Changing the Words Isn’t Changing the Use
By Matthew B. Harrison
TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Media Law, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer
AI can make someone else’s story sound like you. What have you added?
Imagine this morning’s show prep: a host finds a terrific newspaper feature, drops it into an AI tool, and types, “Make this 90-seconds, conversational, in my voice.” Seconds later, there is a polished script. The sentences are different, the pacing works, and it even sounds like something the host would say. The software has changed the words. But has it changed the use?
That question deserves a moment before the microphone opens. “Rewrite this” is an instruction to software, not a legal clearance process. Copyright reaches beyond identical sentences: an abridgment or adaptation can still use protected material from the original. Replacing the vocabulary does not necessarily remove the underlying copyright issue.
First, though, let’s protect something equally important: the freedom to report the news. A newspaper does not own the facts it uncovers, and broadcasters can report those facts in their own words. Copyright protects the author’s expression, not the event, information, or idea itself. An AI-assisted factual summary is therefore not automatically an infringement, either.
When a use does borrow protected expression, fair use requires more than checking whether the wording changed. Courts consider the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the original, how much protected material the user took, and the effect on the original’s potential market. News reporting and commentary can qualify, but neither label guarantees the result. A shorter version that serves as a substitute for the original raises a different question from an excerpt used to examine or criticize it.
For a host, a useful editorial question follows: What am I adding besides my voice? Perhaps the story prompts an interview with the reporter, a challenge to the conclusions, or an explanation of what the issue means locally. Those choices give the audience a reason to hear your treatment. They do not automatically establish fair use, but they help distinguish developing a segment from repackaging a feature.
AI can help with that development. Ask it to suggest follow-up questions, identify assertions worth checking, or organize your own notes into a workable outline. Then read the source, verify the facts, and make the editorial decisions yourself. Credit the reporting that helped you, while remembering that attribution and permission serve different purposes. A source acknowledgment is good practice, but it does not authorize an otherwise infringing use.
The opportunity here goes beyond avoiding a claim. A host’s value includes judgment, curiosity, experience, and the relationship with listeners, all things worth bringing to the microphone. Use AI to make room for more of that work. A script can sound like you without giving the audience anything of yours.
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@HarrisonMediaLaw.com or read more at TALKERS.com.
A Tokyo ruling has revisited a question that Bette Midler raised decades ago.
Your competitor breaks a story. You can report the facts, but you cannot assume that running its article through AI makes the resulting script yours to use. A rewrite button is not a rights-clearance department.
chatbot providers to clearly disclose that users are interacting with artificial intelligence, give users access to their own chat logs, establish data security requirements, restrict the use of chatbot conversations for advertising and behavioral profiling, require affirmative consent before adult users’ conversations are used for AI training, and establish stronger protections for minors. Morano says, “Every transformative technology has had growing pains. Radio changed politics and mass communication. The telephone changed the meaning of distance. Cinema and television changed entertainment, advertising and culture. Society eventually developed rules, norms and expectations around all of them.
The Wall Street Journal recently described what it calls, “The Trillion Dollar Race to Automate Our Entire Lives.” Artificial Intelligence is rapidly evolving from something that answers questions into something that does things – researching, writing, analyzing, organizing and creating. WSJ describes a coming world of personal AI concierges capable of everything from executive presentations to filling out March Madness brackets. For podcasters, there’s opportunity here. And a warning.
Bill Gates has a useful term for something radio should be thinking about: “Human Reserved.” In an essay about a turbulent AI era, he sketches an unsettling future, and – for broadcasters – has a consequential warning… and an opportunity.
By Matthew B. Harrison
New laws may hold AI companies responsible, but regulating machine-generated speech presents risks of its own.
In 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.
Throughout the TALKERS 2026 conference, there was a recurring theme that bears repeating:
“We are competing in an attention economy,” and Magid COO Jaime Spencer reckons that “the playing field is massive.”
with the station across town anymore. It’s competing with 50,000 news brands, nearly half a million podcasts, and an infinite scroll of feeds that never sleep.
offers these tips: 1) Be exact: The more specific the language used, the more accurate the response; State a desired outcome like “grow awareness”, “increase sales”, or “expand my customer base”; 2) Use reputable sources within search queries to get accurate information; 3) Take careful note of sourcing and dates: Don’t take data at face value without checking it; 4) Understand that AI platforms are different: Results will vary depending on the platform; and 5) Expect responses will change: Lots of factors impact the AI answers so read them carefully. 
If you work in radio, you’ve heard every flavor of AI anxiety. Some fear it will wipe out jobs. Others treat it like a super shortcut – cranking-out spots, promos, and proposals faster and cheaper. Kate O’Neill’s 
AI is now embedded in the modern newsroom. Not as a headline, not as a novelty, but as infrastructure. It drafts outlines, summarizes complex reporting, surfaces background details, and accelerates prep for live conversations. For media creators operating under relentless deadlines, that efficiency is not theoretical. It is practical and daily.
Every radio conference agenda and much of what’s-up in the trade press and chat groups is about exploiting Artificial Intelligence. Often these conversations land in one of two places: fear (“Will this replace us?”) or fascination (“Look what it can do!”). Both miss the point.
The plague of pessimism about the future of radio is fueled internally by radio employees. Doomsayers are logically found in the sales department. All day, salespeople meet with buyers. A buyer’s job is to negotiate a lower price by arguing radio’s negatives. The wall of negativity thrives within the work environment of a seller. Tough. But there is little or no reason for pessimism.
For years, “protect your name and likeness” sounded like lawyer advice in search of a problem. Abstract. Defensive. Easy to ignore. That worked when misuse required effort, intent, and a human decision-maker willing to cross a line.
Evidence that your correspondent is a nerd: my airplane read for my CES back-N-forth was Successful AI Product Creation: A 9-Step Framework by Shub Agarwal (Wiley). If you haven’t got time for all 307 pages, here’s what I gleaned, pertinent to radio:
Circus Came to Town.” The Minneapolis-based former DJ, programmer and radio exec tells TALKERS, “In full disclosure, this song was created on suno.com using V5. The lyrics are all mine, and the orchestration is mine too by virtue of having given all of the instructions to create the track. Regardless of how all the controversy about artificial intelligence plays out, I am releasing this opinionated and highly emotional song purely as an expression of my free speech and artistic expression – not for commercial marketing purposes.”
Andy Economos, the founder of Radio Computing Systems (RCS), was a leader in bringing digital tech into the radio industry. In 1980, he was leaving his position as head of technology for NBC Inc. to start his own company. I was EVP of the NBC FM stations. Andy and I were walking to lunch, crossing Sixth Avenue at 49th street and he asked me, “Is there any software your radio stations could use?”
Superman just flew into court – not against Lex Luthor, but against Midjourney. Warner Bros. Discovery is suing the AI platform, accusing it of stealing the studio’s crown jewels: Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Scooby-Doo, Bugs Bunny, and more.