Linda Cohn isn’t holding back. The retired SportsCenter anchor says ESPN’s PR team fumbled its latest layoffs from start to finish.
What We Know: Cohn spent over three decades at ESPN before retiring earlier this year. She addressed the network’s newest layoff round on The Linda Cohn Show podcast. The cuts hit over 150 staffers, including on-air analyst Ryan Clark among other top names. Clark learned of his firing reportedly mid-broadcast during NFL Live this week. Cohn said the errors made by public relations and communications teams at the network allowed a single moment to overshadow everyone else cut from the network.
Linda Cohn says ESPN PR dropped the ball with the layoffs: “The ESPN layoffs, that was awful. What made it even worse, if that could be possible was the way ESPN PR handled it or mishandled it. They treated everyone on this latest firing list with zero respect. Zero.”
Linda Cohn says Ryan Clark layoff handling made everyone else an afterthought: “If you knew there were media outlets going to break the news and you were concerned about Ryan finding out by looking at his phone during the show, then why didn’t you just tell him before the show? before he took the set? That is bumbling and fumbling. That buffoonery electrified this story in a negative way. Even more, the rippling effect of that mishandling of the Ryan Clark situation and why it got all the headlines regarding the mishandling by ESPN and the way they went about it. What it did when I mentioned the rippling effect how about everybody else they became an afterthought.”
Linda Cohn on the ESPN layoffs: “I felt sorry for those who were treated the way they were. How about the over 150 people behind the scenes that were let go? They have their own story. Just because they’re not on TV, it doesn’t mean their stories aren’t as significant… This really bothered me, the way ESPN treated these people. No dignity, no respect.”
What Remains Unclear: The process is which Clark was laid off from ESPN is still fully unknown. Whether the network will change its internal notification process is unknown at this time.
What It Means: Cohn’s remarks add a credible, insider voice to mounting criticism following ESPN’s layoff rollout. Her comments spotlight both the Clark spectacle and the overlooked staffers behind it. But also how longtime employees were made aware of their departures prior to being notified from corporate. Layoffs are never easy, and with networks as large as ESPN it only makes the process more difficult. Consequently, pressure builds on ESPN to retool its process.
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.
Clips are podcasting’s new front door. New research from Podcast Atlasshows they drive real discovery, not just passive scrolling.
What We Know: According to Podcast Atlas’ new findings, watching podcast clips is now mainstream. 89% of listeners watch them at least sometimes, and 72% do so often or always. YouTube leads engagement at 67%, followed by TikTok at 63%. Roughly a third of clip viewers reliably go on to watch the full episode or become regular listeners. Meanwhile, 74% give clips their full attention, nearly matching full-episode focus levels.
What They Said: Tom Webster, Partner, Sounds Profitable: “Clips put podcast content into the same feeds where the mass-reach money is already going, which makes them the one piece of the podcast world that operates at social-platform scale.”
What Remains Unclear: The report cautions against inflating conversion numbers, since most “at least sometimes” figures don’t hold up as reliable percentages. Additionally, it’s unclear how platform algorithms might shift these engagement patterns going forward.
What It Means: For advertisers, clips represent incremental reach rather than a closing tool, according to the report. Therefore, creators and buyers should value clips for discovery, not direct conversion. For creators, the data reinforces that vertical clips increasingly serve as the primary front door to podcast growth. As a result, shows built around clip-first strategies may reach new audiences fastest.
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.
60 Minutes continues to face questions about its recent overhaul. Cecilia Vega says she still doesn’t know why CBS News fired her.
What We Know: Vega publicly addressed her departure from 60 Minutes and CBS News during an appearance with ABC News’ John Quiñones at the National Association of Hispanic Journalists Conference and Expo. Status‘ Oliver Darcy first reported her remarks. Vega was among several 60 Minutes correspondents who exited the newsmagazine following its latest season as part of a shakeup led by CBS News Editor-in-Chief Bari Weiss. Although the leadership changes prompted multiple high-profile departures, CBS News hasn’t publicly explained the reasons behind Vega’s exit. Her comments mark one of the first times she’s spoken publicly about leaving the network.
What They Said: “I don’t know why I was fired. It’s been about three months now … and I don’t know. I was not given a reason. I still have not been given a reason.” -Cecilia Vega
What Remains Unclear: CBS News hasn’t detailed why Vega’s employment ended or whether her departure resulted from broader editorial restructuring. Likewise, the company hasn’t explained whether additional staffing changes could follow the recent overhaul. It’s also unclear whether Vega has plans to return to television journalism in a full-time role.
What It Means: Vega’s comments add another layer of scrutiny to CBS News as it navigates significant leadership and programming changes. Because she says she never received an explanation, questions about transparency inside the organization will likely continue. Meanwhile, her remarks could fuel additional attention on the network’s handling of talent departures during Bari Weiss’ restructuring of 60 Minutes. As the changes continue, observers will watch whether CBS News offers more clarity about the decisions that reshaped one of television’s most recognizable news programs.
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.
Fifty nominees are on the ballot. Twenty will earn induction into the Texas Radio Hall of Fame’s Class of 2026.
What We Know: Voting opened Friday, July 24, and runs through midnight on August 10, 2026. Eligible voting members cast their ballots at TRHOF.net. This year’s field includes two newer recognition categories — Small Markets, Big Voices and Lone Star Legacies — both of which drew strong nominations. The induction ceremony takes place November 7 at the Texas Broadcast Museum in Kilgore.
What’s at Stake: Over 160 broadcast professionals with Texas radio ties entered the nomination process. An internal review committee narrowed that field to 50 finalists. Voting members now determine who among those 50 earns permanent recognition. The stakes are real — Hall of Fame status carries lasting legacy in a state with one of the country’s most storied radio traditions.
What Remains Unclear: No inductee announcement date has been confirmed beyond the November 7 ceremony. Additionally, the organization has not yet disclosed whether the Lone Star Legacies category carries a separate cap on inductees versus the broader 20-person class.
What It Means: The expanded nominee categories signal a conscious effort to broaden the Hall’s reach beyond major Texas markets. Smaller-market broadcasters are gaining visibility they haven’t historically received. That shift matters — it reframes what Hall of Fame recognition looks like in a state as diverse as Texas radio itself.
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.
Jon Gruden is stepping back into the booth for a Tampa Bay Buccaneers preseason game next month. He’ll join Ronde Barber to call Tampa Bay’s August 22 preseason game against the Chiefs. Speaking on his podcast, Barber revealed how the concept came about and what he expects from the experience.
What We Know: Gruden spent nine years as ESPN’s Monday Night Football analyst before exiting after the 2017 season. Since his final NFL head coaching job, he has rebranded online with Barstool Sports. As a result, the Buccaneers turned to him after a scheduling conflict sidelined longtime play-by-play voice Chris Myers for this one game. Moreover, Myers will call Tampa Bay’s two road preseason broadcasts. However, Barber said on his Ronde Barber Show that the concept was his idea, and is hoping the product will be something different.
Ronde Barber on suggestion Jon Gruden to fill in for Chris Myers on a Buccaneers pre-season game: “I said I wanted to do something different. No disrespect to the traditional play-by-play guys out there, I wanted to do something different. I had a couple of options, and I ended up [with] me and Jon Gruden will be calling a game week two of the Buccaneers preseason with Kansas City at home. Jon and I will be sharing the booth.”
Ronde Barber on what he hopes the broadcast with Gruden will be like: “The logistics of which I’m not really at liberty to say. But it will not, and I’m hoping it’s not going to be a traditional play-by-play color type of situation. It’ll be unique to us and it’ll be a whole a whole lot of fun.”
Ronde Barber on Jon Gruden: “He has unique energy. He obviously has experience in the booth. Nine years at ESPN. I just had this inkling that give the fans what they want. Jon is on a heater right now with everything that he’s doing in terms of his presence online. I can’t wait to be sitting next to him calling a football game. It’s gonna be awesome.”
What Remains Unclear: Barber has said the setup won’t follow a traditional play-by-play format, though he hasn’t detailed how duties will split. The Buccaneers have not stated if the broadcast will be a one-off or the beginning of building for the future.
What It Means: This is a unique way to take a scheduling conflict and add a special element to a pre-season game that tends to mean little on the field. With alt-casts becoming more the norm, this is a smart play for the Buccaneers to pit two of the franchise’s most recognizable names in this type of setting. This pairing also marks a symbolic step in Gruden’s public rehabilitation since his 2021 Raiders resignation. Tampa Bay reinstated him to its Ring of Honor last year, and now hands him a microphone. For Barber, it’s a chance to swap routine for something more personal and unscripted. Ultimately, the broadcast doubles as nostalgia and a test run for Gruden’s potential next chapter.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
Nielsen has delisted three Louisville stations, all signals and online streams of ESPN Louisville. The action follows a diary collection violation for the June 2026 ratings survey.
What We Know: According to a product notification to clients, Nielsen says it removed Union Broadcasting’s WHBE-AM & FM and WLCL from the June 2026 Louisville survey. All three signals carry ESPN Louisvilleprogramming. According to reporting, a staff member’s household obtained and returned diaries meant for the June report. The diaries didn’t meet Nielsen’s quality standards, so they were excluded entirely.
What They Said: Nielsen Statement: “Nielsen expressly prohibits participation in its panels and surveys by any household associated with a radio station.”
What Remains Unclear: Nielsen hasn’t said whether Union Broadcasting cooperated during its inquiry. It’s also unknown how long the violation will hold ESPN Louisville from being listed again.
What It Means: Ultimately, this serves as another warning to broadcasters about panel integrity. It is a commonly known fact that anyone associated with station employees, especially living within the same household, are not allowed to participate in measurement. How long ESPN Louisville’s signal and streams will be delisted remains to be seen. Meanwhile, the stations will lose ratings currency making this a costly outcome for local billing and ad sales.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. Sign up for our newsletters to stay updated and get the latest information right in your inbox.
The recorded music industry just took its boldest step yet on AI transparency. On July 10, a coalition of major trade groups proposed a standardized system for tagging AI-generated music across streaming platforms.
What We Know: The RIAA, Recording Academy, SAG-AFTRA, and several independent music associations joined forces on the proposal. It calls for two distinct labels — an uppercase “AI” tag for fully generated tracks and a lowercase “ai” tag for AI-assisted content. The system would rely on voluntary disclosure from artists, labels, and distributors. Notably, streaming platforms did not co-sign the announcement.
What’s at Stake: Deezer now reports that over 50% of daily song uploads are fully AI-generated. Additionally, a Luminate study found 42% of listeners lose interest in a song once they learn AI was involved. Meanwhile, Apple Music says more than a third of its monthly intake is 100% AI-generated. The industry clearly sees a consumer trust problem worth solving.
What Remains Unclear: Streaming services haven’t committed to adopting the new framework. Three sources told Billboard they have concerns about the AI-assisted tag specifically. False positives from detection tools also remain a real risk. Furthermore, how this system would interact with existing platform policies is entirely unresolved.
What It Means: This is a meaningful first move, but momentum isn’t guaranteed. Unlike the Parental Advisory label — where retailers essentially forced compliance — there’s no commercial incentive pushing artists to disclose AI use here. Without that pressure, the system runs on the honor system. That’s a shaky foundation, and the industry knows 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.
Lenard “Charlamagne tha God” McKelvey is officially part of the Hollywood Walk of Fame Class of 2027.
What We Know: The Hollywood Chamber of Commerce announced the Class of 2027 on July 23, 2026. Charlemagne earned his star in the Radio category — one of 32 honorees selected this year. The Selection Committee chose recipients from hundreds of nominations at its May 15 meeting. The Chamber’s Board of Directors ratified the class on July 22.
What They Said: Walk of Fame Selection Chairman Peter Roth captured the weight of the moment well. “These 32 extraordinary individuals have each made a lasting impact on audiences around the world,” Roth said, adding that the committee looks “forward to celebrating them as they take their place in Hollywood history.”
What Remains Unclear: No ceremony date has been set for Charlamagne’s star dedication. Recipients have two years to schedule their ceremony before selection expires. Additionally, a sponsor must fund the star, the ceremony, and ongoing maintenance before anything moves forward.
What It Means: This recognition cements Charlamagne’s crossover from radio personality to full-fledged cultural institution. His platform — built on The Breakfast Club and beyond — helped reshape how radio engages with hip-hop, politics, and mental health. Furthermore, a Hollywood star signals that radio voices still carry real cultural weight.
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.
Ryan Clark, one of ESPN’s most recognizable NFL analysts, reportedly learned he was fired while he was still at work. Karl Ravech, the steady voice of ESPN’s baseball coverage for more than three decades, was gone too. Just like that, two familiar faces disappeared. Social media reacted the way it always does when a network parts ways with people viewers have welcomed into their living rooms for years.
How could ESPN do this? What are they thinking? Doesn’t loyalty count for anything anymore? Those are understandable questions. They’re also usually asked by people who don’t work in the business. I’ve been there.
KNBR, the iconic San Francisco Bay Area sports radio station, let me go in November 2024 after nearly a decade. We had strong ratings. We were reading plenty of live commercials. By every meaningful business metric, the show was successful. I didn’t suddenly forget how to do radio, and listeners didn’t suddenly stop listening. The station simply decided it could create a similar product for less money.
That isn’t bitterness. It’s business.
What To Blame
Fans often assume talented people lose their jobs because they stopped being talented. That is almost never how it works. Ryan Clark is talented. Karl Ravech is talented. Sports media is full of people who are very good at what they do but no longer work where they built their reputations. They didn’t all suddenly become worse at their jobs.
Someone looked at a spreadsheet and decided the company could accomplish nearly the same thing for less money.
There had been reports for months that Clark’s future at ESPN was uncertain. There were public disagreements along the way, including with fellow ESPN personality Peter Schrager. Let’s not kid ourselves into believing personalities or office politics are the story. I’ve worked with people I didn’t always like, and I’m sure some would say the same about me. That’s life.
Ryan Clark: "That’s the non-player in you"
Peter Schrager: "Don’t belittle me like that, I can come and say as three ex-players are saying one thing, and give an alternative perspective"
Ryan Clark: "Peter, what I need for you to do is not get mad and let me finish" pic.twitter.com/zbBXdNPQaI
Sometimes you fake it for three hours because the audience doesn’t care whether everyone had dinner together the night before. They care whether the show is entertaining.
In the end, almost every one of these decisions comes down to one thing: The bottom line.
Just Business
Executives aren’t asking whether Ryan Clark knows football. They already know he does. They’re asking whether they can maintain the audience, satisfy advertisers, and produce something close to the same show while spending less money.
That’s the calculation. Which is why the real story isn’t Ryan Clark or Karl Ravech. The real story is the death of sports media’s middle class.
Look at ESPN today and tell me it doesn’t resemble an NFL roster. Every franchise pays the quarterback first because quarterbacks drive the business. Patrick Mahomes. Josh Allen. Joe Burrow. ESPN now operates the same way. Pat McAfee is a franchise quarterback. Stephen A. Smith is another. Joe Buck, Troy Aikman, and Adam Schefter occupy similar territory.
Those personalities don’t simply attract viewers. They attract advertisers, sponsors, and leverage.
When reports surfaced that McAfee’s next contract could approach $60 million a year, J.J. Watt joked on his show, “Did they keep anybody? Or is everybody fired to pay you?” McAfee correctly pointed out that ESPN licenses The Pat McAfee Show and that his company pays the producers and staff behind it. That’s an important distinction.
It doesn’t change the larger point.
Whether it’s $30 million or $60 million, franchise quarterbacks change the way rosters are built. That’s not McAfee’s fault. Every one of us would sign that contract. When a company commits that much money to a handful of stars, the dependable veterans in the middle become much easier to replace.
That’s what we’re watching happen.
Never Going Back
SportsCenter once created stars. Dan Patrick. Stuart Scott. Keith Olbermann. Chris Berman. Rich Eisen. Today, stars create ESPN. That’s one of the biggest philosophical shifts in the company’s history. The logo still matters, but audiences increasingly follow personalities more than networks.
Dan Patrick, Bill Simmons, Colin Cowherd, and Rich Eisen all proved you can build something successful beyond Bristol.
Artificial intelligence will only accelerate these conversations. This isn’t just about sports media. Every profession will eventually wrestle with the same uncomfortable question.
What is indispensable, and what can be done cheaper with the same or better results? Nobody wants to believe it can happen to them. That’s the dangerous part.
Sports has always prepared us for this reality.
The Patriots decided Tom Brady’s best days were behind him. The 49ers moved on from Jerry Rice and the Colts released Peyton Manning. Even the Los Angeles Lakers decided it was time to turn the page on LeBron James.
Organizations survive. Every time I watched one of those legends get shown the door, I thought the same thing: If they can move on from them, they can move on from me.
I’ve never been afraid of getting fired. I’ve always been afraid of believing I couldn’t be. That’s the trap. Every personality eventually thinks they’re indispensable. Almost nobody is.
After 30 years in sports media, the most valuable lesson I’ve learned is also the simplest. The audience falls in love with people. The business falls in love with numbers, and the numbers always win.
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.
Yesterday, I wrote about the recent Audacy partnership with SiriusXM, which begins later this fall. For Audacy, the partnership is a huge win. It places 23 of its top sports brands on SiriusXM for a different audience to discover, consume, and engage with. Instead of simply moving stations from AM to FM, the deal signals a much larger bet. One that breaks barriers well beyond any frequency and bets more on the future of the format itself.
Then there’s SiriusXM’s side of the partnership. Looking at this side of the coin, I’m left with more questions than answers. Let me explain why.
Earlier this year, Netflix arranged partnerships for exclusive access to video versions of podcasts from The Ringer, Barstool Sports, and iHeartMedia. One question lingered after the partnership was announced: Would consumers pay for something they already receive for free?
The goal was simple. The world’s largest streaming platform wanted to cut into YouTube’s growing share of podcast consumption. YouTube doesn’t have to pay creators to distribute content on its platform, yet it benefits in countless ways from having that programming available.
The Netflix Example
Netflix paid significant sums to secure exclusive rights to long-form video versions of those podcasts. The company certainly isn’t struggling financially, but the early results are beginning to answer the questions many raised from the start.
In June, Edison Research found that only 14% of weekly podcast listeners used Netflix to consume podcasts during the first quarter. Puck’s Matthew Belloni also reported that no video podcast cracked Nielsen’s weekly Top 10, a list Netflix programming typically dominates.
There’s one important distinction, though. Netflix placed a video product behind a paywall while the audio version remained available everywhere podcasts are distributed. The consumption experience is different. Audio offers an intimate, on-demand experience, while video demands more attention and creates a lean-in viewing experience.
Earlier this month, during the company’s biannual viewership report, Netflix didn’t even break podcast viewership into its own category. Instead, it lumped those numbers into its “Other Shows” category alongside non-podcast programming.
The objective is obvious from Netflix’ standpoint. More subscribers create more revenue, more advertising opportunities, and more resources to invest in additional programming. At its core, Netflix is a subscription video platform paying for the exclusive rights to a video version of an audio product.
SiriusXM is now taking a similar approach. However, the difference is it’s an audio platform behind a paywall that is paying for the rights to carry 23 proven sports radio brands’ audio from around the country. The same question applies here as it did with Netflix: Would consumers pay for something they can already get for free?
With Netflix, at least you can argue that watching a video podcast offers a different experience than listening to the audio version. You can’t make that argument with the SiriusXM-Audacy partnership because the product is exactly the same.
The New SiriusXM?
I remember when SiriusXM positioned itself as the alternative for listeners looking for something different from traditional radio. Rawer. Fewer commercials. Crystal-clear reception across the country. No holds barred. Expanded playlists.
It was the cool, shiny new object in the audio industry.
Now, that object is evolving into more of a distribution hub. SiriusXM is now adding proven brands with massive local and national appeal. The kicker is that these brands are already available through over-the-air radio, station apps, social media, video platforms, and connected devices. Most consumers can access them easily and for free.
If the goal is to gain subscribers, why would consumers pay for something they can already access in the same form anytime and virtually anywhere?
Radio signals remain what they’ve always been. They weaken over distance. Cars, however, are more connected than ever. The dashboard has become an entertainment center that syncs with your smartphone and reflects your personal listening habits. Everything SiriusXM is now paying to distribute is already accessible through other apps that don’t cost consumers anything.
There’s also another consideration. By introducing more proven brands, SiriusXM risks pulling paying subscribers away from programming it created to differentiate itself from traditional radio. Mad Dog Sports Radio, for example, was built around the success of Chris “Mad Dog” Russo at WFAN. By adding WFAN to the platform, SiriusXM creates direct competition for a brand that helped establish its own sports identity.
None of this means the Audacy-SiriusXM partnership is destined to fail. In theory, SiriusXM gains respected brands, greater programming depth, and additional advertising opportunities. Audacy expands its reach and introduces its stations to listeners who may not have discovered them otherwise.
On paper, it’s easy to see why both companies agreed to the deal.
Will People Subscribe
We're teaming up with @SIRIUSXM to bring 42 of Audacy's leading local sports, news and talk stations from 29 markets to SiriusXM.
🏟️ 23 sports stations launch Sept. 1 📰 19 news & talk stations coming later this year
But the real challenge isn’t adding great content. It’s convincing consumers to change habits they’ve spent years developing. Netflix is learning in real time that paying for exclusive access to content people already enjoy elsewhere doesn’t automatically persuade them to open their wallets. SiriusXM now faces a similar test.
Sports radio listeners have never had more ways to consume their favorite stations. Whether through over-the-air radio, station apps, YouTube, podcasts, or connected dashboards. If those habits are already deeply ingrained, placing the same content behind a subscription may not create the urgency SiriusXM hopes for.
The partnership may ultimately prove to be a smart strategic investment. But if Netflix’s experience has taught the media business anything, it’s that consumers don’t pay simply because content moves behind a paywall. They pay when the experience offers something they can’t get anywhere else.
That’s the lesson SiriusXM will have to prove it has learned.
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.
