This has been an interesting week on this blog. Volume was markedly increased, as was the number of comments left by scores of you, not only here but on my socials. But too bad there’s no way to measure the emotional intensity of the written word, because this week’s posts – especially Monday and Tuesday – were off the charts.
And I’ve got A.I. to thank. I wrote a two-parter about Alpha Portland’s experiment with this technology on their CHR station. The face of this project is “AI Ashley,” the manifestation of how this technology can turn anyone into a virtual talent.
I can’t say I wasn’t warned. When I did my Zoom interview with the troika of Becker, Elzinga, and Salisbury, they were already neck-deep in comments – mostly seasoned with vitriol, cynicism, and no shortage of snark. Radio people have grown skeptical of technology creep, and its toll on jobs. To date, other “advancements” like voicetracking and remote studios have only served to decrease so-called “head count,” while increasing heartache and angst.
I get it. Thanks in no small part to our company’s lead role in four AQ studies in collaboration with Don Anthony and Morning Show Boot Camp, I’ve seen the numbers year after year. The ranks of on-air talent have diminished steadily over the past past decade or so, leaving personalities in the schizophrenic position of reading our Techsurvey research on the one hand that underscores their immense value to the radio broadcasting industry, while on the other, watching their numbers continue to stairstep down thanks to an endless series of RIFs that have been cruelly happening industry-wide.
While I did not attempt to tabulate your comments, I can tell you that for every one that suggested radio “give A.I. a chance,” there were three or more that castigated the technology in general, and Alpha specifically for their midday cyber-shuffle at Live 95.5. (A number of you pointed out the apparent dichotomy of a station with that handle embracing a technology replacing live voices with virtually created sound files.) Many comments like the one below from Jessica Marz forced me to keep focused on the human toll tech often foists on us:
It’s sad and you know it. How can a radio station call itself live when it has an AI voice broadcasting? Why use a replica of a human voice? Why compete with humanity?
— Jessica Marz (@JessicaMarz6) June 20, 2023
Some, in fact, chided me for giving this issue coverage, much less two days of oxygen. But for that, no apologies from this corner. One of the many missions of this blog is to discuss new technology – including the disruptive stuff – while fostering conversations about its implications on our business, including our careers.
It’s personal, all right. How can it not be?
If you can appreciate the contradiction that A.I., a soul-less technology, can generate football fields worth of emotional anxiety, we’re tracking very closely on the disruption already being wrought in more and more companies close to radio.
A number of you took the critical analysis route, even going so far as to make predictions, like this one from exceedingly perceptive researcher, marketer, podcaster, and man about town, Mark Ramsey:
Nobody asked me, but my prediction is all AI all the time. Except for the great brands of course
— Mark Ramsey (@markramseymedia) June 22, 2023
Futurist James Cridland played a little round of “Would you rather?” with musicologist and industry pundit, Sean Ross:
Would I rather have a decent AI personality instead of non-stop music? Yes, I think I would.
Would I like humans to be replaced with AI? Nope.
If radio’s strength is a human connection and a shared experience, non-stop music can’t deliver that.
— James Cridland @[email protected] (@JamesCridland) June 22, 2023
Then this one from Eric Chase
I’m not as scared of AI in the work place as some. Likely because, in my line of work, I’ve been holding onto a cliff for my job for over a decade. And because my autocorrect and Siri still often seem hapless. @fnjacobs @RossOnRadio
— Eric Chase 🎤🎙🎧🗣 (@Eric_Chase) June 22, 2023
Not to be deterred, this missive from Ed Robinson:
If you abide by “any publicity is good publicity” then Ashley has effectively become the most visible jock in the business right now … so good on her. But for all the wrong reasons. All this will lead to is bad, cheap radio (which we sadly have in abundance already).
— Ed Robinson (@eviledrobinson) June 21, 2023
A number of you also mentioned the ways in which A.I. might be used, over and above swapping out live talent for virtual “personalities.” Here’s Canadian podcaster Rob Johnston:
Coming from a background in the copy and prod side…I can see AI wreaking havoc with great creativity. For pure pump and dump creative, it’ll shed vast amounts of time.
“Write me 15 IDs for this theme weekend” Easy. Done.
The trick is “how to embrace it in a positive way”
— Rob Johnston 🇨🇦🎧🎵 (@Robbie_J) June 22, 2023
Of course, innovation cuts both ways as Eric Chase reminds us:
I think Ashley is exceptional. Yrs ago we had good convos so im 😊 for her. Now the but. I got this same message when I was in Allentown in 2010. Almost word for word. To enhance, not a cost cutter.
I use a fork to eat. I can also use it to throw at someone’s eye, if I wished. pic.twitter.com/e2fh7ATbNl
— Eric Chase 🎤🎙🎧🗣 (@Eric_Chase) June 21, 2023
And my UK friend, Peter Stewart:
.@fnjacobs nails it as usual with the brilliantly accurate (albeit, cutting) forecast of AI and radio. Is it really going to be all bad for listeners…? https://t.co/4gpUZktDxz
— Peter Stewart (@TweeterStewart) June 21, 2023
So it is often hard for anyone – especially those who feel most affected by a nascent technology – to coldly and analytically discuss its impacts on our industry, and on their careers. Clearly, we are still trying to get our heads (wearing VR goggles. of course) around A.I., and the ways in which it will be used in the coming weeks, months, and years.
The aforementioned Eric Chase sent me a news story from Study Finds that may make research companies that sell music tests quake in their Crocs. And maybe a few music directors, too (assuming there are any left). Its headline rivals the one I wrote for this blog post:
“Simon Cowell replaced by a robot? Scientists use AI to pick hit songs” 
A new Claremont Graduate University research study claims 97% accuracy in picking hits. Here’s professor Paul Zak with the key finding:
“By applying machine learning to neurophysiologic data, we could almost perfectly identify hit songs. That the neural activity of 33 people can predict if millions of others listened to new songs is quite amazing. Nothing close to this accuracy has ever been shown before.”
Holy Donna Halper!
That’s one-third the size of most auditorium tests. And no #2 pencils or refreshments necessary at an AI AMT.
So, what about the title of today’s A.I. infused blog post? Would John Lennon – who would’ve turned 83 years-old later this year – have appreciated and embraced this technology? Or would he have had his signature Liverpudlian disdain for it?
The reason this question is germane is that his mate, Sir Paul McCartney recently announced using A.I. to exhume old tracks on a cassette Lennon once recorded. The end result will be released later this year.
In a recent blog post, I wondered whether Beatles purists and even more casual fans would find this use of tech to release a “new song” from arguably the most influential rock band of all time just a little disturbing.
Or even blasphemous.
But the media reactions to Paul’s in-studio A.I. dabbling were miniscule, if not barely perceptible. Clearly, McCartney has won over the trust of the Beatles’ massive fan base, thus minimizing negative reaction. And apparently you as well. None of you pointed a Blue Meanie finger at the “Cute Beatle” for resurrecting John’s musty vocals.
You were fine with it. And that reinforces the notion we all have “a line” we draw with new technology. We emotionally decide it’s OK for this, but not for that. That’s been the basic strain from your comments. And I get it. We all make our personal calls on the morality of technology, often predicated on how it affects US.
But W.W.J.S. about his voice being resurrected for this venture? And was Yoko Ono harmed during the A.I. recording of this song?
This isn’t the first time Beatles songs have been rejiggered with studio magic for blatantly commercial purposes. The producers of the massively successful Cirque du Soleil show, “Love,” created a remastered and reimagined Beatles soundtrack using Giles Martin (son of long-time producer George). Many Beatles lovers rallied around these “new” Fab Four recreations, while other acolytes believed the entire process was heresy.
And that’s a microcosm of what we’re now seeing with new chapter of A.I. and radio. When technology intersects with art, it can get messy. When it intersects with careers and livelihoods, it can
get downright bloody.
I’m undeterred. This technology in its many forms will be with us for some time to come. It may indeed end up being transformative. I hope it ends up creating more jobs – as did the auto industry when it replaced the horse platform – and that all of you reading today’s post end up in a better place than you are today.
But it will also be disruptive. Jobs will be lost. Careers will be upended. Tears will be shed. That’s “progress.”
Not every stable hand shoveling horse manure in 1905 ended up with a well-paying factory job at Ford. And not every D.J. will wind up sitting in front of a computer assembling audio production, entertainment, and information using the A.I. toolkit.
None of this should stop any of you from diving in head-first, learning as much as you can about A.I. technology. Think of your initial reactions to computerized music scheduling, digital editing, voicetracking, social media, and podcasts. If you Bah! Humbugged these once new-fangled tools initially, make a note not to repeat those Luddite-like reactions with A.I. It won’t get you far.
I’m not going to tell you A.I. is the Second Coming. But I will tell you it’s not going anywhere anytime soon.
Don’t just sit and watch the wheel go round and round. Grab it, and take control of this beast while you can.
And the next time someone insists A.I. will never catch on, you tell them this:
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
You can read this week’s A.I. posts here: Monday Tuesday
Jacobs Media has consistently walked the walk in the digital space, providing insights and guidance through its well-read national Techsurveys.
In 2008, jacapps was launched - a mobile apps company that has designed and built more than 1,300 apps for both the Apple and Android platforms. In 2013, the DASH Conference was created - a mashup of radio and automotive, designed to foster better understanding of the "connected car" and its impact.
Along with providing the creative and intellectual direction for the company, Fred consults many of Jacobs Media's commercial and public radio clients, in addition to media brands looking to thrive in the rapidly changing tech environment.
Fred was inducted into the Radio Hall of Fame in 2018.
- Old Man, Take A Look At My Ratings - December 20, 2024
- In The World Of On-Demand Audio, How Do We Define Success? - December 19, 2024
- Scenes From The Classic Rock Highway – 2024 Edition - December 18, 2024
I get it. AI is just another tool that can be used for good or evil. I’ve heard that before. For example, music scheduling programs created highly- structured music rotations, but no matter how many parameters you put into the programs they still create train-wreck transitions that no human would find acceptable. Good programmers go over logs and fix those problems or give jocks enough leeway to resolve those issues if they’re actually paying attention while voice-tracking multiple stations, sometime simultaneously while doing a live show.
Automation replaced pulling record, carts, and CDs and assembling a show from the elements. It also essentially removed the art of the segue from the toolkit unless humans went out of their way to make it happen. When was the last time you heard an artful segue on an automated station?
I know a lot about computers, and I’m very familiar with the concept of GIGO, Garbage-In – Garbage-out. If you can guarantee the material that AI uses to create its artificial intelligence, perhaps you may be able to teach it to be relevant. So far, we’ve seen numerous examples of AI generating everything from bogus legal citations to outright racist material. The bottom line is that computers suck at really creating art, and big corporations have little understanding or concern about the entertainment portion of the entertainment industry. I hope you’re right that it will be used as an aid for helping humans handle the creative part of the industry. I fear that it will be a replacement for humans and will lead to the further deterioration of the radio industry.
Good thinkin, Brian. Your fears have been proven time and again since consolidation. As long as companies try to wring every penny out of a shrinking advertising base, we can only expect the product to bring itself to a level we can’t even begin to fathom.
I think “both sides” have a case to be made, Brian. And sadly, the cynics have history on their side. Your comments about computers and how they “think” are a good reminder for anyone with a tendency to get carried away with new technology. (Like me?) Thanks, Brian.
There is a very healthy discussion about this topic happening right now on HOBBYBROADCASTER.NET; a site devoted to legal low-power Part 15 radio for hobbyists. A group that you wouldnt think would be so vocal about the topic, given that many participants are “one man shows” that only throw a signal over their fence and not much farther.
You need to be a member of the group to read the forums, but it’s a primo site for anyone passionate about the roots of real live radio in the 2020s.
Appreciate that, Alan.
With all these technological and research advancements over the years has the entertainment value of radio really gone up? Not really.
Liners are not entertaining.
Content that lacks compelling is nothing.
All these advancements over the years have cut costs and cut the quality and importance of radio.
We’re on the same page, James, and I’ve express as much in this space. That’s the challenge: How can we use AI technology to improve radio’s quality and public acceptance, while bringing out the best in our people AND attracting some of the best and brightest to our companies.
Automation pre-dates Top 40 radio, folks. What about all of those “Beautiful Music” stations that came on in the early 1950’s? They may have had a live announcer, but many were “live assist”, with an announcer in a studio starting and stopping a reel to reel automation system. “Voice Tracking” in my town was done by the AM morning host who “tracked” liners and intros and outros on carts which were inserted into the automation system. That’s how 7p to midnight was done on WHIO-FM in Dayton for many years with a program called “Concepts In Music”.
I have already heard what AI can do with music. Some people have been putting Beatles songs through AI in much the same manner as is being worked on NOW by Sir Paul. I played one fan produced version of “Grow Old With Me” on an LPFM I run recently. It’s pretty amazing and yes, “AI John” sounds like John.
There are upsides using AI in radio, and big downsides, too. But AI cannot notice the “funny billboard” you see on your drive into work, at least until the script writer does. Content still rules. And will. The best content always wins.
Your final paragraph, Kevin. Thank you.
Fred,
Put this one in the gold archives!! Couldn’t have said it better myself but I’ve learned that you are Jedi master of the blog and bow in your general direction.
I’m saving this for future reference! Thanks for the open mind!
When it comes to technology, it’s always smart to – in the words of legendary coach John Wooden – “be quick but don’t hurry.” And thanks for not calling me Yoda!
Radio has been heading in the AI direction for over 25 years and loves to cut costs with automation, so look for radio to be at the front of the AI adoption line. It’s too late to stop, regulate or even influence AI, so the best we can do is find ways to live with it.
I still say that radio should apply AI at the executive decision maker level first.
Some might say radio has had “virtual CEOs” for many years now. Not me, of course.
Chat BPT or chat DVF would make a fun project.
What’s that ? That’s the sound of more than one hand clapping. Tough stuff and much appreciated….
I knew there was SOMEONE out there who understands me. 🙂 Thanks, Tom. Always great hearing your words of wisdom.
I wouldn’t say “computerized music scheduling, digital editing, voicetracking, social media, and podcasts” have been all bad. I would say radio — and the listener experience — were better before all of the above. That said, open your eyes and forge ahead because there ain’t no going back.
I’m done with that, David. Thanks for chiming in on this.
Fred, you attract the smartest people -and no one can deny that AI exists, it won’t go away and we can only hope that someone can create the best USER experience ever with all of the technology available.
All of studying I did on John Lennon makes me believe that he would have LOVED the technology. Remember he always double tracked his voice, and was thrilled when ADT (artificial double-tracking) was developed by Ken Townsend at Abbey Road Studios. He was always thinking ahead and wasn’t afraid to try new stuff. Best yet, if it didn’t work he’d leave it alone. His model was to enhance what the group did, not to cut costs or eliminate technical help. ADT, phasing, tape loops, filters, compressors -all were part of what John loved in his tool kit. AI would fit right in-and he’d probably find a way to make the “Fab Four” sound like the “Fab Four Hundred” with it.
Of course, we’ll never know, Dave. But a number of people saw Lennon’s openness to experimentation an indication he would have at least tried AI. I was surprised not to read about Yoko weighing in on this as she has other post-John projects. At any rate, it made for a good blog post title. Thanks, as always, for being one of the “smart people.”
An English-language CHR/Hot AC in Malaysia appears to be taking a different approach for its AI DJ…
https://radioinfo.asia/news/fly-fm-launches-malaysias-first-ai-radio-dj