Category: Industry Views

Industry Views

Commercial Copy for Careworn Consumers

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Constulant

imgWhy I love going on sales calls with station reps: Meeting retailers, who have SUCH a feel for their customers’ (our listeners’) mindset. Following-up last week’s column exploring the societal angst we are living through, this week’s will recommend technique for scripting in what psychologists call the Age of Outrage Fatigue.

Emotional bandwidth is down. Skepticism is up. And the old tricks – hyperbole, urgency, shouty headlines – are backfiring. People aren’t just tuning-out content they disagree with; they’re tuning-out tone. They crave calm. Clarity. Credibility.

To cut-through:

— Clear beats clever. Instead of “Don’t sweat it – we’ve got your ducts in a row!” Try “Get your AC fixed today, and sleep comfortably tonight.”

im

— Ditch the drama. Instead of: “Drowning in debt?” Try: “Make a fresh start.”

— Frame your offer as an upgrade, not a fix for failure. Instead of: “Will you EVER be able to retire?” Try: “Plan your next chapter, on your terms.”

— Empathize, don’t exaggerate. People trust what feels human. Empty hype gets filtered out fast. “There’s never been a better time to buy a car!” goes in-one-ear-and-out-the-other.

— Earn attention quickly. The first sentence matters more than ever. Make it a question that includes “you” and/or “your” which describes the consumer situation that your advertiser can cure. “Is your money doing what you want it to?”

— Use specifics, not superlatives. “Best ever!” means nothing. Numbers and proof points build confidence.

— If you’re scripting with AI, rewrite to weed-out clichés. Restaurant spots that tout “a relaxing atmosphere” are verbal Styrofoam.

— Respect their time. Use short sentences. Bullet points. Clear next steps. Happy outcomes.

Today’s most effective copywriting calms the reader. It offers clarity in a crowded, chaotic world.

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

Industry Views

Fair Use in 2025: The Courts Draw New Lines

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

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

imgImagine an AI trained on millions of books – and a federal judge saying that’s fair use. That’s exactly what happened this summer in Bartz v. Anthropic, a case now shaping how creators, publishers, and tech giants fight over the limits of copyright.

Judges in California have sent a strong signal: training large language models (LLMs) on copyrighted works can qualify as fair use if the material is lawfully obtained. In Bartz, Judge William Alsup compared Anthropic’s use of purchased books to an author learning from past works. That kind of transformation, he said, doesn’t substitute for the original.

But Alsup drew a hard line against piracy. If a dataset includes books from unauthorized “shadow libraries,” the fair use defense disappears. Those claims are still heading to trial in December, underscoring that source matters just as much as purpose.

Two days later, Judge Vince Chhabria reached a similar conclusion in Kadrey v. Meta. He called Meta’s training “highly transformative,” but dismissed the lawsuit because the authors failed to show real market harm. Together, the rulings show that transformation is a strong shield, but it isn’t absolute. Market evidence and lawful acquisition remain decisive.

AI training fights aren’t limited to novelists. The New York Times v. OpenAI case is pressing forward after a judge refused to dismiss claims that OpenAI and Microsoft undermined the paper’s market by absorbing its reporting into AI products. And in Hollywood, Disney and Universal are suing Midjourney, alleging its system lets users generate characters like Spider-Man or Shrek – raising the unsettled question of whether AI outputs themselves can infringe.

The lesson is straightforward: fair use is evolving, but not limitless. Courts are leaning toward protecting transformative uses of content—particularly when it’s lawfully sourced – but remain wary of piracy and economic harm.

That means media professionals can’t assume that sharing content online makes it free for training. Courts consistently recognize that free journalism, interviews, and broadcasts still carry market value through advertising, sponsorship, and brand equity. If AI systems cut into those markets, the fair use defense weakens.

For now, creators should watch the December Anthropic trial and the Midjourney litigation closely. The courts have blessed AI’s right to learn – but they haven’t yet decided how far those lessons can travel once the outputs begin to look and feel like the originals.

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

Industry Views

SABO SEZ: What You Need to Know About the “Law of 200”

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Walter Sabo
a.k.a. Walter Sterling, Host
WPHT, Philadelphia, “Walter Sterling Every Damn Night”
and TMN syndicated, “Sterling on Sunday”

imgThe risk is real. Suggesting that a technique used with great success in the recent past might be beneficial to the present is a perilous course. Is the idea out of touch with today’s reality? Is the author ignoring current trends?

A factual current event from which our industry and our lives suffer: Sales are down. Sales for the radio industry are down every quarter.

Hard research-and-math-people will point to the usual causes. Add to that list the fact that the same dollars that bought spots priced at X for the big morning show are being fed into podcasts for 10 percent of X. But podcasts are digital! Therefore, they are sexy to Wall Street. The result of that dollar transfer is quarterly investor calls featuring CEOs declaring that “digital is a sweet spot.” Actually, “digital” is a cheap whore but back to the topic:

Methods deployed to sell radio today are not working. Salespeople work hard, but the strategies they are given are weak. That’s why sales are down – every quarter. Spreadsheets, ROI, CPP, programmatic are elegant math-major systems. But our product is not math. Our product is emotion. Match sales techniques to the product. Tap the power of emotion.

Everything is ultimately purchased from our emotions. Everything.  Case in point: Joe Girard* understands cars better than anyone in history. No, no, don’t be dismissive of Joe because he was a car salesman; cars are very expensive. Cars have impacted you and your family for years. Cars make you feel great or awful. Powerful purchase.

Happy Birthday! One month a year, Joe would mail out a birthday card to all of his past customers and all of his prospects. All of them. In the same month. One out of 12 recipients were thrilled that Joe remembered their birthday! The other 11 would call Joe and tell him that he had their birthday date wrong. They called Joe. A car salesman.

Joe gave all of them information on the phone about the latest models and deals for… a new car. They called Joe.

The Law of 200. Catholic funeral masses hand out prayer cards featuring a photo of the deceased. Ask a priest how many cards are printed. The answer is 200. Caterers will tell you that the standard number of wedding guests is… 200!

Seems we know 200 people who will come to our wedding and our funeral. Major life events. Buying a car is a major, emotional life event. Joe realized that if he sold a good car, 200 people would learn that the customer was satisfied.

OR 200 were not happy. He gave all car buyers a box, a box of his business cards. 200 cards. He urged customers to hand out Joe’s cards to their friends.

Do those 22-year-old time buyers still want concert tickets, merchandise, meals, autographs, meet and greets? Before the power point presentation starts, book the good seats.

Yes, our product is emotion driven. How many arguments have you had about music repetition? New music? Controversial topics? Borderline morning show jokes? Those are emotional not intellectual discussions. There’s our power – in the center of the rink. Put the commercial on the mat.

* How to Sell Anything to Anybody by Joe Girard https://a.co/d/fTpuzoZ

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 “Walter Sterling Every Damn Night” is heard on WPHT, Philadelphia. 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.

Industry Views

When “Sharing” Becomes Stealing: TALKERS’ 90-Second Lesson in Fair Use

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Matthew B. Harrison

TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Media Law, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer

imgNinety seconds. That’s all it took. One of the interviews on the TALKERS Media Channel – shot, edited, and published by us – appeared elsewhere online, chopped into jumpy cuts, overlaid with AI-generated video game clips, and slapped with a clickbait title. The credit? A link. The essence of the interview? Repurposed for someone else’s traffic.

TALKERS owns the copyright. Taking 90 seconds of continuous audio and re-editing it is infringement.

Could they argue fair use? Maybe, but the factors cut against them:

  • Purpose: Clickbait, not commentary or parody.
  • Nature: Original journalism leans protective.
  • Amount: Ninety seconds may be the “heart” of the work.
  • Market Effect: If reposts draw views, ad revenue, or SEO, that’s harm.

And here’s the key point: posting free content doesn’t erase its market value. Free journalism still generates reputation, sponsorships, and ad dollars. Courts consistently reject the idea that “free” means “up for grabs.”

Enforcement options exist. A DMCA notice can clear a repost quickly. Repeat offenders risk bans. On-screen branding makes copying obvious, and licenses can set terms like “share with credit, no remix.”

But here’s the hard truth: a takedown won’t stop the AI problem. Once a clip circulates, it’s scraped into datasets training text-to-video and voice models. Deleting the repost doesn’t erase cached or mirrored copies. Think of it like pouring a glass of water into the ocean – you can’t get it back. And to make matters worse, enforcement doesn’t stop at U.S. borders. Different countries have different copyright rules, making “justice” slow, uneven, and rarely satisfying.

That TALKERS interview may now live inside billions of fragments teaching machines how people speak. You can win the takedown battle and still lose the training war. Courts are only starting to address whether scraping is infringement. For now, once it’s ingested, it’s permanent.

Creators face a constant tension: content must spread to grow, but unchecked sharing erodes control. The challenge in 2025 is drawing that line before your work becomes someone else’s “content.”

The law is still on your side – but vigilance matters. Use takedowns when necessary. Brand so the source is clear. Define sharing terms up front. And remember: free doesn’t mean worthless.

The real question isn’t just “Is it fair use?” It’s “Who controls the story?”

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

Industry Views

Monday Memo: Unmet Needs?

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

imgLast week’s column previewed “CeaseFire,” C-SPAN’s antidote to the caricature cable news shouting match. Thanks to all who offered feedback when we wondered “WHAT IF…?” for talk radio.

Recent report from Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism: People are disabling news alerts, “either because they feel they get too many or because they are not useful.”

People are anxious. Even a robot can read-the-room, as I learned by asking ChatGPT: “In USA society generally, list unmet needs.” Among them:

Belonging Without Division

— People crave community but are tired of being forced to choose sides.
— Unmet need: A way to feel connected and purposeful without being tribalized by politics, race, class, or ideology.

Trusted, Nuanced Information

— There’s information overload, but trust is at an all-time low.
— Unmet need: Sources that feel both credible and fair-minded, without sensationalism, bias, or agenda-chasing.

Civility in Public Discourse

— Public conversation often feels like a battleground.
— Unmet need: Spaces — digital or real-world — where disagreement is safe, not destructive or humiliating.

im

Mental & Emotional Support

— Rising anxiety, loneliness, and burnout affect people across all ages.
— Unmet need: Accessible, non-stigmatized mental health support, including community-based emotional infrastructure (not just therapy apps).

Work That Feels Worthwhile

— Many jobs pay the bills but feel meaningless.
— Unmet need: Opportunities to do work that’s valued, not just productive — where dignity and contribution matter as much as output.

Financial Security That Isn’t Fragile

— Even middle-class households feel one emergency away from disaster.
— Unmet need: Stability and predictability — not just income, but housing, healthcare, and retirement that won’t evaporate with one bad break.

Intergenerational Connection

— Older and younger generations increasingly live in separate realities.
— Unmet need: Meaningful contact across age lines, where wisdom flows both directions — not just tech tutoring and nursing homes.

Shared Purpose

— Many feel like they’re drifting — or living someone else’s script.
— Unmet need: A sense of contribution to something bigger than self, not through ideology but through everyday roles, responsibilities, and relationships.

Consider as you pose call-in topics and choose interview guests.

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

Industry Views

Could Your Own Podcast Become Your AI Competitor?

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

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

mattybharrisonImagine a listener “talking” to an AI version of you – trained entirely on your old episodes. The bot knows your cadence, your phrases, even your voice. It sounds like you, but it isn’t you.

This isn’t science fiction. With enough content, it’s technically feasible today. A determined developer could transcribe archives, fine-tune a language model, and overlay a cloned voice. The result wouldn’t be perfect, but it would be recognizable.

Whether that’s legal is another question – one circling directly around fair use.

Why It Matters

For most content creators, archives are their most valuable asset. Yet many contracts with networks, distributors, or hosting platforms quietly grant broad rights to use recordings in “new technologies.” That language, once ignored, could be the legal hook to justify training without your permission.

Fair use is the fallback defense. Tech companies argue training is transformative – they aren’t re-broadcasting your show, only using it to teach a machine. But fair use also weighs market harm. If “AI You” pulls listeners or sponsors away from the real thing, that argument weakens considerably.

Not Just Theory

Other industries are already here. AI has generated convincing tracks of Frank Sinatra singing pop hits and “new” stories written in the style of Jane Austen. If that can be done with a few books or albums, thousands of podcast episodes provide more than enough material to train a “host model.”

Talk media is especially vulnerable because its product is already conversational. The line between “fan remix” and “AI imitation” isn’t as wide as it seems.

What You Can Do

This isn’t about panic – it’s about preparation.

— Review your contracts: confirm you own your recordings and transcripts.
— Register your work: enforceable rights are stronger rights.
— Decide your stance: licensing your archives for training might be an opportunity – if you control it.
— Emphasize authenticity: audiences still value the human behind the mic.

The Takeaway

Could your podcast be turned into your competitor? Yes, in theory. Will it happen to you? That depends on your contracts, your protections, and the choices you make.

Fair use may ultimately decide these battles, but “fair” is not the same as safe. Consider this example a reminder: in the AI era, your archive is not just history – it is raw material.

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.

Industry Views

The Annual (Radio Station) Physical

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Jonathan Little
TroyResearch
President

imgAn annual physical is a wise idea. Doc asks, “How are you doing?”. Then he or she asks some detailed questions based on your medical history. Then “how have you been feeling? Any issues?” Doc always orders blood draws to see what might be lurking. Is the statin drug keeping your cholesterol in check? Are you getting plenty of exercise, plenty of sleep? How’s your diet? Over the years, I’ve visited about my health with at least a dozen different doctors. I’m convinced that the good ones always ask good questions and then listen carefully. Good questioner – good listener. That’s the doc I can respect and put my trust in. 

If you operate a radio station, your station could benefit from an annual physical. You already know how it’s doing based on ratings, revenue, and profit. Your listeners know how you’re doing for them personally because they’re the users of your radio product. Is it pleasing, challenging, inspiring or annoying, irritating, and easily ignored with a click? If you ask them, they’ll tell you. You should ask them at least once a year. 

TroyResearch has been in the business of asking listeners what they think for 27 years. We recently teamed up with Midwest Communications, Inc., in Green Bay to conduct an exploratory research project with their news/talk station WTAQ. TroyResearch’s association with MCI goes back nearly 27 years, doing music and perceptual research for the Duke Wright music stations. The WTAQ project was something new. Our goal was to discover what actionable data the opinions of loyal listeners might produce. TroyResearch worked with VP Programming Jeff McCarthy and Operations Manager Jason Hillery to develop a 25-question study. 

Survey respondents were recruited over the air and were encouraged to go to the WTAQ website to take a brief survey. Clearly, we wanted to hear from P1’s, those listeners who produce 60%+ of reported listening. Their answers provided a clear picture of WTAQ loyalists – what they like, what they don’t like, their political affiliation, their listening behaviors (radio, podcasts, TV news, cable news, etc.), favorite news outlets, trustworthiness of news outlets, their thoughts about protests becoming riots, and their favorite podcasts to mention a few. 

More than 200 respondents, Persons 18+, completed the WTAQ perceptual study. (32% 18-54, 68% 55+). With Jeff’s and Jason’s permission, we share some results. 

Political Affiliation

1% Democrat
78% Republican
15% Independent
6% Other, like Libertarian, Socialist

In car listening

80% Local radio
10% Satellite radio
6% Streaming services like Spotify
3% Podcasts
1% Other like personal playlists 

Listening to WTAQ, which simulcasts

76% FM
9% AM
8% Streaming from WTAQ app
6% Streaming from a smart device
1% Streaming from WTAQ.com

Where do you get your news? (Select all that apply)

93% Radio
46% Broadcast TV (local channels)
41% Cable news like Fox, CNN, MSNBC
29% Social Media like X, Facebook, Tiktok
16% Internet news like NY Post, Washington Post
10% Newspaper
12% Other 

Your primary news source

58% Radio
15% Cable news like Fox, CNN, MSNBC
8% Broadcast TV (local channels)
7% Internet news like NY Post, Washington Post
7% Social Media like X, Facebook, Tiktok
3% Other
1% Newspaper

When does a protest/demonstration become a riot? (Select all that apply)

85%+ When protesters strike police, throw projectiles, set fires, do property damage
75% When protesters spit on police officers
60% When protesters burn the American flag
37% When protesters curse at police officers

Do you listen to podcasts?

23% Frequently
29% Occasionally
35% Rarely
13% Never

What podcast platform do you use? (Select all that apply)

32% YouTube
25% Spotify
19% iHeart
19% Apple
10% Amazon
2% Rumble
1% The Blaze
1% Daily Wire 

As a broadcaster that reports news and information, WTAQ is interested in knowing how trustworthy you consider the reporting presented by these companies. (1 = very untrustworthy, 5 = very trustworthy)

4.43 WTAQ Radio, Green Bay
3.78 Fox News
3.59 Fox 11, Green Bay
2.92 WBAY, Channel 2, Green Bay
2.83 WFRV, Channel 5, Green Bay
2.77 WHBY Radio, Appleton
2.71 NBC 26, Green Bay
2.22 Green Bay Press Gazette
2.01 Wisconsin State Journal
1.99 Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
1.46 MSNBC
1.37 CNN 

WTAQ asked the 0-10 Customer Endorsement Score question – “On a scale of 0-10 how likely would you be to recommend WTAQ to a friend or colleague?” Those scores reflect the listeners’ opinions of how the station is doing and it’s a forecast of WTAQ’s future. As a rule, a CES of 50 or higher indicates a healthy and sustainable product. WTAQ scored a strong 73 Customer Endorsement Score. 

VP Jeff McCarthy and OM Jason Hillery are pleased with the results of this exploratory study. The WTAQ Sales Team is delighted with the data. 

Good questioner … Good listener! WTAQ asked good questions. And now their leadership team is “listening” to the answers and determining what adjustments, if any, may result in improved ratings, revenue, and profit, on the way to an 80 Customer Endorsement Score with the next WTAQ study. 

Jonathan Little is president of TroyResearch. He can be phoned at 608-219-1077 or emailed via: jlittle@troyresearch.net

Industry Views

Monday Memo: CeaseFire

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

imgAs TV touts its perennial New Fall Season, our DVR is already set to “record series” so we can pick-up where the “Matlock” sequel left-us-hanging; and for a third season of quirky “Elsbeth” (a closet reboot, the female “Columbo”). And where I live – where everyone seems to know everyone – we are salivating for “The Real Housewives of Rhode Island.”

Enduring as its hourglass, “The Days of Our Lives” – which NBC punted to Peacock – is renewed for season #61. As Max reverts to the HBO brand, “The White Lotus” will be back for its 4th. “American Idol” will vet a 24th crop of crooners; “America’s Funniest Home Videos” will share a 36th batch of bloopers; and America’s argument will remain unresolved on every channel… except one.

im

Nonprofit C-SPAN – the Switzerland of cable news – presents “CeaseFire,” a weekly show where “Democrats and Republicans come together to solve problems and discuss the great challenges facing our nation… during a time when division and dysfunction dominate the national conversation.”

And who better to U-turn the “Crossfire” template that pits partisan pundits against each other than the suit who oversaw it, longtime CNN EVP and Washington bureau chief Sam Feist, now C-SPAN CEO. “In a media landscape that too often rewards outrage over understanding,” he reckons “‘CeaseFire’ stands out by showing what respectful, principled conversation looks like.”

“Like sands through the hourglass,” radio’s talk format was an early 1990s Revolution. Now – like the AM band it buttressed as long as possible – WHAT IF…

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

Industry Views

SABO SEZ: The Future Will Include a Need for Talk Show Hosts

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Walter Sabo
a.k.a. Walter Sterling, Host
WPHT, Philadelphia, “Walter Sterling Every Damn Night”
And TMN syndicated, “Sterling on Sunday”

imgThe problem with technocrats is they believe computer programs and machines solve all problems. A technocrat in charge of a business will it kill it, for sure.  For example, once a movie theatre is automated, not requiring a pesky projectionist or even a snack counter attendant, you and I would still not buy a ticket – unless the theater was showing an actual MOVIE!

A radio company can “invest” in automation systems like Wide-orbit, saving an outrageous 15 bucks an hour for a “board op” or NexGen or NewsBoss. None of those systems win a single Nielsen meter.

The future of the radio medium is determined by its ability to attract an audience. Audience is obviously not built by technology but by compelling hosts. This phenomenon is eternal. For over 100 years, listeners have been attracted by personalities, ideas, information, songs, jokes, passion.

PREDICTION: Tech, AI will not replace any truly talented talk radio host by a mile.

One More Thought: Write a Letter

What can a host do to secure their essential participation beyond prepping a show? Write a letter! My Dad was a retailer who bought a lot of radio time. In his office he had a credenza of awards, family photos, and… framed letters from radio personalities. Spending hours in the car with a radio voice turns that voice into a star. Receiving a letter from a star is a life event. My Dad framed the letters he got from his favorite radio stars who hosted the shows he sponsored.

All the damn spots we air are actually invitations to send fan mail to the advertisers. Cheesy, yes, but the autograph industry is robust. The more ways a host engages with advertisers and listeners (touchpoints), the more secure their job becomes.

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 “Walter Sterling Every Damn Night” is heard on WPHT, Philadelphia. 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.

Industry Views

Who Said That? A Practical Guide to Voice Imitation Risk

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

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

imgArtificial intelligence now makes it possible to replicate a human voice with striking accuracy. For broadcasters, podcasters, and content creators, the central question is: When does using or imitating a voice become a legal problem? The answer depends on the person being imitated, the purpose of the use, and the rights attached to that voice. Below is a six-bucket framework to help evaluate the risk.

Bucket 1 – Human Imitation of a Living Person
Example: In Midler v. Ford Motor Co. (1988), Ford hired a singer to imitate Bette Midler’s voice for a commercial after she declined. Legal focus: Right of publicity, false endorsement, misappropriation of identity. Risk: High – especially for commercial use without parody or commentary.

Bucket 2 – AI Cloning of a Living Person
Example: AI trained on hours of a broadcaster’s work generates new scripts in that broadcaster’s voice. Legal focus: Same as Bucket 1, plus emerging AI laws in several states. Risk: Very high – AI makes imitation faster, more precise, and harder to defend as coincidental.

Bucket 3 – AI Cloning of a Deceased Person Within Post-Mortem Publicity Window
Example: An AI-generated George Carlin special, written by humans but performed in a Carlin voice model. Legal focus: Post-mortem right of publicity, lasting 20–100 years depending on the state. Risk: High without estate authorization, even if marketed as a tribute.

Bucket 4 – Historical/Public Domain Figures
Example: Voicing George Washington in an original script. Legal focus: Minimal – rights generally end at death and do not extend for centuries. Risk: Low unless portrayal implies a false endorsement of a current product or service.

Bucket 5 – Corporate Library Owner Using AI to Create New Content
Example: A company acquires a complete host archive, such as Howard Stern’s, and uses AI to create new programming in that voice. Legal focus: Copyright in recordings is separate from publicity rights in the voice. Owning the archive does not automatically permit new performances in that voice. Risk: High without explicit contractual rights to name, likeness, and voice for future works.

Bucket 6 – Inspired-By Voice Not Clearly Identifiable as a Specific Person
Example: An AI voice styled as “a gravelly, old-school talk radio host” without matching a real person. Legal focus: Minimal unless resemblance convinces listeners it is a specific individual. Risk: Low to moderate, depending on closeness to a real identity.

Decision Path
Before using a recognizable voice, ask: 1. Is the person living or deceased? 2. If deceased, are they within their state’s post-mortem publicity period? 3. Is the voice a deliberate imitation? 4. Do you have written permission? 5. Is the purpose parody, commentary, or other transformative use?

Takeaways
Talent: Protect your voice rights in contracts, including AI uses. Buyers: Archive ownership does not guarantee the right to generate new voice content. Creators: Parody and commentary may help, but they are not blanket defenses. As voice cloning becomes more accessible, securing clear rights before production remains the safest path. The cost of permission is almost always less than the cost of defending a lawsuit.

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

Industry Views

Monday Memo: Topics That Tune-Them-In

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

imgBaby Boomers (born 1946–1964) are some 20% of the U.S. population, but control more than 50% of all household wealth. They hold $70+ trillion in assets and spend an estimated $548 billion annually. They are lifelong AM/FM listeners, and they’re redefining what life after 60 looks like. Are you into what they’re up to?

Some are having the time of their lives. Others are confronting new realities. All are seeking relevance, respect, and real-world information. Consider these issues for call-in topics and guest interviews and podcasts. Possibly a sponsored series?

Lifestyle & Purpose

— “How to Make Your Bucket List Actually Happen”
— “Finding Purpose Beyond the 9 to 5”
— “Encore Careers That Start with a Volunteer Gig”

Health & Wellness

— “Sleep After 60: What Changes and What Helps”
— “The Foods That Fight Brain Fog”
— “Fitness Without the Injuries: Smarter Workouts After 50”

Financial Confidence

— “How Much is Enough? Retirement Planning Backwards”
— “Social Security Myths That Could Cost You”
— “Turning Your Home into Income” (downsizing, ADUs, Airbnb)
— “Helping Without Hurting: When Adult Kids Need Financial Help”

im

Freedom & Adventure

— “How to Travel More for Less”
— “National Parks Over 60: Hidden Gems and Senior Pass Tips”
— “Cool Day Trips”

Home & Relationships

— “Downsize Without Drama”
— “Living With – or Near – Your Kids: Pros, Cons & Boundaries”
— “Home Safety Upgrades You’ll Be Glad You Made”
— “The Second Time-Around Marriage: Legal & Emotional Realities”
— “Grandparenting Without Overstepping”

Learning & Creativity

— “The Science of Lifelong Learning: Why Your Brain Craves It”
— “It’s Never Too Late to Learn an Instrument (or a Language)”
— “Turning Your Life Story Into a Book – Or a Podcast”
— “Digital Detox: How to Stay Connected Without Feeling Glued”

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

Industry Views

When the Library Talks Back

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

2f8c1286 c8c3 4b72 ba11 091cec050fcd
By Matthew B. Harrison
TALKERS, VP/Associate Publisher
Harrison Media Law, Senior Partner
Goodphone Communications, Executive Producer

imgImagine SiriusXM acquires the complete Howard Stern archive – every show, interview, and on-air moment. Months later, it debuts “Howard Stern: The AI Sessions,” a series of new segments created with artificial intelligence trained on that archive. The programming is labeled AI-generated, yet the voice, timing, and style sound like Stern himself.

Owning the recordings might suggest the right to create new works from them. In reality, the answer is more complicated – and the music industry offers a useful comparison.

Music Industry Precedent

Sony, Universal, and others have spent hundreds of millions buying music catalogs from artists such as Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen, Paul Simon, and Queen. These deals often include both composition rights and master recordings, giving the buyer broad control over licensing and derivative works.

In music, the song and the recording are the assets. In talk content, the defining element is the host’s persona – voice, cadence, and delivery – which changes the legal analysis when creating new material.

Copyright and Persona Rights

Buying a talk archive usually transfers copyright in the recordings and any scripts. That permits rebroadcast, excerpts, and repackaging of original programs.

It does not automatically transfer the host’s right of publicity – control over commercial use of their name, likeness, and in many states, their distinctive voice. In Midler v. Ford Motor Co. (1988), the court ruled that imitating Bette Midler’s voice in a commercial without consent was an unauthorized use of her identity.

This means a company can own the shows without having the right to make new performances in the host’s voice unless the contract clearly grants that right.

The AI Factor

AI technology can replicate a host’s voice, tone, and style with high accuracy, producing entirely new programming.

Outside broadcasting, a recent AI-generated George Carlin special – written by humans but performed by a voice model trained on decades of his work – sparked debate about rights and legacy.

In talk radio, similar AI use could create “new” episodes featuring well-known hosts. Even with clear labeling, right-of-publicity claims may arise if the host or their estate never authorized it. Disclaimers may address consumer confusion but do not remove identity-rights issues.

Why It Matters

This applies to more than national figures. Any broadcaster or podcaster with a substantial archive could face it. Selling or licensing a library could give the buyer the tools to replicate your voice without your participation.

For buyers, the ability to produce new content from archived material has commercial appeal. But without the right to use the host’s voice for new works, it carries significant legal and reputational risk.

Contracts Decide

The key is in the contract:

— Did the talent assign rights to their name, likeness, and voice for future works?
— Is use limited to original recordings or extended to derivative works?
— Does it address future technologies, including AI?

Older agreements often omit these points, leaving courts to decide. Future contracts will likely address AI directly.

Takeaways

For talent: Know what you are transferring. Copyright ownership does not necessarily include your future voice.

For buyers: Owning an archive does not automatically give you the right to create AI-generated new material in the original host’s voice.

For everyone: As AI advances, control over archives will depend on the contracts that govern them.

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.

Industry Views

They Say YOU Infringed – But Do THEY Own the Rights?

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

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

imgYou did everything right – or so you thought. You used a short clip, added commentary, or reshared something everyone else was already posting. Then one day, a notice shows up in your inbox. A takedown. A demand. A legal-sounding, nasty-toned email claiming copyright infringement, and asking for payment.

You’re confused. You’re cautious. And maybe you’re already reaching for the fair use defense.

But hold on. Before you argue about what you used, ask something simpler: Does the party accusing you actually own the rights?

Two Main Reasons People Send Copyright Notices

1. They believe they’re right – and they want to fix it.  Sometimes the claim is legitimate. A rights-holder sees their content used without permission and takes action. They may send a DMCA takedown, request removal, or ask for a license fee. Whether it’s a clip, an image, or a music bed – the law is on their side if your use wasn’t authorized.
2. They’re casting a wide net – or making a mistake. Other times, you’ve landed in a mass enforcement dragnet. Some companies send thousands of notices hoping a few people will pay – whether or not the claim is strong, or even valid. These are often automated, sometimes sloppy, and occasionally bluffing. The sender may not own the rights. They may not even know if what you used was fair use, public domain, or licensed.

Mistakes happen. Bots misidentify content. Images get flagged that were never protected. Even legitimate copyright holders sometimes act too fast. But once a notice goes out, it can become your problem – unless you respond wisely.

The First Thing to Check Is Ownership

Most creators instinctively argue fair use or say they meant no harm. But those aren’t the first questions a lawyer asks.

The first question is: “Do they have standing to bring the claim?”

In many cases, the answer is unclear or flat-out “no.” Courts have dismissed copyright lawsuits where the claimant couldn’t show ownership or any active licensing interest. If they can’t demonstrate control over the work – and actual market harm – they may not have the right to sue.

What To Do If You Get a Notice

— Don’t panic. Not all claims are valid – and not all claimants are in a position to enforce them.
— Don’t assume fair use will protect you. It might, but only after ownership is clear.
— Don’t engage emotionally. Responding flippantly can escalate things fast.
— Do get help early. A media attorney can help you assess whether the claim is real – and whether the sender has any legal ground at all.

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.

Industry Views

TV Trend is Radio Wake-Up Call

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

imgSouth Florida viewers are confused. WPLG, which brands as “Local 10,” was an ABC-TV affiliate for 69 years… until yesterday. Now it’s more local than ever, after divorcing its network, whose programming moved to the FOX affiliate’s digital channels 18.1 and 7.2, now branded “ABC Miami.” Among courteous FAQs about this change on WPLG’s web site: “How do I rescan my TV?” to find ABC programming.

FAQ #1: Why is this happening? 

WPLG GM Bert Medina explains, “We made a generous offer to ABC, but it became clear the two sides were not going to agree to a new deal.”

Citing the FCC’s “interest in and the authority to promote the public interest and to ensure that local broadcast TV stations retain the economic and operational independence necessary to meet their public interest obligations,” Chairman Brendan Carr is investigating what he calls networks’ “attempt to extract onerous financial and operational concessions from local broadcast TV stations.” His recent letter to Comcast CEO Brian Roberts announced an inquiry into NBC practices that will also scrutinize other networks’ affiliation agreements. He reckons that networks threatening long-held affiliations “could result in blackouts and other harms to local consumers of broadcast news and content.”

“That’s why we have an FCC license.”

WPLG’s GM explains that “our job is to serve this community with news and local programming.” He – and his Berkshire Hathaway ownership – determined that “if we agreed to the ABC terms, that mission would have suffered.” The last straw? “Exclusivity, which is the core to our relationship, is disappearing. Even when ABC airs high-quality programming, like the Oscars, ABC airs that same programming on other platforms. We no longer feel we are getting what we pay for.”

Proud that “a majority of our staff grew up here,” Medina announced that WPLG is staffing up. “Instead of sending our money to New York, we will keep it in our community and use that money to finance a massive expansion in local news and other local programming. We are excited for the future of Local 10. Just watch us. We are about to serve this community in an even bigger and better way.”

Music has been commoditized 

It’s all over the other platforms and devices increasingly siphoning-off radio listening time and ad revenue. And unlike six-spot (or longer) stopsets now common on FM, streams’ spots are shorter and fewer. And there are NO commercials for paid subscribers who’ve had-it-up-to-here with broadcast music radio.

TV networks aren’t shy about hijacking affiliates’ viewers. ABC offers Disney+, CBS lures us to Paramount+, NBC touts Peacock. And network radio spots are plugging iHeart podcasts.

So, yuh. Make your station as smartphone friendly as possible. But when I jump in the car, and my phone pops-up on the dashboard radio once owned, what comes out the speaker still has to compete. And what is the ONE thing that streams that your robotic FM competitors don’t offer? “Local.”

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

Industry Views

Monday Memo: How You Tune Them Out?

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

imgUnintentionally, your poorly phrased comment, dated reference, weary cliché, or offhand remark can at least subtly distance you from your listener and could undercut your credibility, offend, or even spark backlash.

Whether you’re a broadcaster, podcaster, newscaster, or you are crafting commercial or promo copy, take a fresh look at these often-overlooked pitfalls.

Dated references: Nothing can disrupt your listener’s day quicker than quickly changing weather. Being thought of as a weather source can advantage any station in any format. But you risk that currency by calling tomorrow “…a carbon copy of today.” Few under 50 have ever used carbon paper. And with weather more erratic lately, implying otherwise can make your forecast sound – forgive me – “like a broken record.” Also antique: “Rolodex,” now that listeners’ smartphones have “Contacts.” So, purge old-speak from “the radio dial.” Listeners (and advertisers) notice when we keep-up… or don’t.

Stereotyping: 

— “Soccer mom in a SUV” sure is the retail super-consumer advertisers want to see pull-into the parking lot. Visualize her in programming and promotion planning and sales prospecting… OFF-air stuff. But reinforcing gender roles and class assumptions ON-air paints a narrow picture of parenting and lifestyle, potentially alienating women.
— “You know how Millennials are.” Yes – like “Generation X” – they dislike being typecast, and you sound out-of-touch and judgmental.
— Calling someone “a Karen” can alienate listeners who have felt ridiculed suffering a situation similar to whatever you’re describing. And there are millions in the potential ratings sample named… Karen.
— “Probably some college kid with no clue how to drive in the snow” implies incompetence based on age and background. This kind of dig can undermine younger listeners or newcomers to your market.

Stereotypes are lazy, often a shortcut to humor or imagery. Ask yourself: “Is this something I’d say to someone’s face?”

im

Insensitive Humor: “Looks like someone forgot their meds today!” can offend those quietly dealing with anxiety, or depression. Pandemic silver lining: Mental health is no longer a laughing matter. You may have seen TV PSAs by Howie Mandel, sharing how ADHD has impacted his life and asking that it not be a punchline.

“Potty-mouth:” Mom and Dad’s just-the-two-of-them vocabulary is different than the way they speak with kids in the car, and what they want to hear their children repeat after hearing on radio.

— “Pissed-off” has become unnecessarily familiar, particularly with recent inflation…with which we are “annoyed,” “fed-up,” and “frustrated.”
— Even if something sounds commonplace, origins or implications may make it unsuitable for all-audience radio. “Scumbag” began as a term for condom. “Sucks” and “screwed” also have sexual roots some consider vulgar.

Taboo red flags:

— “No offense, but…” or “I’m just saying…” often precede something offensive.
— “It’s just a joke!” often follows a crack at the expense of marginalized groups.
— “Everyone thinks that…” overgeneralizes and can alienate those who disagree.
— Mocking accents or speech patterns can come across as disrespectful rather than entertaining.
— “Real [men/women] do…” Gendered assumptions can feel exclusionary or outdated.
— “This [group] is always…” Sweeping characterizations often reinforce stereotypes.

Words have weight. In a medium where tone, timing, and trust matter, what we say – and how we say it – can either strengthen listener connection or erode it.

NEXT WEEK: Topics to Tune-IN the listeners you want most.

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

Industry Views

Just Because You Found It Online Doesn’t Mean You Can Use It

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

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

imgA New Jersey radio station thought they were just being clever online. They scanned a photo from New Jersey Monthly, cropped out the photographer’s credit line, and posted it on Facebook – inviting listeners to edit and reshare it for fun. ying to engage listeners to interact with the station with more than just their ears.”

But that station, WKXW 101.5, ended up in federal court.

Photographer Peter Murphy sued for copyright infringement and removal of attribution. The Third Circuit ruled against the station – finding that the image was used without permission, credit removed, and the photographer’s ability to license his work damaged.

It wasn’t fair use. It was infringement.

Fair Use Won’t Save You from Getting Sued

Fair use isn’t a free pass – it’s a defense. That means someone’s already accused you of infringement, and now it’s on you to justify it.

Even when it works, fair use still costs time and money. In the WKXW case, the station used the entire photo, failed to transform it, and encouraged widespread online sharing. The court saw that as market harm – one of the most important fair use factors.

And don’t assume you’re safe just because it wasn’t part of the broadcast. Courts have made clear that even social media posts by broadcasters can undermine the value of the original and trigger liability.

Don’t Ignore It Just Because It Feels Small

In my own experience with clients fending off these kinds of claims, sometimes it’s obvious. Other times it’s a bluff. But even bogus claims can cost you if you don’t take them seriously from the beginning.

License It, Link to It, or Leave It

If you didn’t create it or license it, don’t assume it’s fair game. Look for content with clear reuse rights. Better yet – link to the source instead of copying it.

Because if a copyright holder comes after you, your intentions won’t matter. Only your rights will.

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.

Industry Views

SABO SEZ: Top 40 is Always the Answer

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Walter Sabo
a.k.a. Walter Sterling, Host
WPHT, Philadelphia, “Walter Sterling Every Damn Night”
And TMN syndicated, “Sterling on Sunday”

imgReviewing radio’s challenges:

— Trouble attracting and growing younger demos
— Trouble appealing to youth-oriented advertisers
— Trouble generating excitement in our culture
— Trouble owning a seat in the news media
— Trouble attracting out of college/high school employees
in sales, management on air.

The answer is: Top 40 or, if you must, CHR. The answer has always been Top 40.

The brilliant Allen Shaw, president ABC FM Radio, CEO Beasley Broadcasting, CEO/owner Centennial, said, “And Top 40 will always have an important place in radio because it plays the most popular music therefore it will always have an audience.”

In reviewing Spring Nielsens, it is hard to find a Top 40 station that is #1 6+ in any city. Consider how odd that is. Since 1955 there have been hundreds of Top 40 stations that attracted dominant shares of audience.

No, not audience: fans. Passionate fans because music is passion. New music is more passion. Cultural pebbles between the songs dropped by passionate radio stars compel even more passion.

Big contests. Big promotions. Breaking music trends. Huge voices. Pounding jingles. Prizes: Trips to see Taylor Swift in the studio – in England. A week off from school, on us! Free pizza for 50 of your friends – for a year. A new red, customized Z-93 car in your driveway on your birthday. Ed Sheeran plays your prom! A limo to school on opening day. Big Time Rush sings at your street fair.

Alex Warren writes a song for you – and performs it for you. Gift certificates for CAMEO. The Apple package… an iPhone, iPad and MacBook Air.

Media Buyer: Hop on the station yacht this summer, let’s go for a sunset party cruise. One buyer wins this custom Mustang. Wherever you go on vacation, tab’s on us.

Excited? Radio is good at contesting, better than any other medium. Excitement in thin air is what radio does… well, used to do.

Of course radio is a low choice among fresh grads, 18-24s, and media buyers. Radio stopped making the best radio, stunning, pulsing, sexy, unpredictable. We stopped rolling out the red carpet: Hot, current, daring, dangerous… Top 40.

You were drawn to radio because of Top 40. Make that.

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 “Walter Sterling Every Damn Night” is heard on WPHT, Philadelphia. 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.

Industry Views

Monday Memo: News/Talk’s New Fall Season

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

imgWhy we’re already seeing TV tout its coming attractions: They understand how, after Labor Day, routines settle in. Viewers will be ready to re-engage.

Radio stations that treat September as just another month are missing an opportunity to reintroduce our relevance, refresh our programming, and remind listeners why we matter. After a summer of disrupted routines, school vacation, and scattered attention, commutes return, and schedules normalize. And we want to be the soundtrack. How?

1. Make listeners feel like they’re rejoining a conversation they care about. “Back to the grind? We’re back with what matters.”
2. Freshen your lineup or formatics. It’s a great time to introduce new contributors – analysts, columnists, or rotating guests with fresh perspectives. Debut a new segment: deeper dives, listener town halls, daily fact-checks, etc.
3. Update Imaging.Listeners tune to news/talk for clarity. At client stations, we’re refreshing IDs, show opens, transitions. Convey momentum and immediacy, and that you’ve got your listener’s back. Adjust clocks to improve flow and appointment tune-in. Even subtle changes, well-explained and promoted, can feel significant.

im

4. TV has premieres. Radio can, too. Launch a limited-run podcast series and promote it on-air?
5. Promote like you’re running for election. Off-air marketing money may be scarce, but you have other arrows in your quiver: Daily topical on-air promos explain how listening will be helpful. Use social media to tease what’s upcoming, and to post ICYMI “Feature the Moments that Matter.” Ditto e-newsletters and station app alerts and, and partner mentions via local media or civic groups.
6. Sales! Help advertisers freshen their messages similarly.

Any station, any format, should reassert its role. And – as each day’s events impact everyday life – no other format can command more attention than news/talk. So, welcome back.

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

Industry Views

In the Age of Blogs, Podcasts, and Substack, Defamation Law is Asking: How Public is Too Public?

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

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

imgMark Walters didn’t expect to lose private-figure legal protections over something he never talked about – especially since the thing he never talked about never even happened. A nationally syndicated radio host and outspoken Second Amendment advocate, Walters is publicly known, but in a specific lane. He never discussed nonprofits, financial misconduct, or legal ethics. Yet when ChatGPT hallucinated a claim that he had embezzled from a charity, a Georgia court ruled he was a public figure – and dismissed his defamation suit. 

The logic? Walters had a platform, a following, and a history of public commentary. That was enough. The court held that his general media presence elevated him to public-figure status, even though the allegedly defamatory statement had nothing to do with the subject matter of his actual work. wasn’t defamed about what he’s known for—but his visibility was used against him anyway.

The case didn’t just shut down a complaint. It opened a wider question: who qualifies as a public figure in the modern media era – and when does that designation apply to topics you never touched?

Mark Walters Inspired editorial cartoon for exclusive use by TALKERS


Why Public Figure Status Matters

Defamation law protects people from false, reputation-harming statements – but not equally. A private figure needs only to show that the speaker was negligent. A public figure, by contrast, must prove actual malice – that the speaker knew the statement was false or recklessly disregarded the truth.

This high standard, first articulated in New York Times v. Sullivan, was intended to protect freedom of speech and the press. But in the age of digital publishing and algorithmic reach, it’s increasingly used to deny protection to people who never thought they were stepping into the spotlight.

What Makes Someone a Public Figure?

Courts recognize two main categories:

– General-purpose public figures are household names – people famous across all topics and platforms.

– Limited-purpose public figures are individuals who have voluntarily entered public controversy or engaged in widespread public commentary on specific issues.

Here’s where the modern problem begins.

Thanks to blogs, newsletters, podcasts, and social media, it’s easier than ever to participate in public dialogue – and harder than ever to keep that participation confined to just one topic.

Post a viral thread on immigration?

Host a weekly podcast about school choice?

Weigh in on TikTok about local politics?

You may have just stepped into “limited-purpose public figure” territory – whether you intended to or not.

The Walters v. OpenAI Case – Now the Law

In Walters v. OpenAI, the court didn’t question whether the claim was false – only whether Walters could meet the public figure burden of proof. The court held that he could not. Despite the fact that he had never discussed the subject matter in question, his general visibility was enough to require that he prove actual malice. And he couldn’t.

The decision came with no trial, no settlement – just a dismissal. It now stands as legal precedent: having a public voice on one issue may cost you private-figure protections on others.

Microphone, Meet Microscope

This shift affects:

Independent journalists

– Podcast hosts

– Niche content creators

– Local activists with modest but vocal platforms

They may not feel “public,” but courts increasingly view them that way. And once that threshold is crossed, the burden in a defamation case becomes dramatically harder to meet.

he more you speak publicly—even on one topic—the more legally exposed you are everywhere else.

That wasn’t the intent of Sullivan. But in today’s fragmented, always-on media culture, visibility leaks- and so do legal thresholds.

Final Takeaway

You don’t need to be famous to be “public.” You just need to be findable.

Whether you’re behind a mic, a blog, or a camera, your platform may elevate you into public figure status – and bring defamation law’s toughest burdens with it. If you’re defamed, you’ll have to prove the speaker acted with knowing falsehood. If you’re doing the speaking, your target’s legal classification could determine how costly a misstep becomes.

In 2025, every microphone is also a microscope. Know what the law sees before you go live.

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.

Industry Views

Sean Hannity Guests on Harrison Video Show

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

img

Talk media superstar Sean Hannity guests on the new installment of “Up Close Far Out with Michael Harrison.” Hannity is the long-running, reigning champion of both news/talk radio and cable news television. He’s seen nightly on the FOX News Channel and heard daily on more than 750 radio stations via Premiere Networks. Hannity has been expanding his platforms to include a special new premium channel titled FOX Nation and is stretching the subjects he discusses well beyond the realm of politics, for which he has become famous, including history, show business, sports, and even stand-up comedy. Harrison, publisher of the broadcasting trade journal TALKERS, engages Hannity in a candid conversation about his life and career – as well as the launch of a new four-part FOX Nation program he hosts titled, “Wanted Dead or Alive,” about famous outlaws and bank robbers of the early 20th century.

To watch the program in its entirety, please click here.

Industry Views

When One Clip Cuts Two Ways: How Copyright and Defamation Risks Collide

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

img

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

imgA radio (or video podcast) host grabs a viral clip, tosses in some sharp commentary, and shares it online. The goal? Make some noise. The result? A takedown notice for copyright infringement – and then a letter threatening a defamation suit.

Sound far-fetched? It’s not. In today’s media world, copyright misuse and defamation risks often run on parallel tracks – and sometimes crash into each other. They come from different areas of law, but creators are finding themselves tangled up in both over the same piece of content.

Copyright Protects Ownership. Defamation Protects Reputation

It’s easy to think of copyright and defamation as two separate beasts. One guards creative work. The other shields reputation. But when creators use or edit someone else’s content – especially for commentary, parody, or critique – both risks can hit at once.

Take Smith v. Summit Entertainment LLC (2007). Smith wrote an original song. Summit Entertainment slapped him with a false DMCA takedown notice, claiming copyright they didn’t actually own. Smith fought back, suing not just for the bogus takedown but also for defamation, arguing that Summit’s public accusations hurt his reputation. The court said both claims could go forward.

That case shows just how easily copyright claims and defamation threats can pile up when bad information meets bad behavior.

Murphy v. Millennium Radio: A Close Call with a Clear Message

In Murphy v. Millennium Radio Group LLC, a New Jersey radio station scanned a photographer’s work – with his credit – and posted it online without permission. That alone triggered a copyright claim. But the hosts didn’t stop there. They mocked the photographer on-air, which sparked a defamation lawsuit.

Even though the copyright and defamation claims came from different actions – using the photo without permission and trash-talking the photographer – they landed in the same legal fight. It’s a reminder that separate problems can quickly become one big headache.

Why This Double Threat Matters

— Fair Use Isn’t a Free Pass on Defamation. Even if you have a solid fair use argument, that won’t protect you if your edits or commentary twist facts or attack someone unfairly.
— Public Comments Can Double Your Trouble. The second you speak publicly about how you’re using content – whether you’re bragging about rights you don’t have or taking a shot at someone – you risk adding a defamation claim on top of an IP dispute.
— Smart Lawyers Play Both Angles. Plaintiffs know the playbook. They’ll use copyright claims for takedown leverage and defamation claims for reputational damage – sometimes in the same demand letter.
— FCC Rules Don’t Cover This. It doesn’t matter if you’re FCC-regulated or a podcaster on your own. These risks come from civil law – and they’re coming for everyone.

The Takeaway

The overlap between copyright and defamation isn’t just a legal footnote – it’s a growing reality. In a world of viral clips, reaction videos, and borrowed content, creators need to watch how they frame and comment on what they use, just as much as whether they have permission to use it in the first place.

Because when one clip cuts two ways, you could take a hit from both directions.

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.

Industry Views

Monday Memo: The Dog Days of Summer

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

By Holland Cooke
Consultant

imgAsk any dog: The humans’ greatest invention EVER? Ice cream. Share summer’s sweetest treat with them, and listeners, during National Ice Cream Month.

Ask dog owners: “What makes YOUR dog happy?” Callers will tell stories.

im

And what’s cooler than hot wings? Do something special on July 29 – National Chicken Wing Day – and you will seem more special than non-local and/or robotic audio competitors.

Ditto International Hot Dog Day, August 26.

Convene a meeting to brainstorm opportunities on Thursday (July 24, National Tequila Day). Or August 8, International Beer Day.

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

Industry Views

The Soundbite Trap: How Editing in Radio and Podcasting Creates Legal Risk

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

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

imgIn radio and podcasting, editing isn’t just technical – it shapes narratives and influences audiences. Whether trimming dead air, tightening a guest’s comment, or pulling a clip for social media, every cut leaves an impression.

But here’s the legal reality: editing also creates risk.

For FCC-regulated broadcasters, that risk isn’t about content violations. The FCC polices indecency, licensing, and political fairness – not whether your edit changes a guest’s meaning.

For podcasters and online creators, the misconception is even riskier. Just because you’re not on terrestrial radio doesn’t mean you’re free from scrutiny. Defamation, false light, and misrepresentation laws apply to everyone — whether you broadcast on a 50,000-watt signal or a free podcast platform.

At the end of the day, it’s not the FCC that will hold you accountable for your edits. It’s a judge.

1. Alex Jones and the $1 Billion Lesson

Alex Jones became infamous for promoting conspiracy theories on Infowars, especially his repeated claim that the Sandy Hook shooting was a hoax – supported by selectively aired clips and distorted facts.

The result? Nearly $1 billion in defamation verdicts after lawsuits from victims’ families.

Takeaway: You can’t hide behind “just asking questions” or “it was my guest’s opinion.” If your platform publishes it – over the airwaves or online – you’re legally responsible for the content, including how it’s edited or framed. 

2. Katie Couric and the Gun Rights Group Edit

In “Under the Gun,” filmmakers inserted an eight-second pause after Katie Couric asked a tough question, making it seem like a gun rights group was stumped. In reality, they had answered immediately.

The group sued for defamation. The case was dismissed, but reputations took a hit.

Takeaway: Even subtle edits – like manufactured pauses – can distort meaning and expose creators to risk. 

3. FOX News and the Dominion Settlement

FOX News paid $787 million to Dominion Voting Systems after airing content suggesting election fraud – often based on selectively edited interviews and unsupported claims.

Though FOX is (among other things) a cable network, the impact shook the media world. Broadcasters reassessed risks, host contracts, and editorial practices. 

Takeaway: Major networks aren’t the only ones at risk. Radio hosts and podcasters who echo misleading narratives may face similar legal consequences. 

4. The Serial Podcast and the Power of Editing

“Serial” captivated millions by exploring Adnan Syed’s murder conviction. While no lawsuit followed, critics argued the producers presented facts selectively to build a certain narrative. 

Takeaway: Even without a lawsuit, editing shapes public perception. Misleading edits may not land you in court but can damage trust and invite scrutiny.

Whether you’re behind a radio microphone or a podcast mic, your editing decisions carry weight – and legal consequence.

The FCC might care if you drop an indecent word on air, but they won’t be the ones suing you when a guest claims you twisted their words. That’s civil law, where defamation, false light, and misrepresentation have no broadcast exemption.

There’s one set of rules for editing that every content creator lives by – and they’re written in the civil courts, not the FCC code.

Edit with care. 

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.

Industry Views

Emergency Radio

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

 

img

By Michael Harrison
Publisher
TALKERS

imgLet’s look into the crystal ball. Humor me if you will.

The year is 2030 and someone invented a new radio brand that was recognized by the end of the 2020s as the most innovative AM format to come down the pike since “news/talk” and “all sports” rose to prominence some three decades earlier (although the need for it was plainly obvious for years). It is even credited with “saving the AM band” like Rush Limbaugh did back in the 90s.

Now, at the start of the 21st century’s third decade, this approach to on-air broadcasting exists across America on approximately 20 major and medium market AM outlets and is tagged by a variety of brand names including “Emergency Radio,” “Emergency Room,” “First Responder AM,” and more. (One outlet has been tagged “The Flashlight 570” and another is being called “The Hero 710.”)  How about “Crisis 1050?”

It is a commercial format with an extraordinarily wide array of potential advertisers, and it is an “image buy” that defies being dependent on ratings. What image-conscious company wouldn’t want the prestige of sponsoring such a positive media force?

Of course, it streams on the internet and has a syndication component – but it wears its “live and local” dimension and its AM dial frequency like a double-edged sword of honor because by 2030 it has become painfully obvious that the electric grid as provided by digital technology is a fragile structure indeed.

We hold this TRUTH to be self-evident

Emergency Radio is based on the self-evident truth that it is very challenging to be a human being in an environment in which the world is constantly bombarding each and every individual with disasters. Please pardon my messy metaphor – but hurricanes are merely the tip of the iceberg.

The human race is plagued by non-stop natural disasters, man-made disasters, medical disasters, financial disasters, emotional disasters, technical disasters, ethics disasters, and a tsunami of anxiety!

Emergency Radio provides real time help in conveying accurate live and local information to the immediate market during fires, floods, earthquakes, pandemics, accidents, and random acts of violence.

Emergency Radio also provides information about disasters happening around the nation and world.  The volcano in a far-away country. The kid trapped in a well in the next state.

But it doesn’t stop there. “Slow news days” are filled with a whole array of revivable radio syndication initiatives that focus on feelings, anxiety, relationships, money, and a slew of real-life problems that impact each and every one of us on a seemingly constant basis. Emergency Radio simply puts them under a different generic umbrella. The world around us, near and far, is one big potential drama waiting to be tapped on the great stage known as the theater of the mind.

Emergency Radio unabashedly recognizes that life’s a bitch and that people need help – including honest inspiration.

BACK TO THE PRESENT: The only problem standing in the way of this prophesy being self-fulfilled is that it will take a bit of a budget still not considered feasible by industry standards and a whole lot of work.

Michael Harrison is the founder of TALKERS.  He can be emailed at michael@talkers.com.    

Industry Views

Michael Harrison Interviews C. Crane CEO Jessica Crotty About the Future of the AM/FM Receiver and Radio-Oriented Devices

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

img

In its latest post (7/2), “Up Close Far Out” – a YouTube video series hosted by TALKERS publisher Michael Harrison – takes a deep dive into the rapidly evolving world of radio, examining the state of the radio device itself – the actual appliance – from the perspective of those on the front line of its development, manufacturing, marketing and distribution.

What is the state of the gizmos we call “radios” in the early decades of the digital era?

Is radio an obsolete technology on its last legs or is the device going through an exciting evolution in terms of its technology, content and broader societal purpose going forward into a brave new world?

What is the difference between “radio” and the broader term “audio?”

What impact does the prospect of ongoing tariff wars have upon the domestic radio manufacturing industry?  And what exactly does it take to move back and develop a new product such as a modern radio in the USA?

Harrison’s guest, Jessica Crotty, is an important player in that industry. She is the CEO of a small, but highly influential, Northern California-based company – C. Crane – that for more than three decades has specialized in manufacturing, aggregating, distributing and marketing radios and radio-oriented devices for the platform’s most ardent fans.

The company’s focus on radio literally began as a “mom & pop” operation by draftsman, designer and electronics engineer Bob Crane, his wife Sue, and Grandma Faye who ran the fledgling business at the kitchen table of their home north of the “Redwoods Curtain.”

Since selling their first AM antenna, C. Crane has grown into a nationally respected “boutique” electronics company. They have developed several outstanding radios to serve radio listeners who prefer information, talk radio and audio tuned for voice clarity. After several near 7.0 earthquakes, in 1992 they added radio and light products that would become essentials during an emergency event anywhere in the country.

Jessica Crotty launched her professional career with C. Crane almost three decades ago working her way through the ranks from customer service all the way up to being CEO and a company principal.

Crotty and Harrison engage in a candid, information-packed conversation exploring the evolving technical and cultural intersection between radio’s glorious past, underrated present, and potentially impactful, but somewhat ambiguous, future. If you are interested in radio as a broadcaster or a fan, you do not want to miss this interview.

To view the video in its entirety, please click here.

Industry Views

You Cut for Time. They Cut You a Lawsuit.

By TALKERS | by TALKERS

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

imgLet’s discuss how CBS’s $16 million settlement became a warning shot for every talk host, editor, and content creator with a mic.

When CBS settled a lawsuit with Donald Trump for $16 million over a selectively edited “60 Minutes” interview with Kamala Harris, it wasn’t about guilt. It was about leverage. The lawsuit happened to coincide with Paramount’s FCC merger review – coincidentally, right when regulatory pressure was needed the most.

For broadcasters and digital creators alike, the message is clear: even lawful edits can become political weapons. If you shape content, you’re a target. And the courts aren’t the only battleground. Public outrage, regulatory scrutiny, and advertiser anxiety all shape the cost of controversy.

For Broadcasters: Every Cut Counts

Editing always alters reality. That doesn’t make it wrong – but it makes it risky. Even good-faith trims for time or tone can be reframed as distortion. What matters isn’t just what you cut, but whether you can defend it.

Case in Point: “60 Minutes” vs. DeSantis

CBS was accused of misleading edits in a 2021 vaccine rollout story. They published full transcripts and stood their ground. No apology, no payout.

Takeaways:

— Archive raw footage.
— Log your editorial decisions.
— Be ready to explain your process with clarity and conviction.

For Digital Creators: You’re Not as Untouchable as You Think

Section 230 might protect platforms, but it doesn’t shield you from smear campaigns, takedowns, or frivolous lawsuits. Editing with commentary or critique is often fair use – but that doesn’t stop bad-faith actors from flipping the narrative.

Case in Point: “Decoding Fox News”

Jules Terpak’s critique series survived coordinated attacks thanks to clear sourcing, transparency, and credibility built ahead of time.

Takeaways:

— Know your rights, but also your vulnerabilities.
— Keep receipts.
— Build audience trust before someone tries to burn it down.

The Real Risk Isn’t the Edit – It’s the Optics

Trump didn’t need to win the lawsuit. He just needed the headlines – and CBS needed their merger. Settlements aren’t always about truth. They’re about timing.

So protect yourself:

— Document your work.
— Develop internal standards.
— Don’t panic under pressure – prepare for it.

Because in an era where outrage spreads faster than facts, defending the integrity of your edit isn’t optional. It’s essential.

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.