efforts to build more ‘career stability.’
“What makes the show work is the three of us and the relationship we share,” says Woody. “We love each other. That means we can give each other the business without being mean. The dynamic is so familiar to people. When listeners tune in they immediately identify with it.”
Like most families, they spend more time talking about their personal lives than anything else.
“We’re not into pop culture or Dancing with the Stars,” says Chelsea. “We do talk about topical things. Most of them are ridiculous and that’s the draw of it.”
The show has also made a conscious decision not to talk about politics, providing a respite for listeners. That wasn’t an easy choice, and it’s something Wilcox says they still wrestle with on the program.
“It’s harder now because everything is political. We made the decision not to talk about it, but I still wonder if we’re doing the right thing,” questioned Wilcox.
That doesn’t mean they shy away from serious topics that affect the team, which included Chelsea’s personal battle with breast cancer. The topic touched home for so many listeners, and was a big part of the program’s content. There was also another incident involving Chelsea’s child bring involved in a horrible car accident.
“She got the call while we were on the air,” Woody continues, “Wilcox and I started making fun of the situation until it turned out to be serious. Then we immediately fell on the sword saying, ‘man we are such a-holes.’”
Like most family units, each has a defined role. It starts with Woody, whose opinions might make him sound like an alien. However, he knows what his job is and where his towel is trying to get a rise out of his fellow teammates and listeners.
“I’m the antagonist,” he explains. “I’m the guy who makes you look down at the radio, cock your head sideways like a dog and wonder ‘did he just say that,’” said Woody. “I want them to think what I just said was so outlandishly wrong. But I said it with so much confidence that they have to correct me. If I can do that without making anyone super angry, I’ve done my job.”
As for Wilcox and Chelsea, the approach is much different than Woody. Wilcox’s main role is the straight man, while Chelsea is the smart one of the ensemble.
“When she speaks, it’s with the passion of someone who feels very deeply about things with the intelligence to back it up,” says Woody. “Both Wilcox and I are two goofballs who can’t believe she read an entire book in a weekend.”
Wilcox favors their dynamic because it’s different than many traditional radio morning shows. In many cases, typically the woman in the studio was only there to laugh at or agree with the other guys. Not in this case with The Woody and Wilcox Show.
“It cuts against the grain of most rock shows with two guys and a woman,” says Wilcox.
In addition to the three of them, there is their producer ‘Cool Beans.’ She served as an accountant for the IRS before deciding she hated the job and moved into radio. Wilcox considers both ‘Cool Beans’ and Chelsea to be overqualified for the positions they keep.
Being syndicated across five time zones by Radio Resources has created a loyal group of listeners who regularly contribute great content. Some of the mainstays include Chuck Diapers, Hooters Eric, and Woody’s little league coach.
“We have such a unique group of people out in the world. Everything we talk about someone will call in and know something about it,” says Chelsea.
Unlike many talk-heavy shows, none of the callers air live. Instead, every call comes to Wilcox as an audio file that he edits before it hits the air. There’s strategy in that method to ensure that momentum is never wasted on a day-to-day program for the audience.
“When you take a live phone call, you always could have cut ten to fifteen seconds out. That’s what Wilcox does for four hours,” explains Woody. “These callers have never been on the air. They don’t know to get to the punchline and never had a PD yell at them. So Wilcox is saving them from an aircheck session.”
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.
On February 22, 2026 — exactly 46 years to the day after the Miracle on Ice. The United States men’s hockey team did something it hadn’t done since a group of college kids shocked the Soviet Union in Lake Placid: win Olympic gold.
A 2-1 overtime victory over Canada in Milan. Dentally challenged Jack Hughes firing a five-hole shot past Jordan Binnington 1:41 into overtime, missing teeth and all. NBC’s Kenny Albert delivering a call that is still bouncing off satellite dishes across the country: “Jack Hughes wins it, the golden goal for the United States.”
Now comes the debate that every sports media outlet in America will wrestle with for years: Can 2026 ever sit alongside 1980 in the American sports pantheon? More urgently — what does it mean for how this country covers, consumes and cares about hockey going forward?
Before the mythology machine fully cranks up, let’s acknowledge what the stats say.
Canada was dominant. They outshot the United States 42-28. They scored 28 goals in the tournament — nearly five per game. In the second period alone, they fired 19 shots on goal, the most by any team in a single period in Olympic gold medal game history.
If this were a boxing match, every judge at ringside had Canada winning on points going into the 12th round.
Yet they couldn’t beat Connor Hellebuyck, who stopped 41 of 42 shots. He turned away a Connor McDavid breakaway and a Macklin Celebrini breakaway. He survived a 5-on-3 power play that should have broken the Americans completely.
In the third period, he reached back and denied Devon Toews on a shot that had no right to be stopped. Toews stared at an open net. Hellebuyck found the one inch of space the puck could reach and beat it there. That save alone will be looped on highlight reels for decades.
Oh, and Jack Hughes had already lost multiple teeth to a high stick before he went out and scored the overtime winner. Try finding that kind of toughness in most professional sports today. LeBron and Luka would still be arguing with officials.
The media should be screaming from every platform it has: Hockey, the last real sport.
Here’s the number that should be changing editorial calendars right now: 26 million. That’s how many Americans were watching when Hughes scored in a gold medal game that started at 8:15 Eastern in the morning.
On a Sunday. Before most of the country had finished its first cup of coffee. The live audience was 18.6 million on NBC and Peacock, making it the most-watched sporting event before 9 a.m. ET in United States history.
Not just for hockey. Not just for the Olympics. For all of American sports history.
For context, more Americans watched this hockey game before breakfast than typically tune into the NBA Finals in prime time. The sports media world has spent years handwringing about hockey’s place in the American sports conversation — too regional, too niche. Sunday morning answered that question definitively.
The audience is there. The appetite is real. The question now is whether the industry has the nerve to feed it.
Team USA is taking home the GOLD. Relive Team USA's golden moment in full. 💪🥇 pic.twitter.com/eKIn0gbsdd
ESPN and TNT Sports should be asking hard questions this week. Will they invest more in hockey coverage? Push more regular-season NHL games into prominent windows? Will they chase this moment the way ABC chased college basketball after 1979, when Magic and Bird made the sport must-see television overnight?
They should. The blueprint sits in the ratings data.
Then there’s the broader media culture question: Will this game create hockey fans? It should. Jack Hughes missing teeth and scoring in overtime is exactly the kind of image that converts casual viewers into believers.
The NBA has spent years marketing its stars while its product has become a nightly flop-a-thon, foul-shot competition and load-management showcase. Meanwhile, Hughes didn’t blink. Nobody asked whether his tooth situation required a “maintenance day.” He played. He scored. That contrast writes itself, and smart sports media should be writing it loudly.
In 1980, the United States beat the Soviet Union. The Soviets had beaten the NHL All-Stars in an exhibition shortly before the Olympics. They were considered unbeatable. The Americans were amateurs, mostly college players, facing a professional machine built by a state.
Al Michaels’ call — “Do you believe in miracles?” — wasn’t hyperbole. It was a sincere question, asked in real time, because few in that building believed what they were watching. America still had to beat Finland 4-2 to win gold, a game that felt almost anticlimactic by comparison. The miracle had already happened.
In 2026, the Americans were not amateurs. They were NHL stars competing against the best Canadian team in years, and it seemed gold was destined to return to the Great White North. Still, this was a rivalry. The United States has now won Olympic gold in hockey exactly three times in more than 100 years of the sport — 1960, 1980 and 2026. They were not plucky unknowns.
However, they were not expected to win, and Hellebuyck’s brilliance combined with Hughes’ golden goal created the kind of athletic drama that sports media lives for.
What 2026 has that 1980 doesn’t is Canada as the perfect foil — the country that invented the sport, treats it as a national birthright and hasn’t seen a Canadian franchise win the Stanley Cup since the 1993 Montreal Canadiens. The maple leaf crowd has waited for an Olympics to heal that wound. Instead, it watched salt poured in by the Americans on the anniversary of Lake Placid, no less.
Kenny Albert’s call isn’t “Do you believe in miracles?” — nothing ever will be — but it doesn’t need to be. It only needs to be remembered, and now it will be.
The honest answer is that 1980 will always be the Miracle. Al Michaels still owns the greatest call in sports broadcasting history. 2026 is not trying to be 1980. It’s trying to stand on its own — and it has the raw material. Hellebuyck’s Toews save. Hughes’ bloody, toothless smile after the golden goal. A viewership record that rewrote the rulebook for morning sports television.
A Canada-USA rivalry that now has a new, burning chapter.
The media’s job now is to keep this moment alive. Cover the NHL with the urgency it deserves. The Stanley Cup Playoffs are coming up, competing with the NBA, and the action sells if the right networks fully embrace it.
At the same time, acknowledge basketball’s issues with tanking, fouling, stoppages and overall style. Once a hockey period starts, there are no bathroom breaks. The pace is relentless. NBA whistles create a symphony of uneven play, followed by a parade of players berating officials.
Plaster hockey players on the front of ESPN.com. Lead SportsCenter with pucks. Include hockey topics among the burning questions on morning sports talk shows, not just another recycled LeBron take. Tell this story every February 22. Make Jack Hughes what Magic Johnson became after 1979 — not just a great player, but a symbol of something larger.
The audience proved Sunday morning that it’s ready. The only question is whether the sports media industry is ready to meet it.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
I unfollowed a childhood friend this week. No drama, no rock radio issues, but he just lives in Lake Me.
Do you know about Lake Me? It’s not a bad place but people drown there.
It traps talent, brands, and it can pull anyone under. It brings problems on the air, but online is the deep end.
Lake Me is where everything is about you:
Your wins
Your grind
Your brilliance
Your opinion on everything
Even your mundane
It’s ok to celebrate yourself. Post the selfie with Grohl, show off your grilled cheese masterpiece, and let us know if you save a baby from a burning building. Just make sure that seesaw comes down after your personal high and gives a ride up for others, because they’re expecting it.
Why are they expecting it? Social media is personal. It’s my personal page.
Yes, it is. But it’s also personal for scrollers and fans. If talent and brands don’t remember that — and only deliver exhausting laps in Lake Me — that’s when it gets dangerous.
Fair or not, most everything talent or brands do online is viewed as business in the eyes of others, especially clients and fans. That’s the difference between Lake Me and Lake Them.
Lake Me vs. Lake Them
Lake Me fills your personal tank, your self-worth, the achievements, stuff you really care about. While important, it’s best used in moderation. Lake Them is what builds an audience, creates bonds, and includes them.
Lake Me harmlessly says:
Long week of shows, meetings and appearances. No show tomorrow, I’m just chillin’ tonight with Jack Daniels and Netflix.
That’s fine. But who’s that for? It’s “look at me” with a status update no one asked for. Too much of that and you’ll have fewer followers than I do.
Lake Them says:
Finally the weekend. Jack Daniels and Netflix. Got any Night Agent drinking games? Takeout musts?
Both are touchpoints: whiskey, Netflix and chill. But the intent is different. Different relationships. The Lake Me post won’t get you kicked off social, but it was a humble brag about meetings and appearances and a one-way broadcast about YOU… or ME. Lake Them was a conversational invite into your evening. Subtle difference, but important.
Not everything needs to drive interaction but how we talk to the audience matters. Scrollers notice.
More examples:
Lake Me: Ratings came out today. The show was #1 AGAIN.
Lake Them: Ratings say #1 again. Probably a mistake, there should be a recount.
Lake Me: Sorry I haven’t posted in a few days. Big paydays are great but traveling for keynotes is brutal.
Lake Them: Been running around pretending I’m smart to pay the rent. What’d I miss, fill me in?
Now think about rock bands. Some treat every day like it’s their birthday. But those that stand out build careers on songs that make fans feel something — a collective experience, a shared identity, the fans are always on blast — that’s Lake Them.
But it all shifts when fans feel like they’re suddenly being lectured or talked at — the whole vibe changes. You feel it and see it: when artist preach, talk too loudly about themselves or slip into too much Lake Me, fans will drift down the lake to other boats.
It’s important to be you and let the world know when you’re killing it. Just don’t forget that intent is felt and it’s not always all about you. It’s also easy to spot the regulars quietly shouting, “Look at ME… I’m in Lake ME.”
“I” more than “you.”
Posts are like lectures or acceptance speeches.
Experts on everything.
Trying to force boring into being relevant.
Credit rarely shared.
Reciprocal interaction is sparse.
Humble brags in disguise
That’s chlorine poisoning.
For onliners, there’s no discernible difference between personal pages and brand pages, and the audience wants you in Lake Them.
If you’re a manager, have a chat about Lake Me with your team. And just for fun, review your FB or IG feeds and count all the “Lake Me” posts you see today. You won’t be able to unsee them.
Lake Me.
Go for a swim.
Just don’t become a VIP member.
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.
Conan O’Brien didn’t mince words when he talked about the freedom he’s found in podcasting. The longtime late-night host made it clear that the medium has given him something traditional broadcasting never quite could: room to breathe.
For those in spoken-word radio, his comments should resonate — and maybe sting a little.
Podcasting will always have a leg up in at least one critical area: hyperpersonalization. That edge isn’t going away. It isn’t dependent on quarterly ratings or transmitter reach. It’s baked into the DNA of the format.
O’Brien recently explained just how different his creative life feels now.
“I think I reach more people now, either through the podcast or doing the travel show. I have all this freedom to be me in different ways, in different formats,” he said during an appearance on The New Yorker Radio Hour. “There’s a lot of really beautiful opportunities, and I’ve been having a blast and getting to have types of interviews I never could have had in that old ‘you’re up in the attic’ format.”
That’s not just a celebrity enjoying a second act. In transparency’s sake, I’m a big Conan O’Brien fan. I think he’s a comedic genius. That’s why I believe his thoughts are a blueprint for why podcasting keeps pulling talent and audience alike.
Broadcast radio, especially in the spoken-word space, is built on mass appeal within a defined geography. Stations need to capture the largest possible share of a specific market. They’re tasked with serving a metro. They live and die by how many people in that area they can aggregate at once.
Podcasters don’t have that burden. They don’t have to win mornings in Dallas or afternoons in Phoenix. They don’t have to super-serve a 35+ demo in a single ZIP code. Instead, they can chase a niche audience scattered across the country, with reckless abandon, and build something sustainable around it.
That hyperpersonalized nature is an enduring advantage. A true-crime host can speak directly to diehards who want forensic detail. A political podcaster can zero in on whatever minutiae they deem important. A comedy show can lean into absurdity without worrying about offending half the cume of Peoria.
None of that means podcasters don’t want big numbers, obviously. They absolutely do. Scale matters for ad revenue and influence. But they’re not bound to casting the widest possible net in a specific city just to survive. They can thrive with depth instead of sheer breadth.
That freedom extends beyond content. It touches format and structure, too.
“I can talk to Robert Caro for an hour and a half, and then talk to Al Pacino, but then talk to Charlie XCX for an hour. I mean, this old format is going away, but they’re being replaced by a multitude of other ways to connect with people and be funny, and be satirical, and be probing, and let your talent run wild — that in some ways are more freeing,” O’Brien said. “And you can be master of your own destiny. You’re not working for, ultimately, a giant toothpaste company or whoever it is who owns your studio.”
That’s the ballgame. An hour and a half with Robert Caro doesn’t fit neatly into a terrestrial clock. Neither does a freewheeling deep dive with Al Pacino. Spoken-word radio lives inside spot blocks and hard outs. Podcasting lives inside conversations.
Which brings us to another structural advantage: lighter spot loads.
Anyone who listens to commercial news/talk radio knows the drill. Four-minute breaks. Six-minute breaks. Traffic, weather, legal ID. Then do it all over again. The economics of broadcasting demand it. Running an AM or FM radio station ain’t cheap.
Podcasts operate differently. Host-read ads feel more like endorsements than interruptions. Breaks are shorter and can be harder to decipher that they’re even a read at all. Sometimes they’re skipped entirely by subscribers. Even when they’re present, they’re often integrated into the tone of the show.
That doesn’t mean podcasting is ad-free. It’s not. However, the overall load is almost universally lighter. The listening experience feels less cluttered. For audiences conditioned to expect on-demand control, that matters.
Spoken-word radio can’t simply slash inventory to compete. The math doesn’t work. Public companies have margins to hit. Local operators have payroll to meet. Meanwhile, a podcaster with a lean team and national reach can build a profitable business with fewer interruptions and a more intimate feel.
Intimacy might be the real secret sauce. Podcasts live in earbuds. They’re consumed at the gym, on a walk, during a commute. Hosts often speak in a more conversational tone. The relationship feels one-to-one instead of one-to-many.
That’s where hyperpersonalization and lighter loads intersect. Listeners feel chosen rather than targeted. They subscribe. They download. It’s a different psychological contract.
Radio still owns immediacy. It still dominates during breaking news. It still has unmatched local reach when a storm hits or a city council implodes. None of that is going away.
Yet when it comes to carving out deeply specific communities and nurturing them with minimal friction, podcasting holds a permanent edge. Geography doesn’t limit it. Clocks don’t constrain it. Corporate structures don’t box it in the same way.
Conan O’Brien’s joy isn’t accidental. Instead, it’s the product of a medium designed for flexibility and comfort. Broadcasting will continue to evolve. Smart operators will borrow from the podcast playbook. But the hyperpersonalized core of podcasting — paired with fewer ads and more freedom — is an advantage that’s here to stay.
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.
Scrolling through social media and watching news outlets these days would have you think that most Americans live on the hard left or the hard right. But do we – really?
I certainly don’t feel a need to be evenly yoked with everyone. I have no idea how my neighbors feel about any political issues. President Trump, ICE, liberal, conservative, and left or right never seem to come up in everyday conversation. I have never seen the everyday folks who share my street wake up each morning eager to fight ideological battles or defend their political identity.
I just see them doing what we all do. Focus on work, family, bills, health, and whether they have enough time and energy to get through the day.
While the loudest voices tend to dominate the conversation, I have never believed they represent the majority. Even when I traveled the globe on behalf of media companies in other countries. People were simply trying to navigate everyday life.
I’ve worked in radio for most of my life, including news/talk operations. I can say that outside of on-air content, no one internally discussed personal opinions. Nowadays, most HR departments require training on avoiding conflict in the workplace by not offering personal views.
Largely because a few insist on doing so.
When did the world change so drastically that we need to be reminded about common courtesy and manners? I am convinced that the majority of us live in a pretty wide, quiet “middle zone.” Not because we couldn’t care less, but because most of our real lives never fit into neat ideological boxes.
People can be passionate about one thing and less so about another. They can support one social issue while strongly disagreeing with another. We can agree or disagree with either or both parties and still care deeply about our nation and communities.
It’s those who create commonality who outweigh the extremes.
Make no mistake – I absolutely have political and religious convictions, and for several I am very passionate. However, I rarely, if ever, share them aloud. Virtue signaling and standing on moral high ground have apparently taken center stage, but constant conflict can be dangerous. It’s truly exhausting and unhealthy.
Studies show that constant stress has direct links to cancer. Life already offers an overabundance of pressure and obligations, and as we get older, added health concerns. It’s odd enough arguing online with strangers (who somehow are on my friends list), defending positions or dealing with tensions. Doing so never makes life better for anyone.
Many in our industry forget that offering opinions can hurt business and personal careers. Just this week, I saw a voiceover talent who depends on others for a living strongly voice personal opinions on social media.
Does he not realize that he risks offending many who have the potential to do business with him? Managers tell everyone the same thing for those reasons.
Please note that throughout this, I offer no personal opinions or partisanship. I only question whether the noise we see and hear lives firmly on the edges rather than in the mainstream middle.
Why define ourselves through a narrow political lens? We are all just parents, children, business owners, workers, family members, neighbors, caregivers, creators, believers, skeptics, and problem-solvers.
When issues hit close to home, like schools, roads, safety, and healthcare, shouldn’t the rest take a backseat? In my mind, practical outcomes for real lives matter most.
The rest is noise.
As members of the media, we all know that amplifying controversy shapes public perception. Let’s face it — what generates ratings and clicks? Voices of reason or extreme opinions? As a result, the political conversation we see every day bends toward conflict.
Perhaps the country is not as divided as it appears. Think about your daily life at work. Most of us quietly coexist, compromise, and collaborate without openly denouncing anyone. Not so much on social media.
My basic needs are simple. Stability, fairness, and the freedom to live my life with my wonderful wife. I am convinced that people want to raise their kids in good schools, earn a living without fear of losing it, and then go home and snuggle up inside their own little cocoon of safety.
There’s a theory of late that we aren’t talking enough. I suggest that maybe — just maybe — we should talk a little less and stop oversharing every little thought we have.
When I grew up, no one shared political opinions or told others who they voted for. You stepped into a booth, pulled the curtain, and made your selection. Before and after that moment, only you knew your thought process. Even my mom and dad didn’t tell each other who they voted for.
In my mind, this constant barrage of outrage only creates more skepticism about anything and everything, including trust in our industry. We all want solutions to everyday issues that affect our nation, cities, and communities. We hope we are smart enough to leave the loud noisemaking to those we elected to take it on.
For me, anything else is little more than political theater and, frankly, I have seen this show before and I’m really tired of it.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
1010 WINS morning anchor Scott Stanford a master showman, and his morning drive show was just named the #2 Morning Drive show in a Major Market by Barrett Media.
“When you look at all the great talent and great stations, it really is cool to be number two. And we’re looking to do even better next year and get to number one, if it’s possible,” Stanford told Barrett Media.
Humbly, Stanford admitted how important the whole morning show team is, both on and off the air.
“[My co-anchor Susan Richard and I], we’re a great mix in the morning, and the whole morning team!” he said of the Audacy-owned outfit. “This is the greatest place I’ve ever worked. It’s a place where you are valued as talent. There’s no egos, from the folks who are on the air to the producers to the production assistants. Everybody has a great time getting the work done. There’s a lot of fun in between.”
Stanford, a seven-time Emmy winner, is one of the lucky ones. In his 25-plus years in media, he’s never had to leave his home market, New York. “I got all my training and my ‘out-of-town experience’ in Rockland and Westchester on small stations like WRKL and WFAS. Then one day, before I knew it, I ended up at WCBS 880.”
From there, Stanford jumped into the TV world. For 15 years, he worked at WWE, as well as different local outlets in the country’s #1 market, including NBC 4, Fox 5/My9, and PIX11.
He spent nearly six years at WPIX in several different roles. “[PIX11] had a lot of management changes here and there,” he reminisced. “So I went from doing news to being the sports guy to being the morning co-host with Sukanya Krishnan (Suki) on the PIX11 Morning News, and then back to being the sports guy. So in the six years I spent there, I pretty much did everything — including cleaning the bathrooms.”
Stanford and PIX parted ways in 2019, but his kinship with Suki is eternal, and in 2020, the pair launched The Suki and Scott Show. “Our first guest was Jerry Springer,” he recalled. “May he rest in peace. Love Jerry Springer. Jerry came on, did a little show with us. We started posting it on Facebook and, lo and behold, 2,000 shows later, we basically had almost every Hollywood celebrity and performer on the program.”
Today, the show is streamed on USA Today Streaming and QVC Plus. “Everybody always says they feel like they’re hanging out with their friends. They love our interviews when we interview these folks,” Stanford said. “We just started doing it as a hobby six years ago, and now it’s become a nice little business for us.”
In addition to his streaming show, Stanford returned to his radio roots in 2025, this time with WINS. “I started as a freelancer, just getting my feet wet there, learning the equipment,” he clarified. This is because, “At WINS, the anchors do it all. We run the board, all the sound that you hear. We throw to the weather, the traffic, and the reporters. We’re controlling everything you hear coming through the radio, including the commercials. So it takes a little time to get used to that stuff.”
Timing is everything in this business, so when the impeccable Lee Harris left, Ben Mevorach and Ivan Lee turned to Stanford. “Three years later, we’re still doing it. The ratings have almost tripled,” he said. “We’re the number one listened-to morning radio program in the country, as far as CUME audience goes, and it’s just been a fantastic run that just keeps getting better.”
The common thread Stanford brings to both his morning drive and The Suki and Scott Show is comedy and a little levity. “Most of the folks who write [to 1010 WINS] say they just love how we mix in the fun and the humor because, listen, most of the time all the news is bad news. Right. I mean, you’ve got to report the bad news.” Stanford added, “[But] in between the bad news, bad traffic, and now with the bad weather in the winter, people always say, ‘Hey, I love listening to you in the morning. I get all the information I need. You make me laugh.’”
“I make them laugh because I say things that they can relate to. I love to do some impressions. We sing a little bit, play some funny clips. It’s just a little buffet of everything. And my producers know that among the stories we have to cover every day, there are two or three fun things we can do, which are either New York-centric or from around the country and sometimes the world.”
For those looking to follow in his footsteps, Stanford suggests, “If you’re hosting a show, obviously you want to be relatable to your audience. I always tell young broadcasters, just don’t try to be somebody else — just be yourself. And when you’re being yourself, people on the other side of the mic will feel that and they’ll be able to relate to you.”
But don’t expect it to come overnight. There is a lot of time and practice involved in becoming a great anchor, no matter the subject material. “So when the time comes for that big audition and somebody gives you a shot, you’ll be ready to go. Just like when they gave me a shot to do 1010 WINS, I was ready to go.”
He added a good show is “all about creativity and fun.” This is because, “When it comes to news, the news is the news. It’s going to be whatever it is. But what you do with the other time that you have in that newscast is what makes people want to stick around because they can get their news from anywhere. It’s the people who are going to make you laugh and have fun that you’re going to come back to watch.”
Stanford did give youngsters fair warning. “The problem with this business is that your job is always dependent upon the next person who takes over as your boss. It’s such an objective and subjective business. You could be the best news anchor in the world, but the jobs above you come and go pretty often.”
Later opining, “It’s almost like it’s a revolving door a lot of times when it comes to management. The next person that comes in can be like, ‘You know what? Yeah, this guy’s good. I know our ratings are good, but I don’t really like him. You’re done.’ It’s such a crazy, subjective business.”
But for Stanford, this brings him to the beauty of working at New York’s #1 all-news radio station, 1010 WINS on 92.3 FM. “I’ve been at a lot of different places broadcasting-wise. This is the greatest place I’ve ever worked. I always tell people, getting up at 1:30 in the morning makes it worthwhile because you’re going to a place that you absolutely love being. And that’s the best thing I could say.”
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.
Netflix has officially stepped aside in the high-profile pursuit of Warner Bros., clearing a path for Paramount Skydance to move forward with what now appears to be the winning bid for the storied studio.
In a statement released Thursday, Netflix co-CEOs Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters confirmed the company will not increase its offer to match the latest proposal submitted by David Ellison’s Paramount Skydance.
While Netflix had previously positioned its bid as financially sound and strategically beneficial, leadership ultimately determined that raising the offer would no longer make economic sense for shareholders.
The executives emphasized that their proposal would have delivered long-term value and maintained a straightforward regulatory pathway. However, they reiterated that the acquisition was never considered essential to Netflix’s broader business strategy.
Instead, they described Warner Bros. as an attractive opportunity only at a price aligned with the company’s disciplined financial approach.
“At the price required to match Paramount Skydance’s latest offer, the deal is no longer financially attractive,” Sarandos and Peters said. They also expressed appreciation for Warner Bros. Discovery leadership, including CEO David Zaslav and the company’s board, calling the negotiation process thorough and professional.
With Netflix stepping away, Paramount Skydance now stands in prime position to secure approval from the Warner Bros. Discovery board, which earlier Thursday labeled Paramount’s revised proposal a “superior” offer. That designation significantly reshaped the trajectory of negotiations and signaled where momentum had shifted.
Zaslav acknowledged Netflix’s participation in the process, praising the streaming giant and its leadership for their collaborative approach during discussions. At the same time, he expressed enthusiasm about the potential merger with Paramount Skydance, noting that the combined entity could create meaningful shareholder value and strengthen the company’s competitive position across film, television and streaming.
The deal represents another major turning point in an entertainment industry still recalibrating amid shifting economics, streaming consolidation and Wall Street pressure to prioritize profitability over scale alone. For Netflix, the decision reinforces a strategy centered on disciplined capital allocation rather than aggressive expansion through costly acquisitions.
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.
