Category: Industry Views

Industry Views

Rock Promotion Legend Paul “Rap” Rappaport Guests on Harrison Podcast

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

img

The new installment of the TALKERS MEDIA channel video podcast, “Up Close Far Out,” features a blockbuster conversation between two album rock “golden age” media pioneers – TALKERS founder Michael Harrison and legendary music industry executive, Paul “Rap” Rappaport.

img“Rap” was senior vice president of rock promotion at Columbia Records where he served for 33-years during album rock’s golden era, playing a pivotal role in the careers of some of the biggest stars in the business. These included everyone from Bob Dylan to Bruce Springsteen, Pink Floyd to the Rolling Stones, Elvis Costello to Billy Joel, Judas Priest to Alice In Chains, Journey and many, many more.

His recently released memoir, Gliders Over Hollywood: Airships, Airplay, and the Art of Rock Promotion (Jawbone Press, 2025), tells the exhilarating true story of a blue-collar kid nicknamed “Rap” who grew up enthralled by rock ’n’ roll and then found himself right in the middle of many of his heroes’ lives as he became one of the most renowned rock promotion reps in the nation.

Harrison states, “The book is excellent. I particularly found it fascinating and fun talking with Rap because I was also there during one of pop culture’s most colorful chapters and knew him quite well.” Harrison coined the term Album Oriented Rock (AOR) and was the first programmer to specifically develop and promote it as an official format while serving as program director of KPRI in San Diego in the early seventies and as managing editor of the trade publication Radio & Records though the mid-seventies. From 1970 to 1990, he worked in various roles as DJ and/or program director, at major album rock outlets including WLIR, Long Island; WNEW-FM, New York; KPRI, San Diego; KMET, Los Angeles; and WZLX, Boston in addition to being a syndicated personality on hundreds of AOR stations.

Don’t miss this engaging conversation between two media heavyweights who share their firsthand experiences and memories of a truly special era and connect the dots to today’s very different music and pop cultural scene.

To connect to the podcast, please click here.

Industry Views

After Warning Talk Radio, ABC Sues the FCC

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Matthew B. Harrison
TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Legal Group, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer

 

imgABC warned that the FCC’s scrutiny of “The View” could reach talk radio. Now the eight ABC-owned television station licensees have taken the agency to court. But the immediate lawsuit is not asking a judge to decide whether “The View” qualifies as news.

Rather, it challenges the FCC’s decision to force those local stations into license renewal years ahead of schedule. On April 28, the FCC’s Media Bureau invoked a rule allowing early renewal when it considers that step essential to an investigation. The stations filed under protest, and on August 18 asked a federal court to halt the proceeding before the FCC can designate it for a hearing.

The FCC says it is investigating possible unlawful discrimination in ABC’s employment practices and whether the stations have served the public interest. ABC calls that explanation a pretext, pointing to public demands that it fires Jimmy Kimmel, threats against its licenses, criticism of its editorial decisions, and the separate proceeding involving “The View.” No license has been denied, and the FCC has not yet answered the lawsuit.

The ABC network does not hold one national broadcast license. Its local stations hold the licenses, and the same federal licensing structure covers terrestrial radio. An online-only show has no FCC broadcast license for the agency to call in.

ABC’s legal argument is that the process itself can punish speech. A costly, open-ended license proceeding may chill hosts, producers and programmers before a regulator ever issues a censorship order. For talk radio, the question is not whether you like ABC; it is whether the government may use threats to a station’s license to influence who gets booked, what gets asked, or which opinions reach the air.

Matthew B. Harrison is a media and intellectual property attorney who advises radio hosts, content creators, and creative entrepreneurs. He has written extensively on fair use, AI law, and the future of digital rights. Reach him at Matthew@HarrisonLegalGroup.com or read more at TALKERS.com.

Industry Views

Who talks like THAT???

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

img

At the end of the day, when all is said and done, broadcasters and podcasters should avoid clichés like the plague. And redundancies, “Period, full stop.”

Consultant, longtime TALKERS columnist – and, yes, long, long-ago English teacher – Holland Cooke has been collecting verbal misdemeanors for decades. His new quick-read e-book Who Talks Like That??? skewers broadcast-ese, bloated wording, antique vocabulary, redundancies, mispronunciations and other ways we accidentally make listeners notice how we’re talking instead of what we’re saying.

“Because radio and podcasts are intimate media, and unforgiving,” Cooke urges, “sound human.” Especially now that every word is competing for attention with SO many audio competitors. FREE download to TALKERS readers: https://getonthenet.com/OOPS.pdf

Industry Views

Monday Memo: Prospect Retailers Who Are Podcasting

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

They’re low-hanging fruit. They “get” audio, and they crave the listeners radio can bring. We train station sales reps to ask, “If we don’t tell our listeners about your podcast, how will they know you’re doing one?” Incorporate sound bites from their podcasts into their spots.

Holland Cooke is a consultant working the intersection of broadcasting and the Internet. Follow HC on Twitter @HollandCooke and connect on LinkedIn

Industry Views

Is the Algorithm Your New Program Director?

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

img

By Matthew B. Harrison
TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Legal Group, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer

 

imgYou post five clips from yesterday’s program. Four do fine. The fifth, an argument with a caller, explodes. It gets more views, more comments, more shares and more click time than anything else you posted.

So tomorrow you post another argument.

That one performs too. Before long, you are clipping more confrontations because confrontation travels. Then maybe the show itself begins to change. You stay on the angry topic a little longer. You take the provocative call you might once have dumped. You learn what gets rewarded.

Nobody at YouTube, Facebook or TikTok called and told you to make an angrier show. The algorithm did not order you to do anything. It simply showed you what produced a reaction, and you reacted to the reward.

Radio people have seen versions of this forever. The phones light up, so we stay with the topic. A feature appears to perform well in PPM, so it gets another quarter hour. Ratings rise, so management asks for more of whatever seems to be working.

Digital distribution makes that feedback faster, more visible and harder to ignore. It also adds another wrinkle: the platform may use strong engagement to give the next clip more distribution. The reward is not just a good number on a report. It may be a bigger audience tomorrow.

That makes analytics tremendously useful. They can show what attracts attention, what holds audience and what helps people discover your program. But a measurement tool can become a programming influence if you start chasing every spike.

A good host learns from the audience without becoming a hostage to it. A good programmer knows what works without assuming that whatever gets the biggest reaction is automatically the best show.

Use the algorithm to distribute your work. Learn from what it tells you. Make money wherever the audience finds you.

Just don’t appoint it the role of program director.

For the larger discussion of ratings, PPM and digital distribution, read The Algorithm Is Listening at TALKERS.com here.

Matthew B. Harrison, associate publisher of TALKERS, is a media and intellectual property attorney who advises radio hosts, content creators, and creative entrepreneurs. He has written extensively on fair use, AI law, and the future of digital rights. Reach him at Matthew@HarrisonLegalGroup.com or read more at TALKERS.com.

Industry Views

The Algorithm Knows What You Did But It Doesn’t Know Why

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

img

By Matthew B. Harrison
TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Legal Group, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer

 

imgA viewer watches the same political clip three times. The platform sees a powerful signal: this person stopped, stayed, and came back. What it cannot reliably know is whether the viewer loved the argument, hated it, was factchecking it, or was showing it to someone else in disbelief. The algorithm knows a viewer watched. It does not necessarily know why. That is why YouTube looks beyond viewing itself to other signals of appeal, engagement, and satisfaction.

That distinction matters to broadcasters because digital analytics can look much more intelligent than they really are. An algorithm can measure behavior with extraordinary precision, but behavior is not motive. PPM taught radio a version of the same lesson. Nielsen’s meter can passively detect exposure to encoded audio, but the resulting audience measurement cannot tell a programmer why someone listened or why audience levels changed.

Livestreaming creates the opposite problem. Instead of too little explanation, the host suddenly gets too much of it. The chat is moving. People are demanding another topic, praising a guest, attacking a caller, or announcing that the segment is dying.

That feedback is valuable, but the people typing are not necessarily representative of the people listening. Radio hosts should already understand this because callers have never represented the entire audience. They represent the portion motivated enough to pick up the telephone. Livestream chat is the same phenomenon at digital speed.

The danger comes when these two imperfect signals reinforce each other. The dashboard says engagement jumped. The chat says, “More of this.” A host can easily conclude that the audience has spoken when what actually happened is that a particularly active portion of the audience became particularly visible.

Good broadcasters have always listened to the audience without surrendering the show to it. Digital tools make that listening faster and more detailed, but they do not eliminate the need for judgment.

The algorithm knows what people did. The chat tells you what some people said. The programmer still has to decide what either one means.

For the larger discussion of ratings, PPM, algorithms and digital distribution, read The Algorithm Is Listening here: https://talkers.com/category/industry-views/

Matthew B. Harrison is a media and intellectual property attorney who advises radio hosts, content creators, and creative entrepreneurs. He has written extensively on fair use, AI law, and the future of digital rights. Reach him at Matthew@HarrisonLegalGroup.com or read more at TALKERS.com.

Industry Views

Monday Memo: Radio’s New Fall Season

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

 

imgAs TV is touting its coming attractions, take a step back. We – inside the box – live-and-breathe radio.

Listeners have their hands full just living and breathing. Their day is time-crunched and financially-challenged, and we want to be its soundtrack. But listening is free, unlike umpteen other purchase decisions they agonize. So what’s high-stakes to us is low-stakes to them.

We only matter if we matter, and we’ve never had so much audio competition.

  • This month, as the school year begins in so many places, the listeners local retailers want as customers revert to “normal.” Their tempo changes, and builds to a holiday season climax. Do they know who you are and how you can help?
  • Off-air promotion (remember that?) merely says give-us-a-try. When they do, does what they hear deliver? Even with scant (or no) off-air promotion, much of what you can do to become more habit-forming costs nothing. As consultants do, I’m talking about “the fundamentals,” the blocking-and-tackling stuff. For starters, think: recognition and relevance.

Who are you?

  • Are call letters or station nickname delivered frequently? PPM myth: call letters matter less. Baloney. Awareness drives use. Ditto your dial position(s) and how to listen via smartphone, smart speaker, and streams. Name-and-address.
  • As your listeners cume 3 stations this week, help ’em remember yours more than the other 2 (not to mention streams and satellite radio and podcasts). And are you selling — or merely reciting — call letters, dial position, and slogans? This is often an issue with veteran talent, creatures of habit.

“Who cares?”

Or as my WTOP successor Jim Farley (RIP) asked: “W.G.A.S.?” He hung a sign in the newsroom there, meaning “Who Gives A Shit?”

  • Are topics relatable and useful? Enable listeners with helpful information, and they’ll keep coming back.
  • Do you say “you” and “your,” a lot? It’s a litmus test for relevance.
  • Do you keep setting the stage as audience tunes in? Someone JUST got in the car.
  • Are you teasing the next quarter hour? And what you’ll offer same-time-tomorrow?
  • Even with apps in the dashboard, weather and traffic are super-local and can be super-impactful.
  • Is your on-air imaging about the station? Or about listeners’ lives? “Because ONE traffic jam can jam-up your whole day…”

There’s more from radio’s right-now To-Do list at HollandCooke.com

Holland Cooke is a consultant working the intersection of broadcasting and the Internet. Follow HC on Twitter @HollandCooke and connect on LinkedIn

Industry Views

The Algorithm is Listening

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

1527a63f d481 4de5 8636 2bcf88a23c44

img

By Matthew B. Harrison
TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Legal Group, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer

Radio once measured the audience… now digital platforms use the audience to decide what happens next

Radio programmers have always watched the audience. The difference for programmers today is that the audience can now watch back, respond instantly, influence the show, and determine whether the next person ever receives it.

That is the practical meaning of an algorithm for a broadcaster. It is not a mysterious robot hiding inside the black box of an enigmatic social platform. It is a set of instructions used to make decisions. On YouTube, Facebook, TikTok, Spotify, Twitch, and other services, those instructions help determine which content gets shown, to whom, in what order, and under what circumstances.

Radio has used simpler forms of algorithmic thinking for decades. A music clock is a set of instructions. So is a rule prohibiting two songs by the same artist within a specified period. Or two female vocals in a row. A programmer who schedules news at the top of the hour, traffic twice an hour, and the strongest feature before a commercial break has created a decision system.

Digital algorithms do something more consequential. They do not merely organize the program. They organize the audience around each individual piece of content.

From diaries to PPM

The traditional radio diary asked selected listeners to record what they heard and when they heard it. Nielsen defines the diary as a measurement method in which respondents manually record their listening habits. Those reported habits are then used to estimate listening across a larger market.

The system was necessarily crude. A diary could show that someone reported listening to a station during morning drive. It could not reliably establish whether that person loved the program, ignored it, hated it, stayed because the station was playing in a waiting room, or simply remembered the call letters incorrectly.

Still, the diary produced an enormously valuable number. Ratings influenced advertising rates, station formats, talent contracts, syndication opportunities, and management decisions. The ratings service measured the audience, but the station still controlled the programming and the transmitter.

The Portable People Meter changed the speed and granularity of that feedback. PPM panelists carry a small device that detects inaudible identification codes embedded in participating broadcasts. Instead of relying entirely on a listener’s memory and written entry, the meter passively detects exposure to encoded audio.

That gave programmers something closer to immediate feedback. They could study audience movement within smaller portions of a show, identify apparent tune-out points, compare features, evaluate commercial breaks, and make changes much more quickly.

PPM therefore became the bridge between traditional ratings and algorithmic distribution. The diary remembered the audience. PPM observed the audience more closely. Both still produced information for human beings to interpret.

A programmer could see a decline and decide to shorten a segment. The meter did not shorten it. A consultant could conclude that a feature hurt retention. The PPM system did not prevent tomorrow’s listeners from hearing it.

The algorithm closes that gap.

(more…)

Industry Views

Monday Memo: Trust is the New Currency

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

Holland Cooke

It is now the ultimate competitive advantage, and for broadcasters it’s a survival strategy. In The Five-Year Century: Bold Leadership and Accelerated Outcomes in the Age of AI, Mihir Shukla and Nancy Hauge explain how—as artificial intelligence accelerates change and demographics reshape the audience—trust becomes the only durable asset radio and television can bank on.

The book describes a 2026 world where the “twin engines” of growth—population and productivity—have stalled. Birth rates are plunging, workforces are shrinking, and productivity has flatlined across most industries. Meanwhile, AI is compressing decades of innovation into months. This collision creates what the authors call “The Five-Year Century,” in which the pace of change overwhelms institutions built for slower times—broadcasting, for instance.

Radio and television were built on industrial-era assumptions: mass audiences, standardized programming, rigid schedules, and hierarchical decision-making. Those assumptions worked when the audience was broad, predictable, and captive. On February 9, 1964, the Beatles tripled Ed Sullivan’s ratings. Back to the future…

AI is rewriting the rules of content creation, distribution, and consumption. Personalized news feeds, customized ad loads, and algorithmic programming are expectations. Younger audiences don’t wait for a newscast; they expect a feed. They don’t tune in; they scroll. They don’t accept one-size-fits-all; they demand one-size-fits-me.

In this environment, trust becomes the new currency because it’s the one thing AI cannot manufacture.

Broadcasting’s advantage has always been credibility. When a storm hits, people still turn to local radio. When a shelter-in-place alert hits their phone, they still switch on local TV. That instinct is powerful, but it’s not permanent. Trust must be earned continuously, especially as AI-generated misinformation floods the ecosystem.

The book’s chapter on the “Trust Economy” makes a critical point: trust accelerates outcomes. High-trust organizations move faster, innovate more boldly, and adapt more effectively. For broadcasters, trust accelerates audience loyalty, advertiser confidence, and community relevance. But trust now requires new behaviors.

It requires transparency about how AI is used in newsrooms. It requires clarity about what is human judgment and what is machine assistance. It requires authenticity as AI-generated talent becomes increasingly commonplace—and increasingly convincing.

Trust requires broadcasters to lean into what humans do best: context, empathy, moral reasoning, and community connection. The book reminds us that “work worthy of human potential” is work that machines cannot replicate. For broadcasters, that means storytelling, accountability journalism, and the human presence that makes local media local.

By all means, assign AI the routine tasks: editing, logging, transcription, versioning, and production. Then reinvest the human time you save in the relationship between a station and its community. In The Five-Year Century, trust isn’t just a virtue. It’s a conspicuous differentiator. It’s the currency that will determine which broadcasters thrive and which fade into the noise of an algorithmic world. As our industry suffers workforce cutbacks, we risk downsizing trust.

To read two sample chapters and watch a short video interview with the authors, click here.

Holland Cooke is a consultant working at the intersection of broadcasting and the Internet. Follow HC on Twitter @HollandCooke and connect on LinkedIn.

Industry Views

The Advertiser Gave Us an AI Commercial… Isn’t that Enough?

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

doublewiredaiproblem

imgBy Matthew B. Harrison
TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Legal Group, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer

Synthetic audio can turn one clearance problem into two
An advertiser sends a finished commercial to a station. The script came from one AI platform, the announcer’s voice from another, and the music arrived inside the final audio file. The production value is surprisingly good for a dental office. Then someone notices that the announcer sounds remarkably like Matthew McConaughey. He does not say “alright, alright, alright,” exactly, but he says something close enough to make the association obvious.

A conventional infringing commercial may misuse a song, recording, photograph, or written copy. An AI commercial can create the same copyright problem while adding another: the unauthorized commercial use of a recognizable person’s identity. One file can therefore produce two entirely different claims.

Copyright protects original expression, including scripts, music, and sound recordings. It generally does not give anyone a copyright in the sound of a natural voice. That does not make a distinctive voice free for advertisers to imitate.

Tom Waits established the distinction decades before generative AI. After Waits declined to participate in a Frito-Lay campaign, the company used a singer who imitated him in a radio commercial. Waits successfully pursued claims for voice misappropriation and false endorsement. AI now makes that imitation faster, cheaper, and potentially more convincing. Waits v. Frito-Lay⁠

The rights do not travel together 

Clearing the script or music does not clear the voice. Permission from the person whose voice was cloned does not clear protected material that the system may have reproduced. The station needs to ask two questions: Who owns everything in this commercial, and whose identity is doing the selling?

There is another wrinkle. The AI company may possess defenses that do not travel with the finished audio. In Walters v. OpenAI, ChatGPT falsely accused radio host Mark Walters of embezzlement. OpenAI defeated the defamation claim because the recipient encountered warnings that the system could be inaccurate, did not believe the accusation, verified that it was false, and did not republish it. Walters also failed to prove the necessary fault or damages. Walters v. OpenAI⁠ case summary⁠

That ruling did not grant AI companies blanket immunity. It does suggest an uncomfortable result for broadcasters. A provider’s warning that its output requires verification may help protect the provider while making it harder for a station to argue that airing the output without checking was reasonable. The company that generated the problem may have a better defense than the broadcaster that delivered it to the public.

California’s AI Transparency Act, operative August 2, 2026, now requires certain large AI providers to offer detection tools and place provenance disclosures in generated audio, images, and video. Those tools may help identify origin. They do not establish copyright clearance, consent, accuracy, or authority to imitate someone. California AI Transparency Act⁠

Stations should require advertisers to warrant both ownership and permission for identifiable voices or likenesses, backed by indemnification. AI has not replaced the old clearance problem. It can place a second problem beside it, then leave the broadcaster holding both.

Matthew B. Harrison is a media and intellectual property attorney who advises radio hosts, content creators, and creative entrepreneurs. He has written extensively on fair use, AI law, and the future of digital rights. Reach him at Matthew@HarrisonLegalGroup.com or read more at TALKERS.com.

Industry Views

Sabo Sez: It’s All Media

By TALKERS | by TALKERS
Sabo Sez:  It’s All Media
By Walter Sabo
A.K.A. Walter Sterling
Host, The Other Side of Midnight
WABC, New York / Red Apple Audio Networks
img“It’s all media,” declared accomplished media executive Jack Griffin when confronted with brand new definitions of content and content distribution. Jack, for years, was president of Meredith Publishing, Time Inc., and The Tribune Company. I met Jack when he was publisher of PARADE magazine. Jack is pragmatic, won’t waste your time and spots BS faster than most humans. We were listening to discussions of the impact of online media versus traditional media, and his line was running out. Jack declared “It’s all media” and the meeting blessedly ended. The phrase haunts me and it is being proven true every second of every day.
Steve Goldstein, CEO of Podcast consultancy, AMPLIFI, published a white paper on the growing acceptance of podcasts in the dashboards of media buyers. The paper tackles the challenge industry committees have had defining a podcast! [link]

Answer: It defines a podcast as an on-demand, spoken-word show intelligible with your eyes closed – video and RSS are both allowed, neither required.
 
The definition of a podcast is simple, broad, and can be met by any podcaster! And every person and entity is making a podcast. Follow that through to what Griffin declared.
VOGUE magazine puts out podcasts constantly. By most definitions they are really good and brand appropriate. Pretty, gossipy, urgent and current. Much more entertaining than the magazine. The New York Times has more podcast viewers than newspaper readers.
The ever-prescient Michael Harrison was right on the money more than two decades ago when he coined the term “media station” to describe the multi-media platform potential of ANY then-traditional venue such as radio and TV stations, newspapers, magazines, books, and cinema.  The media station has since become a reality and the podcast is one of its main engines.
NPR leads the top 20 lists of podcasters, and they can sell advertising in their podcasts without violating their prime directive.
It’s all media
 
When brands evolve from their original product and mission to a podcast, their methodology for success changes but not their definition of success. Brands want revenue and profit. If a brand’s assets can generate the most profit through podcasts, then podcasts will become their business.
 Audience time with media is the target. Capturing their time. Not viewership, listenership, readership, attention: T I M E because it’s ALL MEDIA.
Ultimately a corporate entity’s starter business could be shuttered in order to grow its podcast.  Good to note that every single newspaper and magazine publisher has one fantasy: Get rid of the paper.  Your competition isn’t WXXX it is becoming the VOGUE podcast.
Walter Sabo has been a C-Suite action partner for companies such as SiriusXM, Hearst, Press Broadcasting, Gannett, RKO General, and many other leading media outlets. His company, HITVIEWS, in 2007, was the first to identify and monetize video influencers. His nightly show “The Other Side of Midnight” is heard on WABC, New York and the Red Apple Audio Network 1:00 am – 5:00 am. His syndicated show, “Sterling On Sunday,” from Talk Media Network, airs 10:00 pm-1:00 am ET, and is now in its 10th year of success. He can be reached by email at sabowalter@gmail.com.  He can be phoned at 646-678-1110.
Industry Views

When AI Speaks, Who’s Accountable?

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

img

By Matthew B. Harrison
TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Legal Group, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer

 

imgNew laws may hold AI companies responsible, but regulating machine-generated speech presents risks of its own.

Florida recently sued OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, alleging that they marketed ChatGPT while concealing known safety risks. California has taken a different approach: a company accused of causing harm cannot defend itself simply by saying the AI acted autonomously. Neither development guarantees liability, but both signal that “the AI did it” may no longer work as a legal escape hatch.  

That sounds sensible. An AI model cannot pay damages, carry insurance, exercise professional judgment, or go to jail. If a company releases a system, profits from it, and markets it as useful or reliable, the law should at least ask what the company knew, promised, and reasonably could have prevented.

Mark Walters – host of Armed America Radio – learned how difficult that can be. ChatGPT falsely reported that he had been accused of embezzling money from a gun-rights organization. Walters sued OpenAI for defamation, but a Georgia court granted the company summary judgment in 2025, finding insufficient evidence that OpenAI knew the output was probably false. The machine was wrong; the legal remedy failed.

The harder question involves speech. Colorado adopted requirements intended to prevent discriminatory automated decisions, prompting AI to sue on First Amendment and equal-protection grounds. The Federal Trade Commission has now suggested that secretly steering a model away from the accurate or objective answers users expect could itself constitute consumer deception.

This presents a genuine slippery slope. Government should protect people from fraud, defamation, discrimination, dangerous products, and nonconsensual deepfakes. It should not acquire a broad power to decide what an AI system must identify as “truth,” particularly in areas involving politics, history, public policy, or contested scientific opinion.

For broadcasters and content creators, the immediate lesson remains familiar. AI may assist with research, writing, editing, and production, but it does not inherit responsibility for the finished product. The person or company that publishes the words still needs to verify them, while the companies building the machines should not escape scrutiny merely because no human typed the final sentence.

Accountability should follow control, knowledge, and profit. The challenge will be imposing that accountability without turning AI regulation into government supervision of lawful speech.

Matthew B. Harrison is a media and intellectual property attorney who advises radio hosts, content creators, and creative entrepreneurs. He has written extensively on fair use, AI law, and the future of digital rights. Reach him at Matthew@HarrisonLegalGroup.com or read more at TALKERS.com.

Industry Views

Monday Memo: AI Can’t Fake Real

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

imgIn Full Stack Human: The Mindset Upgrade You Need to Stay Human in a World Ruled by Technology (2026, Wiley Books) Dara Simkin and Tane Hunter describe a 2026 media landscape where people face information overload, shrinking attention spans, negativity fatigue, algorithmic manipulation, and constant distraction.

The irony is that radio may win the future not by becoming more like technology, but by becoming more human. In an age of artificial everything, that’s the sustainable competitive advantage local radio has. And the more crowded the media landscape becomes, the more valuable radio’s unique strengths become.

Consider what today’s digital platforms do best. They personalize content as algorithms learn what users like and deliver more of it. Streaming services can build custom playlists. Social media feeds are tailored to individual interests. AI can generate content instantly.

What those platforms cannot do is belong to a community. Spotify doesn’t know why I-95 is jammed. TikTok doesn’t care that the town council just approved a controversial zoning change. An AI-generated playlist can’t tell listeners where to find shelter during a storm or why Friday night’s high school football game matters. Local radio can. And as media becomes increasingly global, local content becomes increasingly scarce. And scarcity creates value.

Citing research, the book points to another opportunity: Digital platforms are optimized to trigger emotion, especially outrage and conflict – the 1990s talk radio caricature on steroids. The result is a public that often feels overwhelmed, exhausted, and anxious.

Listeners want information, and are looking for context, usefulness, connection, and (dare we?) a reason to smile. Stations willing to do more than simply amplify the argument du jour become indispensable. Winners deliver local information, from trusted voices, a genuine connection that answers the listener’s constant question: “What’s in this for me?”

Click here to read a free sample chapter of “Full Stack Human: The Mindset Upgrade You Need to Stay Human in a World Ruled by Technology.”

Holland Cooke (HollandCooke.com) is a consultant working the intersection of broadcasting and the Internet. Follow HC on Twitter @HollandCooke and connect on LinkedIn

Industry Views

Harrison: Don’t Believe that AI Lacks “Heart”

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

imgTALKERS founder Michael Harrison is this week’s guest on the National Press Club’s official podcast, Update-1, in which he tackles the topic “Predicting the Future of Media Following the Shutdown of CBS News Radio.” Interviewed by noted American University media professor Gemma Puglisi, Harrison addresses such issues as changes in the tenets of journalism and the general shrinkage of radio news. Along the way, he offers his insights into a variety of media and societal topics including the impact of clickbait and what he describes as “the daily dance of affirmation” resulting imgfrom the trend toward news platforms “targeting” audiences for purely marketing purposes. Harrison defends AI from critics who claim the technology lacks “heart” and that audiences will swing back to the “authenticity” being destroyed by AI slop. Harrison makes the case that what counts is the humanity behind the operation of AI which is “only a tool.” He says, “Blaming AI for shallow content is like attributing shoddy novels to the invention of the word processor.” Harrison boldly predicts that AI and modern technology will hasten the “death of Hollywood” as we know it among other insights into the future of news, entertainment, and communications.  Don’t miss this!  To listen to the podcast in its entirety, please click here.

Industry Views

Monday Memo: Robot vs. Robot

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

imgRadio stations used to announce the present temperature at the end of the weather forecast, empowering listeners who are heading out to dress accordingly. It’s the ultimate live-N-local information.

 It was SO conspicuous that – in diary markets – competing stations would fib if the temperature was a competitor’s dial position. I was the 7-midnight DJ during WPRO’s 1970s Top 40 heyday — yep, a live voice at night, before the overnight guy took over. Our AM dial position was 63, a temperature never announced on WGNG (55) or WJAR (92). And vice-versa.

Back to the future: The forecast still airs on AM/FM radio, but often without a live temp’ at the end, because the station is robotic and the weather is canned. Common faux pas: At 4 pm, the forecast begins “Today will be…”

Listeners who want the temperature now get it – instantly – where Amazon Prime subscribers can also ask for 2 million songs…from a robot, Alexa.

In next week’s column here: How radio wins the future – not by becoming more like technology, but by becoming more human. 

Holland Cooke (HollandCooke.com) is a consultant working the intersection of broadcasting and the Internet. Follow HC on Twitter @HollandCooke and connect on LinkedIn

Industry Views

Tradup: Lindsey Graham’s Death a Loss for Talk Radio

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

In a piece written for Townhall.com, Salem Radio Network vice president Tom Tradup writes that talk radio will miss Graham: “But beyond the Beltway political drama, Lindsey Graham’s passing is a huge loss to talk radio, where he was a ubiquitous presence for imgyears. Unlike many of his timid Senate colleagues, the senator was always delighted to join local and national talk shows without being blocked by the annoying Praetorian Guard of Capitol Hill aides dragging their feet, demanding questions in advance, placing limits on topics to be discussed and other myopic restrictions.” Tradup goes on to note, “Salem Radio Network host Mike Gallagher frequently welcomed Lindsey Graham on his nationally syndicated talk show, as did Salem’s Hugh Hewitt and others. Graham was also a featured guest on Sean Hannity’s radio and FOX News Channel programs, as well as Salem’s ‘This Week on Capitol Hill’ with Tony Perkins and virtually every Sunday talk show.” Read his column here.

Industry Views

Monday Memo: Eat Your Ice Cream

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

img“Globalization and the deconstruction of community and country, an addictive media system that runs on algorithms we don’t understand and can’t escape, the unpredictability of climate change, Gilded Age-level inequality, and the worry that generative AI will control rather than be controlled by us.”

Those facts-of-life come from Ezekiel J. Emanuel MD, who reckons make us “feel vulnerable, anxious, and powerless – at the mercy of forces beyond our reach. So, we embrace what we can control: our own wellness.”

Emanuel is a University of Pennsylvania professor, bioethicist, and oncologist, and was one of the architects of the Affordable Care Act. His best-selling book, Eat Your Ice Cream: Six Simple Rules for a Long and Healthy Life, is HIGHLY recommended. Much of what you read will be as surprising as the title.

Click here to read a sample chapter, FREE.

If you own or manage a radio station, reread his quote above. See the opportunity.

In a world where people feel unmoored, a local radio station that reliably shows up with clarity and calm — that helps people feel a little less powerless — becomes more than a medium. It becomes the one they won’t live without.

Holland Cooke (HollandCooke.com) is a consultant working the intersection of broadcasting and the Internet. Follow HC on Twitter @HollandCooke and connect on LinkedIn

Industry Views

Who Gets to Decide If and Why a Guest is Newsworthy?

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

img

By Matthew B. Harrison
TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Legal Group, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer

imgA political candidate sits down for a broadcast interview. The host asks questions. The conversation reaches into policy, personality, controversy, and campaign issues… just another day in the world of talk radio.

To the FCC, depending on the program and the circumstances, it may raise a different question: did the station give one legally qualified candidate a broadcast “use” of its facilities that now triggers equal opportunities for opponents? That question sits at the center of ABC’s dispute with the FCC over “The View,” and it deserves the attention of every broadcaster who books public officials, candidates, advocates, and political personalities.

This is not an article about whether anyone likes “The View.” That is the wrong question. The better question is whether the government should decide, after the fact, that a long-running interview program no longer qualifies as a bona fide news interview program because regulators dislike, distrust, or second-guess its guest selection.

The Equal Opportunities Rule, often called “equal time,” is not the Fairness Doctrine. The Fairness Doctrine is gone. However, equal opportunity requirements remain part of broadcast law. In general terms, when a broadcast station permits a legally qualified candidate to “use” its facilities, opposing legally qualified candidates for the same office may be entitled to comparable opportunity, unless an exemption applies.

One such exemption covers bona fide news interviews.

That exemption matters because it allows broadcasters to cover politics without turning every meaningful candidate interview into a scheduling trap. The law recognizes that a news judgment is different from a campaign favor. A host may interview a candidate because that candidate is newsworthy, controversial, powerful, interesting, or central to a public issue, not because the station has endorsed the campaign.

ABC’s argument is that “The View“ already cleared that hurdle more than two decades ago, when the FCC treated it as a bona fide news interview program. ABC now says the Commission has forced the issue back onto the table and is effectively asking whether the government should dictate which candidates the program may feature. That is why ABC’s filing points beyond daytime television and directly toward talk radio.

Talk radio should not dismiss that warning. The format routinely features candidates and officeholders without immediately inviting every opponent. Sometimes the reason is obvious: one guest is in the news and the others are not. Sometimes the reason is practical: a candidate accepts and the opponent declines. Sometimes the reason is editorial: the host believes one interview will better serve the audience.

Those are normal programming judgments. But if regulators start looking behind those judgments for partisan motive, the risk changes. The question becomes less “Was this guest newsworthy?” and more “Can you prove to the government that your reason was acceptable?” That is a dangerous shift for any medium built around editorial discretion.

This does not mean broadcasters should panic or stop booking candidates. It does mean stations, networks and programs should tighten their habits. Know when a guest is a legally qualified candidate. Understand when an appearance may count as a use. Keep clean records. Preserve the editorial reason for the booking. Make sure producers and hosts know the difference between a campaign appearance, a news interview, and paid political time.

The larger warning is simple: broadcast talk is regulated speech in a way podcasts, YouTube shows, and most streaming programs are not. That distinction already matters for indecency, sponsorship identification, public files, political files, and license obligations. Now it may matter again in the heart of the format itself: who gets invited to talk.

The government should not sit in the producer’s chair. But broadcasters should not pretend the chair is invisible. The best protection is not silence. It is disciplined editorial judgment, documented in real time, applied consistently, and defended as what it is: the broadcaster’s constitutional role in deciding what is newsworthy for its audience.

Matthew B. Harrison is a media and intellectual property attorney who advises radio hosts, content creators, and creative entrepreneurs. He has written extensively on fair use, AI law, and the future of digital rights. Reach him at Matthew@HarrisonLegalGroup.com or read more at TALKERS.com.

Industry Views

Harrison and Elci Discuss 250th Anniversary and Talk Industry Issues

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

img

TALKERS founder Michael Harrison was interviewed by guest host Lee Elci on multi-media talk star Wayne Allyn Root‘s nationally syndicated program “The WAR Zone” this past Tuesday (7/7).  Elci, the daily morning host on WJJF, New London, CT, is an occasional guest host on the popular “WAR Zone” show.  Harrison and Elci engaged in a candid examination of the state of politics and media in America at this drama-filled juncture in the nation’s history.  Not to be missed.  To see the uninterrupted excerpted dialogue, please click here.

Industry Views

Monday Memo: Radio’s 2027 Talent Strategy: Destination by Design

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

imgIf your station is outside the top 50 markets, you already know the pressure points. A mature workforce stretched thin. Fewer applicants for on air and production roles – specifically the younger creators who don’t see radio as their first creative outlet. And a competitive landscape where streaming, satellite, and podcasts divert attention with the gravitational pull of a black hole.

But radio can absolutely attract these next-gen creators. We just can’t do it with yesterday’s playbook. In “Future Work World,” Barry Winkless argues that organizations must intentionally design themselves to “excite, entice, and engage” the next generation of talent. He’s talking about the future of work broadly – but his framework fits independent local radio like a blueprint. Especially in medium and small markets, where stations are fighting a two-front war: defending local relevance while competing with global audio giants. Accordingly…

  1. Redesign roles for the “Work Salad” generation.

One of the book’s core ideas is the rise of “work salads” – workers who blend skills, platforms, and creative identities rather than fitting neatly into a single job description. That’s today’s creator economy in a nutshell. For radio, this means offering roles like host+podcaster+social storyteller; or news voice+explainer video creator+local events personality. Younger creators don’t want an airshift. They want a mix – a portfolio of creative outputs. Stations that offer that mix will win talent that would otherwise bypass radio entirely.

  1. Make your station a Designed Destination.

Winkless’ “Destination Designer” mindset recommends environments where people want to be, because the place itself inspires them. For radio, this means a workplace that feels flexible, fluid, and creatively alive. You don’t need a big market budget to create a big market feel. You need intentionality and a willingness to break from “how we’ve always done it.” Turn a legacy operation into a future ready talent magnet.

  1. Use AI the way creators already do.

In one of the book’s fictional “jumps,” Winkless introduces the “cowerka,” an AI assistant that handles tasks, anticipates needs, and frees humans to focus on what only humans can do. AI can help prep shows, suggesting ways to localize trends and topics. Nextgen creators already use AI as a collaborator. Stations that embrace this reality will feel familiar – and attractive – to them.

  1. Sell the one thing no competitor can match: Local Reach

Streaming platforms offer scale. Podcasts offer intimacy. Satellite offers variety. Only radio offers local presence at scale.

Creators want audiences – podcasters hunger for what radio has: cume. Broadcast radio can give them something TikTok can’t: instant legitimacy in a real community. As I have explained here previously, we position client stations as reach engines: Instead of asking creators to serve radio, radio serves creators.

  1. Tell a Better Story About Who You’re Becoming

Winkless’ “Next Level Storytelling” chapter cautions that your recruitment story can’t be: “We need someone to do afternoons.” Instead: “We’re building the next chapter of local media, and we want creators who want to shape it.”

Creators don’t join job descriptions. They join stories.

The Bottom Line

Local radio doesn’t need to out tech the tech giants. It needs to out human them. By redesigning roles, modernizing culture, embracing AI, and positioning radio as a creator platform – not just a broadcast outlet – stations can attract the next generation of talent that will keep them relevant, resilient, and indispensable.

Your RIGHT NOW opportunity: As fill-in voices cover for vacationing full-timers, you can preview 2027 talent options. To help them smooth-out any rough edges – and assess how well they take direction – here are 12 Tips for the guest-hosts who are not career broadcasters and don’t share our second-nature performance routines.

Holland Cooke (HollandCooke.com) is a consultant working the intersection of broadcasting and the Internet. Follow HC on Twitter @HollandCooke and connect on LinkedIn

Industry Views

Monday Memo: Those Lazy, Hazy, Crazy Days

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

imgNo two summers have been alike since the pandemic upended listeners’ lives and retailers’ businesses. So, we’ve seen this movie before. To sound relevant and relatable and helpful, connect the dots:

Gas prices and pricier airfares are scortching summer getaways many hoped for. Are there family day trips and local attractions that locals might take for granted, or not know about?

Do “Fun-formation.” Inflation is pinching everyone in every way… including YOU. Notice how you yourself are coping and share on-air. And interview locals who can suggest money-saving life hacks. Including… advertisers you have made household names. Airing their advice will result in even more “I heard you on the radio.”

Start with financial advisors. Heavy AM/FM users are in the worry-about-IRA / 401K demographic.

It’s a safe bet that listeners have the talk radio gloom-N-doom script memorized. Stuff like the above HELPS them.

Holland Cooke (HollandCooke.com) is a consultant working the intersection of broadcasting and the Internet. Follow HC on Twitter @HollandCooke and connect on LinkedIn

Industry Views

The Most Valuable Commodity AI Can’t Generate

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

580F82DF 2E97 496E 8C29 CAE848AF1045
By Matthew B. Harrison
TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Legal Group, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer
imgThroughout the TALKERS 2026 conference, there was a recurring theme that bears repeating:

Technology creates abundance. Authenticity creates value.

Throughout human history, creating media required expensive equipment, specialized knowledge, or access to someone willing to open the door. Each technological leap removed another layer of friction. Desktop publishing challenged traditional print. Digital audio transformed radio production. YouTube made anyone with a camera a broadcaster or “content creator.” Podcasting removed the need for a transmitter. Today, generative AI can help write scripts, edit video, compose music, translate languages, and produce polished content in minutes.

That isn’t the end of creativity. It’s the beginning of an era with more creativity than we’ve ever seen.

We should cautiously embrace it.

Every time technology lowers the barrier to creation, more people get the opportunity to tell stories, share ideas, build businesses, and reach audiences that were once inaccessible. That’s a remarkable thing.

Abundance, however, changes the economics.

When content was scarce, simply producing it created value. Today, content is everywhere. Tomorrow, there will be even more. Artificial intelligence isn’t replacing creators nearly as much as it’s multiplying them.

When everyone can create, audiences need a different way to decide what deserves their attention.

They look for authenticity.

Authenticity isn’t about perfection. It isn’t about expensive production. It isn’t even about whether AI helped along the way. It’s about whether audiences believe there is a real person behind the work, someone with genuine experience, judgment, and something worth saying.

That idea also explains why fair use has always mattered.

Fair use protects commentary, criticism, reporting, scholarship, and parody because those activities add something new to the conversation. Copyright law has long recognized that society benefits when creators contribute insight rather than simply repeat what already exists. The principle hasn’t changed. The tools have.

Media has entered another frontier. The rules are still developing. Business models continue to evolve. New voices appear every day. Some will succeed because they mastered the latest technology.

The most enduring voices will succeed because people trust them.

Broadcasters have always understood this, even if we didn’t always describe it that way. Listeners return because they believe the personality behind the microphone.

The same is true for podcasters, streamers, YouTubers, journalists, and creators of every kind.

Technology will continue creating abundance. That’s worth celebrating.

The opportunity now is to create something abundance cannot replace.

Authenticity.

Matthew B. Harrison is a media and intellectual property attorney who advises radio hosts, content creators, and creative entrepreneurs. He has written extensively on fair use, AI law, and the future of digital rights. Reach him at Matthew@HarrisonLegalGroup.com or read more at TALKERS.com.

 

Industry Views

Former CBS Radio Head Dan Mason Guests on TALKERS Podcast – Discusses New Memoir, Colorful Career, Biz Philosophy, and the State of Radio

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

img

Dan Mason, former president / CEO of CBS Radio, is this week’s special guest on the TALKERS video podcast, “Up Close Far Out.”

Podcast host Michael Harrison and Mason engage in a robust conversation about radio prompted by the release of Mason’s new book, FEARLESS: The Life and Times of a Media Maverick.  All profits generated by the sale of the memoir are being donated to the Broadcasters Foundation of America – the non-profit organization that helps those in need in the radio and television industries that Mason serves as chairman emeritus.

Mason is one of the most influential radio broadcasters of the modern era.  As head of CBS Radio from 2007 to 2015, he oversaw all aspects relating to the company’s portfolio of 117 stations across 26 markets, including all the top 10. In a prior stint at CBS Radio, he held the presidency from 1995 to 2002.  In addition to his roles at CBS, he advised and managed a number of other major broadcast organizations including serving as president of Westinghouse’s Group W Radio in the early 1990s

In 2016, Mason was inducted into the Radio Hall of Fame and, in 2022, into the Broadcasting and Cable Hall of Fame. He was a member of the board of directors of the National Association of Broadcasters, which presented him with the 2012 National Radio Award for outstanding leadership within the radio industry.  Michael Harrison states, “Dan Mason was one of the major leaders who guided radio from the analog to the digital era.”

To view this conversation in its entirety, please click here.

Industry Views

Monday Memo: Improving Results from Endorsement Spots

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

imgThe stations I work with make big money with live endorsement spots delivered by familiar local on-air personalities. Remember them? With most AM/FM broadcast hours now robotic or non-local, your relationship with the listener is precious and can be leveraged… carefully.

Quality vs. Quantity

The more products or services you endorse, the less special each pitch will be. You’re asking the listener’s trust each time, so asking too often can sound insincere. So back-to-back “I’m [name] for [account]” is verboten, and that can happen when spots you voice air outside your show.

“Tell me a story”

When the late, great Don Hewitt – the father of “60 Minutes” – spoke at a NAB convention years ago, he told us that he was often asked, “Why is this the most successful TV news show of all time?” And he said, “I can tell you in four words: ‘Tell me a story,’” which every piece does.

Describe your personal experience with the advertiser’s product or service in before-and-after fashion – problem was, problem solved – in a relatable way.

OOPS. Are you saying, “I haven’t sold you yet?”

Often, these are long-standing advertiser relationships.  Two cautions:

If you’ve been touting an advertiser for a while, DON’T say so. “For years, I’ve been telling you about [name of business].” Translation: “…and I haven’t sold you yet, have I?” Instead, keep the pitch fresh.

And keep it customer-centric; rather than talking about a store. In one spot I heard, for a sewing supply retailer, the well-intentioned host sounded awestruck as he recited the store’s inventory (“over fifteen hundred bolts of fabric!”). That’s the store’s problem. Instead, solve the listener’s problem: “Imagine the money you could save if you made all your kids’ back-to-school clothes this year?  [advertiser] will give you free sewing lessons!”

Avoid saying…

  • “MY GOOD FRIENDS AT [name of business],” which sounds phony.
  • “All-new:”Say “new,” if it IS new, AND if newness is a listener benefit (and say why).
  • “…AND MUCH MORE,” which means nothing. Weed-out stuff like this, and you’ll give copy more time to breathe.
  • “Needs,” as in: “FOR ALL YOUR [product category] NEEDS” (the ultimate “BLAH, BLAH, BLAH”).

More?

My video “Make Money with Endorsement Spots:” https://youtu.be/fReiC8WLTac

Holland Cooke (HollandCooke.com) is a consultant working the intersection of broadcasting and the Internet. Follow HC on Twitter @HollandCooke and connect on LinkedIn

Industry Views

Monday Memo: Time to Update Baseball Sponsors’ In-Game Spots?

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

img“Baseball is back!” was welcome in April (especially after a rough winter in many places). But it sounds embarrassingly old by now.

Does the advertiser have a new offer or other copy change? Even if not, you-being-in-touch sends a message… as does you not-being-in-touch.

Holland Cooke (HollandCooke.com) is a consultant working the intersection of broadcasting and the Internet. Follow HC on Twitter @HollandCooke and connect on LinkedIn