Losing people in our musical landscape is tough. When they are only 47, it is unbelievable. I remember when Brad Arnold’s 3 Doors Down’s Kryptonite landed on my desk as a radio programmer.
Who didn’t hear that song? It was the top rock radio song in 2000, and the band’s debut, The Better Life, went multi-platinum. 3 Doors Down broke through on their local rock station in Mississippi and always supported the radio community. I remember the first time I had them on my radio show, their live shows, and their activism. They were one of the true original rock radio bands.
We lost 3 Doors Down leader Brad Arnold on Saturday after a valiant battle with kidney cancer.
The word that comes to mind when I think of Brad is gentle. He was a kind soul and a dynamic powerhouse on stage. In person, he was kind, funny, and soft-spoken.
3 Doors Down was a powerhouse band during a changing-of-the-guard moment in rock radio. The band’s first monster hit, Kryptonite, was written when Brad was just 15 in his high school class. It broke them instantly. Their debut, The Better Life, went six-times platinum. Their sophomore release, Away From the Sun, was equally successful with singles Here Without You and When I’m Gone.
The band continued to make records with Seventeen Days, 3 Doors Down, Time Of My Life, and Us And The Night.
Brad and the band formed The Better Life Foundation in 2002, originally focused on making “a better life” for children in need. Over time, the foundation evolved to help hurricane victims and support Habitat for Humanity.
The Better Life Foundation concerts have included notable performers such as Shinedown, Lynyrd Skynyrd, and Alter Bridge.
Brad was open about his addiction. Also the loss of his 3 Doors Down bandmate Matt Roberts in 2016 at age 36 to a prescription drug overdose. He always shared his journey to sobriety and faith, which he proudly embraced.
I was lucky to catch 3 Doors Down in 2024 when they opened for Creed at the iconic Madison Square Garden. The band killed it and the crowd loved them. Hit song after hit song, much in part because of Brad’s ability to make a massive, sold-out crowd feel like they were in his garage.
Just a few months later, in May of 2025, he was diagnosed with stage four cancer. It was hard to believe.
I caught up with Brad not long ago for an interview as we discussed the pressure of coming up with a second record and the success of their second release, 2002’s Away From the Sun. Brad has called the emotionally charged feeling of the band’s second release his favorite.
*Editor’s Note: Answers have been edited for clarity and length.*
Terrie Carr –Away From The Sun was such a special record, as second records can be when you are following up a monster debut. Seventeen weeks on the charts, multiple platinum singles. A record that meant a lot to a lot of people because we were coming off a time that was so tumultuous in the country.
Everybody gravitated to this record. What was it like putting it together and why it was special to you guys?
Brad Arnold – By the grace of God, we had such a big record with The Better Life. It’s a lot to follow up with as 23-year-old kids. We were 20 when we got signed, and I was 21 when we went on the road with The Better Life.
When we started writing Away From the Sun, we had been through so much in those two years. We’d been through a lifetime on that record and played so many places. It was the first record where we realize this was our job. We have to write a record!
This was the first time we had to do so. I’ll never forget the writing process of that record. We wrote it down in Mobile, Alabama, and we rented a house over there. We wrote that record in about three or four months. Maybe it was longer. I can remember each song, and it’s crazy how singing each song can take you right back to where you were when you wrote it.
TC– Total time travel, right?
BA– Absolutely! I think about writing with our original guitarist, Matt, who passed away. It brings me back to memories of him, and I like it.
I like to think about conversations that we had, the situations, and the inspirations for the songs. A lot of them are not really happy memories. They are still valuable memories when you think about what inspired the songs.
Here Without You is about being away from my wife at the time, but it’s really more about the idea of being away. When I’m Gone really hit a chord with a lot of military people. It opened the door for our relationship with the military. We are all from military families. My dad was in the Air Force, and Chris, our guitar player, was in the Navy.
We’ve always been very military-oriented. We did the tour and shot the video for When I’m Gone on that tour. There wasn’t even supposed to be the video for that song. We had already shot a completely different video.
Then, in the year that followed, we heard from so many soldiers about how much it meant to those on deployment or while away. Even more so with Here Without You, because they would sit there and listen to that song on the phone with their wife.
Both of those songs have taken on a new meaning with Brad Arnold’s passing. He will be missed. Condolences to his wife, his family, his fans, and his beloved pup.
Covering a presidency is hard work on a good day. Covering Donald Trump has always been something else entirely. Last week, when Kaitlan Collins found herself on the receiving end of a public berating from the President, the exchange wasn’t just uncomfortable. It was a reminder that some assignments come with no possible path to winning.
This isn’t really about Collins, though she happened to be the target. It’s about a dynamic that’s followed Trump from the campaign trail to the Oval Office. The President is allowed to act however he wants. The moment a journalist responds like a human being, the journalist becomes the problem.
Watch the tape again and put yourself in Collins’ chair. She’s asking questions as part of her job. She’s not shouting, not editorializing, not being unreasonable or acting improperly. What she’s doing is the thing the White House press corps exists to do. Then the President unloads.
At that point, her options were gone.
If Collins had defended herself, the reaction would’ve been swift and predictable. She’d be labeled classless. Unprofessional. Disrespectful. The irony wouldn’t be acknowledged. It never is. The same people excusing the President’s behavior would’ve demanded higher standards from the reporter he was dressing down.
Agreeing with him wasn’t an option either. Nodding along or backing down only rewards the behavior. It tells Trump, and anyone watching, that this approach works. It emboldens the next outburst and raises the odds that the next reporter gets the same treatment, or worse.
So she stood there and took it.
This is the trap that’s defined Trump-era coverage from the beginning. He escalates. The press absorbs it. If anyone pushes back, the conversation shifts away from presidential conduct and toward media decorum. Suddenly, tone matters more than substance. Power goes unexamined while manners are endlessly dissected.
None of this is accidental. Trump understands leverage. He knows the press fears becoming the story. He knows many outlets would rather move on than risk losing access. That imbalance is the real issue, and it’s one the media still hasn’t figured out how to fix.
The solution doesn’t come from the person being attacked. It can’t. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. Until someone who isn’t currently under fire steps in, nothing changes.
Imagine a different moment last week. Trump berates Collins. Another reporter speaks up. Not loudly. Not theatrically. Just clearly. “This isn’t OK. It’s unprofessional, it’s unbecoming of a President, and you’re being ridiculous.”
That shouldn’t be radical. It shouldn’t be controversial. It should be expected.
Instead, the silence is deafening. Many in the room look down. Others wait for the next question. Everyone calculates risk. No one wants the next barrage aimed their way. So the behavior goes unchecked, and the precedent hardens.
The idea that the President of the United States is beyond reproach should alarm every journalist in that briefing room. It should alarm viewers, too. A press corps that can’t call out misconduct in real time isn’t holding power to account. It’s managing it.
This isn’t about politics. It’s about standards. If the press accepts that verbal abuse is part of the job, it becomes part of the job. If reporters won’t defend each other, no one else will.
Kaitlan Collins didn’t fail last week. The system around her did. And until the people standing safely on the sidelines decide to speak up, we’ll keep watching the same no-win scenario play out again and again.
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.
In 2024, Nielsen Audio announced a major methodological change. After at least 60 years of “five minutes gets you the quarter hour,” Nielsen changed to three minutes in PPM markets. To no one’s surprise, AQH estimates increased across the board when the change was implemented in January 2025. Cume was also up a bit, but the biggest surprise, at least to me, was how many listening sessions were only three or four minutes long.
The year of increases is now over. I checked Kalshi and Polymarket, and the smart money is betting — I mean trading — on overall radio audience estimates declining year over year. Much like when stations started installing Voltair units in the mid-2010s, the bump lasted one year, and I expect the decline in radio listening to continue.
However, Nielsen may have another ace up its sleeve. While I’ve heard rumors to this effect, someone has now put it in print: Nielsen is considering going to “one minute earns the QH.” This development reminds me of the old Doobie Brothers song, “Minute by Minute,” which could be the way radio and local TV are measured soon. Bill Harvey, who has been around the audience measurement business for decades, writes a column for MediaPost. Here’s what he published on January 28:
Stations have been losing ad revenue share to digital for some time, as is the case nationally with networks, and were frustrated that the MRC viewability standard for digital video was two seconds, while in local TV, the industry convention has always been a five-minute rule in order to get credit in the Average Quarter Hour (AQH) metric. TVB, CIMM, and stations asked Nielsen for relief from this unfair situation and, at the request of buyers and sellers, Nielsen is examining the possibility of changing to 1MQ (a viewer viewing one to 15 minutes in a quarter hour would be credited as audience to that quarter hour) and has begun to deliver Impact Data for clients to examine what this could mean to their business.
While his comments concern local TV, you can bet that if the local TV dog goes to 1MQ, then the radio tail will be wagging with it. The comparison to the MRC digital viewability standard has been noted in this column several times. Two seconds is pathetically low, but as a friend mentioned to me, this was something of a compromise with a crowd that preferred one second. Can you pick up any advertising message that lasts two seconds? Is that a legitimate “impression”? Remember iHeart’s “blinks”? At least those were six seconds long, if memory serves.
I watched Jon Miller’s RAB webinar last Wednesday, partly to see if he would make any mention of 1MQ for radio, but the topic never came up. He did cover other relevant Nielsen topics, and I’ll offer my thoughts in a future column.
Let’s think about the implications of a one-minute rule for radio for a moment, even if only for PPM. Audience estimates will increase. However, we won’t know how much until Nielsen Audio runs some sample data with nearly every instance of listening credited. Once again, the industry will be offered a one-year opportunity to improve the listening experience, promote and market, and try to win new audiences from other sources. And if Nielsen does this “right” — “right” is defined as what Ed thinks is best — the one-minute rule would apply to diary markets as well, even if the effect would be smaller. This potential change sounds positive for the industry.
However, there’s a fly in the ointment. Nielsen’s pricing remains exorbitant based on what the industry can afford in 2026. All the negative Nielsen policies will still be in place, such as “Subscriber First” and the Network Policy that is currently being litigated. In other words, the same toxic relationship between Nielsen Audio and the U.S. radio industry won’t change, except that our ratings will be better — for one year. And the expected decline that will resume one year after implementation will come from a higher level of listening, but it is inevitable.
If higher ratings will help business, this potential change will give the industry one more year to come up with a plan to either bring Nielsen’s prices down by trading cost for a less granular service, or to find and encourage competitors to come into the radio space. Eastlan is already there, and The Media Audit is still around as a competitor to Scarborough. DTS AutoStage, while in the early stages, shows promise. There are other companies that are kicking the tires with new methods that may work.
A challenge to Nielsen Audio would be positive for radio, both commercial and noncommercial. However, it requires some level of cohesion by the industry, which doesn’t seem to happen that often. I heard Mike Hulvey, RAB’s head, say multiple times on last week’s webinar that radio is stronger when it works together. He’s right, but let’s move past the words and on to the actions.
Let’s meet again next week.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
In the Classic Rock/Hits formats, stations must constantly walk a line between living in the past and being a contemporary media outlet. All the music is older, and so are many, but not all, of the listeners. As we continue trying to survive in a 25–54-obsessed media buying environment, attracting new, younger listeners while not losing the station’s core is a constant struggle. NBC, with its recent acquisition of broadcast rights for the NBA and MLB Sunday Night broadcasts, now finds itself in a similar situation.
A recent article in Front Office Sports website points out that, as the home of the NBA from 1990 to 2002, NBC was the network of record during what may have been the league’s most popular era. It was when Michael Jordan was in his prime and the Chicago Bulls won all six of their championships.
NBC’s connection with baseball goes back even further. The network has been home to thirty-nine World Series broadcasts, including being the first to televise the Fall Classic in 1949. It was also where the Game of the Week and Monday Night Baseball lived for more than forty years, starting in 1957.
So, let’s look at some of the tactics NBC is employing to tap into the nostalgia of the network’s history while not ignoring the need to attract younger fans:
Personalities
On the basketball side, NBC invested in, and heavily promoted, having Michael Jordan as a “special contributor.”
While plenty has been written about how impactful, or not, these segments have been, the hype of tying basketball coverage back to one of the greatest to ever play, who was synonymous with the years NBC covered the league, appears to be paying dividends with big ratings.
On the baseball side, the network is bringing back Bob Costas, one of the most respected sports broadcasters of a generation, who spent forty years involved with NBC’s baseball broadcasts.
At 73 years old, Costas said this will likely be how he wraps his storied career. “I don’t need a brass band and a parade, but if we can do some good work, have some fun, and it feels like the right concluding chapter, I think everybody will be gratified by that.”
Production Value
The network is tapping into even more nostalgia through graphics and other parts of its production. For basketball, they brought back the instantly familiar “Roundball Rock” theme that kicked off games in the nineties.
While we have yet to see a baseball broadcast, NBC executive producer Sam Flood says, “There will be an acknowledgement of nostalgia,” in their plans.
Innovation
The network is not only relying on nostalgia to bring in audiences. For the NBA, analysts are delivering “on-the-bench coverage” from positions located near the teams on the floor.
They are also working with augmented reality in the studio to create more in-depth breakdowns of the action, and games on Peacock include a “Performance View” with real-time statistics.
Again, while we have to wait to see what they have in mind for baseball, Flood has promised similar updates to the traditional broadcast.
Now, let’s consider how that applies to our radio world.
Talent
Tapping into heritage talent in your market can make a giant difference in how your station is perceived. Much like NBC did with Michael Jordan, that doesn’t have to mean a full-time position. There may be other creative ways to leverage a name synonymous with the music on your station without a major commitment.
Production
Sparing use of jingles, IDs, produced elements, and sounds from the early days of your station, or even another local station that was in your format, can easily tie your station to the market’s history without completely disrupting your contemporary presentation.
Innovation
While looking back for inspiration, continuing to find new and unique ways to present the music, to be part of your market, and to tie the station to current events and trends will help ensure that you remain intriguing to new, younger listeners.
There isn’t a simple blueprint for how to leverage nostalgia. No one handed the team at NBC a roadmap.
Instead, I’m challenging you to think outside your usual boundaries to find ways to create unique connections that only your station can deliver.
It’s not easy, but the results, much like the ratings NBC’s basketball games have been pulling, could be worth 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.
Turning Point USA saw several million concurrent viewers for its All-American Halftime Show, running opposite the NFL’s official Super Bowl Halftime Show on Sunday.
The show — featuring Kid Rock, Lee Brice, Brantley Gilbert, and Gabby Barrett — saw over 5 million simultaneous viewers on the Turning Point USA YouTube channel.
Other avenues available for the stream included Charlie Kirk’s YouTube channel, which topped more than a million concurrent viewers, while an additional 225,000 viewers watching on Rumble channels from TPUSA and Charlie Kirk.
Viewers could also watch the performance on Daily Wire+, Real America’s Voice, Trinity Broadcasting Network, Charge!, and The National News Desk.
Blake Neff, a producer for The Charlie Kirk Show, said on social media that “the audience kept going up throughout the competing show.”
The country music stars’ performance aired directly against the NFL’s show, featuring rapper Bad Bunny. His show included surprise appearances from Lady Gaga and Ricky Martin, among others.
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.
Last year, new methodologies from Nielsen helped propel Super Bowl viewership to ‘new heights’. Chiefs-Eagles on Fox set a new record, totaling 127.7M viewers across all legal platforms in the US.
Super Bowl LX offers a different set of circumstances. This time around there is no Patrick Mahomes. Instead, NBC has a matchup between two teams that few people at the start of the season would have projected to make it this far. How will this impact viewership? Is there a path for NBC to top Fox?
Super Bowl 49 Rematch
The Seahawks and Patriots square off in a Super Bowl rematch, eleven years removed from Malcolm Butler’s stunning goal line interception. In a bit of irony, NBC was also the broadcaster of that game. I am of the belief—and I am not alone in this—that had Nielsen employed the same techniques it uses presently to measure viewers, Super Bowl XLIX would to this day be the most-watched program in US television history.
The hype for XLIX was unreal. This was Seattle’s attitude era. Legion of Boom. Marshawn Lynch and his Skittles, only here so he ‘won’t get fined’. Many considered Russell Wilson to be on a Hall of Fame trajectory. The team was looking to go back-to-back. That iteration of the Seahawks captured the nation’s attention, no small feat for a franchise located in the Pacific Northwest.
The Patriots of course had Tom Brady and while frequent Super Bowl participants, they were still reeling from consecutive heartbreaking title game losses to the Giants several years’ back. The early days of the DeflateGate investigation loomed large. There was a distinct narrative being brandished about questioning whether they could ever get the job done again. The game was a pick ’em at kickoff. Many expected it to be a compelling and close contest.
And it delivered.
Pros and Cons of the Super Bowl LX Matchup
It’s pretty safe to say LX does not garner the same amount of hype. Make no mistake, Mike Macdonald and Mike Vrabel both deserve tremendous praise for the turnarounds they have orchestrated. This version of the Seahawks and Patriots certainly have talented skill players—Jaxon Smith-Njigba, former Super Bowl MVP Cooper Kupp, Stefon Diggs to name a few—but they aren’t exactly household names. The most intriguing personality is probably Mack Hollins with his bare feet and WARRIORS chant. Cool but nevertheless he’s not a WR #1 or #2. There are not many big personalities here who are capable of driving ratings.
The same can be said of the starting quarterbacks. With all due respect to Sam Darnold and Drake Maye, neither has the luster of Patrick Mahomes. Seattle has a vaunted defense and the Pats’ D similarly has stepped it up in the postseason. The casual viewer though isn’t particularly interested in that level of X’s and O’s. When it comes to an event of this magnitude, perhaps key above all else is the extent the casual viewer, the person who’s not obsessed with sports, who only watches a handful of games a year, is engaged. These two teams, despite their storied histories, are no longer part of the cultural zeitgeist they once were. At initial glance, early signs point to LX falling short of LIX’s viewership watermark.
How NBC Can Prevail
There is a way NBC can come out on top over Fox though. It starts with a unique card up their sleeve which could serve as a useful tool to attract the casual viewer. This month the network has the trifecta of the Super Bowl, the Winter Olympics, and the NBA All-Star Game. Surely by now you’ve caught one of their ‘Legendary February’ promotions—they’re everywhere. The idea here is that each of these events in turn promotes the others.
Obviously the Super Bowl is the golden goose, towering over the other two properties. Network execs nevertheless believe they have crafted an environment that lifts all ships. While the Winter Games aren’t the ratings juggernaut as their Summer counterpart, the Olympics are that type of sporting event which the casual viewer typically finds compelling enough to watch. Expect NBC to use the Opening Ceremony on Friday, two days before the Super Bowl, as a springboard for attracting more casual viewers on Sunday.
Similar to four years ago, NBC again is utilizing the Olympics as lead-out programming for the Super Bowl. Just after the confetti drops and the Lombardi Trophy is presented, NBC jumps right back into its Milan Cortina 2026 coverage. They are presented with quite the challenge. Earlier on Super Bowl Sunday, decorated skier Lindsey Vonn returned to the Olympic stage at age 41. It was already one of the top stories of these Games, made even more compelling by the fact she had ruptured her ACL just over a week ago but would still compete. A video of her doing a series of intense leg exercises mere days before the downhill quickly went viral. This had the makings of an epic comeback. Unfortunately, it was not to be—mere seconds into her run Vonn suffered a devastating crash and subsequently had to be airlifted.
The whole ordeal was rough to watch live. Now, NBC has to decide how they’ll cover this moment when they show taped coverage of the downhill in primetime. As a longtime Olympics broadcaster they are used to adjusting on the fly. They may have to do so here. Will they edit out anything—her screaming, the number of replays, the crowd’s reactions? The shift in tone from Super Bowl euphoria to haunting images of an American hero suffering a literal and figurative fall is a difficult undertaking.
It’s made slightly easier by the fact Vonn’s compatriot Breezy Johnson took Gold in the event. Still, it’s not an enviable task for any broadcaster. Surely, once the clock hits triple zeroes at the Super Bowl everyone will already know what happened to Vonn. Many surely will stay up to watch this moment unfold either again or for the first time, regardless of what happens between Seattle and New England. The framing is different—it is more a story of tragedy than triumph—but eyeballs will be glued to it. Having the Olympics as shoulder programming can only help the Super Bowl. It might not make an enormous difference, but undoubtedly it will add to the game’s final viewership average.
The Nielsen and Bad Bunny Effect
This is the second Super Bowl which Nielsen will include its expanded out-of-home (OOH) metric, which has been an absolute boon to NFL and college football broadcasts. This is the first Super Bowl which Nielsen will apply their “Big Data + Panel” (instead of their previous Panel only) methodology. OOH is more responsible for recent increases than Big Data but the latter without question will provide a further boost. NBC will also include their Adobe Analytics numbers in their final total, as is network policy. NBC is also in more households than last year’s broadcaster Fox.
Then of course there’s the streaming component. Peacock finally broke out of its doldrums and gained 3M subscribers in Q4, reaching a total of 44M. Peacock is behind a paywall / needs authentication from a cable or satellite provider. That’s in contrast to Fox from last year, who made the Big Game available on the free ad-supported television (FAST) platform Tubi, which only required an email address. Economics aside, it should come as no surprise that Fox here has the advantage, given the easier level of access.
Bad Bunny could also play a role here. The artist, coming off his Grammy win for Album of the Year, takes the mic for the Halftime Show. His selection has not come without controversy. A vocal opponent of ICE, Bad Bunny doubled down on his stance in his Grammys acceptance speech one Sunday ago. He also sings exclusively in Spanish, something English-speaking audiences may not be accustomed to. Given his stardom among the Latino community, expect Telemundo to outperform the typical Super Bowl Spanish-language broadcast. The bigger question becomes whether English-language viewers will tune in at the same levels at which they usually do for halftime performances and whether his political stance will turn some people away.
Key Issues
Everything else being equal, a closer game will result in more people watching. Last year’s game was far from a barn burner as the Eagles quickly jumped out to an insurmountable lead. Given the lopsided result, many were tempted to ‘turn this TV off’ but surely a sizable percentage nevertheless stuck around just to affirm the Chiefs were in fact mortal. They wanted to witness the fall. Unlike their matchup from eleven years ago, Seattle is the hands-down favorite. The on-field product from the Patriots offense has left much desired this postseason.
Many also question whether the Patriots are a legitimate contender or the beneficiary of one of the league’s all-time easiest schedules. Likewise, while Darnold had a great NFC Championship, he still is best known for his collapses. If LX gets out of hand early in favor of either squad it’s hard to imagine people will be as keen to stick around as they did for Eagles-Chiefs.
There are other factors which could tip the scales one way or the other. Another impact of the Chiefs’ absence: no Taylor Swift storyline this time around. Do not underestimate the impact of that. Like an envious ex keeping tabs on their old lover who’s undergone a glow up, the greater NYC market will tune in to see Darnold. California residents may be more interested in a local Super Bowl than one held in New Orleans. Vast portions of the US have been subjected to colder than average weather the past couple weeks, which could keep public get-togethers down (of course people can choose to just watch at home so it could net out). Breaking political news could siphon off people’s attention.
Expectations
To be clear, Seahawks-Patriots is far from the worst-case scenario. If things shook out differently in the earlier rounds of the playoffs we could have been presented with a matchup of ‘small-market teams’ like the Panthers and Jaguars. It also could have been a lot better. Imagine what a Bears game would have garnered. In LX we get to address the question of how immune the NFL is to a Super Bowl matchup without marquee names.
People are quick to forget, but there was undoubtedly some fatigue surrounding Chiefs-Eagles in New Orleans. It was the second time they squared off for the Lombardi in 3 years. Still, LIX without question is far sexier than LX.
Barring a complete slugfest of a game, Seahawks-Patriots has a pathway to hit a higher reported figure. The new Big Data methodology, the additional Adobe Analytics numbers, Olympics shoulder programming, presumably a larger Latino audience tuning in, plus some ahem, ‘prodding’ from interested parties for Nielsen to ‘capture’ every viewer could be enough to tip the scales in NBC’s favor.
Jake Kline is an attorney specializing in sports and entertainment law. He can be reached at jake.a.kline@gmail.com. Follow him on X/Twitter @JakeAKline.
ESPN’s experiment of repositioning the NFL’s annual all-star showcase deeper into Super Bowl week has produced low results, as the 2026 Pro Bowl Games delivered one of the lowest television audiences in the event’s modern history.
According to Nielsen data, only 1.919 million viewers watched ESPN’s Pro Bowl coverage on Tuesday night, representing a staggering decline of roughly 60 percent from last year’s audience. The figure continues a downward trend for an event that has struggled to maintain relevance amid format changes and growing fan apathy.
The Pro Bowl Games drew approximately 4.7 million viewers in 2025, a number that already reflected a sharp drop from historical norms. This year’s move to a Tuesday night window — combined with the NFL’s decision to fold the event into Super Bowl festivities — appears to have accelerated that slide rather than reverse it.
For the first time, the league staged the Pro Bowl in the same city hosting the Super Bowl, with events held at San Francisco’s Moscone Center. The league followed the games with the annual NFL Honors ceremony on Thursday evening, attempting to create a weeklong celebration of its star players and storylines.
Instead, the Pro Bowl’s latest iteration has reignited debate over whether the event still serves a meaningful purpose. Since rebranding as the Pro Bowl Games in 2023 and eliminating full-contact football in favor of flag football and skills competitions, the league has faced persistent criticism from fans who feel the showcase no longer reflects the sport’s competitive identity.
That frustration intensified this year due to controversy surrounding player selections, which relied heavily on public voting. Travis Kelce was named to the roster despite a down season with the Kansas City Chiefs, before later withdrawing because of injury. Rookie quarterback Shedeur Sanders also received a Pro Bowl nod after only a limited number of starts with the Cleveland Browns, drawing widespread criticism across social media.
On the field, the NFC — coached by Hall of Famer Jerry Rice — defeated the AFC 66–52 in a high-scoring flag football matchup. While the game itself delivered entertainment value for some fans, it did little to stem concerns about declining interest.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries.Sign upfor our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
When Stephen A. Smith and Skip Bayless reunited for a candid conversation on The Arena Gridiron podcast, the discussion quickly turned reflective, defiant, and unapologetic. More than a decade after their final appearance together on First Take, the two polarizing figures pushed back against long-standing criticism that their style damaged sports media rather than elevated it.
Bayless acknowledged that detractors still accuse the duo of lowering industry standards through debate-driven programming. However, he rejected the premise outright.
“I still hear people say that you and I ruin sports media. We destroyed it with our style or whatever. It’s ‘Screaming A. Smith’ and ‘Skip Baseless,'” said Bayless. “That’s all we ever heard. If I may say so myself, I think we revolutionized it.”
Ratings success played a central role in that defense. Bayless pointed to sustained audience growth during their run as evidence that chemistry, not controversy, fueled the show’s appeal. While imitators followed, he suggested that few replicated the balance of entertainment and substance that defined their dynamic.
“No one has ever quite matched the chemistry that maybe God above gave us,” said Bayless. “Can’t teach it, or coach it. It just worked, and it was entertaining, and enlightening. It was just fun.”
Smith echoed that sentiment, while adding context about the resentment that often follows visibility and success. According to Smith, criticism frequently stems from professional envy rather than principled disagreement.
“It’s a lot of BS when it comes to that stuff because you got a lot of jealousy, envy,” said Smith. “People look at what we’ve been able to achieve, and they’re like, Why them? Why not us?”
That rise, Smith explained, did not happen by accident. Both men entered television from print journalism backgrounds at a moment when newspapers were rapidly losing relevance. Smith described an acute awareness that traditional reporting roles were shrinking, while opinion-driven platforms were growing in value and reach.
“We saw the forest from the trees. Both of us were in newspapers, and we saw the industry dying. We saw them transitioning from that to dot com,” explained Smith. “We would run into radio hosts that didn’t know s**t. We were up there making $75-$100,000 while these cats making $300-$400,000 just to talk for two hours on the radio. I was like, I need to find out more about that industry.”
Rather than abandoning their journalistic roots, Smith argued that he and Bayless adapted them. Preparation, sourcing, and perspective remained central, even as the industry embraced debate and performance.
“The industry was evolving, and it was changing, and it was getting more into talk and stuff like that,” said Smith. “Skip knew he could talk. I knew I could talk, and we got the information. We weren’t worried about anybody else. That’s what we did.”
Years later, as sports media continues to wrestle with its identity, Smith and Bayless remain steadfast in their belief that First Take was not the problem. In their view, it was the blueprint.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries.Sign upfor our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
The feud between Erika Kirk and Candace Owens shows no signs of stopping. Owens helped reignite the fuse this week.
Erika Kirk appeared on Fox News with Trace Gallagher to explain why she’s supportive of the transparency in Utah courts relating to the case against her husband’s assassin.
During her show on YouTube, Owens shared her opinion that Kirk’s plea for transparency rang hollow. She then made comments directly toward Kirk, positing that she knew it would get back to the Turning Point USA CEO.
“I wanted to write this open letter to Erika because I know that Turning Point USA watches every episode of this podcast, and that people then take what I say back to her and give her notation,” said Owens. “So, I would appreciate it if the elves at Turning Point USA would just let her see this in its entirety. Because more information has become available to me, I am feeling well. I’m feeling some type of way.”
Candace Owens then read an open letter to Erika Kirk before turning her attention to other executives of the organization. In total, her comments lasted more than 20 minutes.
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.
Michael Wilbon did not sound nostalgic during his appearance Friday on The Dan Le Batard Show. Instead, the longtime NBA analyst sounded exhausted, frustrated, and increasingly disconnected from a league he has covered for decades.
Wilbon’s criticism centered on two intertwined issues that he believes are eroding the NBA’s relationship with its audience: player availability and the growing confusion surrounding where fans can actually find games. While the league continues to post strong revenue numbers and expand its media footprint, Wilbon suggested that the everyday viewing experience has quietly deteriorated.
“I hate it this week more than ever,” Wilbon said, describing an attempt to watch a regular-season matchup between Oklahoma City and San Antonio where many of the stars of the game didn’t play.
“Whether you paid to see in person or at home on one of the nine streaming services. You don’t even know where the games are,” said Wilbon. “Is it on Prime? ESPN? NBC? NBA TV? Where the hell is the game? I can’t find it.”
Wilbon noted that fans often discover key players are unavailable only after tuning in, regardless of whether they paid for tickets or a streaming subscription. Compounding that frustration is the league’s increasingly fragmented television and streaming landscape. With games spread across multiple platforms, Wilbon argued that even informed viewers struggle to keep track of where marquee matchups are airing.
“I was with Charles Barkley one night in Arizona. We’re having dinner, and we were like, we got to go watch that game. Charles and I both look at each other and say, where’s the game,” explained Wilbon. “Two people who are employed to talk about basketball on national television don’t know where the damn game is.”
Beyond accessibility, Wilbon took aim at what he sees as a widening gap between modern player resources and on-court availability. While acknowledging that today’s athletes are “bigger, stronger, faster, more athletic,” Wilbon questioned how advancements in sports medicine, technology, and training have coincided with a dramatic reduction in games played by star performers.
“Dudes used to wear canvas shoes with no tape, and they played 82 [games]. Now guys have everything, and they can’t play 60 games,” questioned Wilbon. “I don’t like that. I hate that. And it may not be just the NBA, but the NBA seems to major in that right now.”
Wilbon’s comments reflect a broader concern among veteran observers who believe the league’s regular season is losing meaning and influence with viewers. While postseason interest remains strong, he suggested that fans are growing weary of a product that requires more effort to find and offers less certainty once it is located.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries.Sign upfor our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
