consumer

‘Guaranteed Human’: Audio giant iHeartMedia says real people, not AI personalities, are at the controls

As media executives wrestle with the use of artificial intelligence, radio giant iHeartMedia wants to stand out.

“We don’t use AI-generated personalities. We don’t play AI music that features synthetic vocalists pretending to be human,” Tom Poleman, the company’s programming chief, wrote in an email to employees.

“The podcasts we publish are also Guaranteed Human,” he wrote.

Radio station DJs now are expected to say “Guaranteed Human,” as part of their hourly on-air disclosures, which include announcing the station’s call letters, as required by the Federal Communications Commission. The new branding campaign has its roots in iHeartMedia’s research that listeners turn on the radio for more than just music and information.

“Consumers aren’t just looking for content, they’re looking for connection,” the company’s president of insights, Lainie Fertick, wrote in an October blog post. “In a world of tech overload, consumers are searching for something real.”

The move comes as Hollywood creators, agents and executives come to grips with rapid advances in artificial intelligence, which has assisted workers with routine tasks but also caused a stir with the release of realistic AI actors, such as Tilly Norwood, which has more than 66,000 followers on Instagram. Entertainment behemoths, including Walt Disney Co. and Comcast’s NBCUniversal, also have sued AI companies for copyright infringement.

To be sure, iHeartMedia uses “AI-powered productivity and distribution tools that help scale our business operations,” Poleman wrote in his note. Such AI tools are used for “scheduling, audience insights, data analysis, workflow automation, show prep, editing and organization,” he said.

iHeartMedia is the nation’s largest radio operator with more than 850 stations, including KFI-AM 640, KLAC-AM 570, KOST-FM 103.5 and KIIS-FM 102.7 in Los Angeles.

The company also has a growing podcast business, producing such shows as “Stuff You Should Know,” “Questlove Supreme” and “Drama Queens.” It also co-produces podcasts with the NFL, NBA and Shonda Rhimes’ Shondaland Audio, which includes “The Laverne Cox Show.”

Previously known as Clear Channel Communications, the company has experienced the dark side of automation and programming centralization.

In 2002, its radio stations in Minot, N.D., aired canned music as a toxic cloud blanketed the community after a train transporting anhydrous ammonia for fertilizer derailed and exploded. One person died, and dozens of others were injured. Congress then drilled into alleged harms of media consolidation and the failure of broadcasters to alert the community during the disaster in Minot, where Clear Channel owned six of the eight commercial radio stations.

Clear Channel later said local police failed that night to activate the emergency alert system, which would have allowed the broadcast of special bulletins.

The company has since championed its responses to other disasters. An iHeart spokesperson pointed to its award-winning coverage of Hurricane Helene in Asheville, N.C., in 2024 as well as its efforts during the devastating Eaton and Pacific Palisades fires in January, “delivering crucial lifesaving information and working with local organizations to collect and distribute essential disaster relief supplies,” the spokesperson said, noting that Clear Channel was run by a different management team.

“At iHeart, we make service to our communities our number one priority,” the spokesperson said.

iHeartMedia, like other entertainment and news outlets, is dealing with advertising declines, and it has been looking for ways to keep listeners engaged amid media fragmentation. The company this fall cut several staff members at historic KFI, including Morris “Mo” O’Kelly, who had hosted the station’s evening talk show for nearly three years.

Radio host Chuck Dizzle also announced on Instagram that he’d been laid off from iHeart’s Los Angeles hip-hop station KRRL-FM, which brands itself as “Real 92.3.”

The company said its research shows that consumers crave interactions with real people, and they have deep concerns about the growing use of AI and its potential societal changes.

Poleman pointed to a recent survey that showed two-thirds of respondents were worried about losing their job to AI.

iHeartMedia employees should embrace “Guaranteed Human” as more than a marketing tagline, Poleman wrote.

“When listeners interact with us, they know they’re connecting with real voices, real stories, and real emotion,” Poleman wrote. “Sometimes you have to pick a side — we’re on the side of humans.”



Source link

US consumer confidence tumbles to lowest level since April | Business and Economy News

A sluggish job market lowers consumer confidence but may also lead to another rate cut from the Federal Reserve by the end of the year.

United States consumer confidence sagged in November as households worried about jobs and their financial situation, likely in part because of the recently ended government shutdown.

The Conference Board said on Tuesday its consumer confidence index dropped to 88.7 this month, from an upwardly revised 95.5 in October, hitting its lowest level since April.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

Economists polled by the Reuters news agency had forecast the index edging down to 93.4 from the previously reported 94.6 in October.

“Consumers’ write-in responses pertaining to factors affecting the economy continued to be led by references to prices and inflation, tariffs and trade, and politics with increased mentions of the federal government shutdown,” said Dana Peterson, chief economist at the Conference Board.

“Mentions of the labour market eased somewhat but still stood out among all other frequent themes not already cited. The overall tone from November write-ins was slightly more negative than in October.”

Consumer confidence remained low among all income brackets. While confidence among those who make less than $15,000 annually ticked up slightly, it still remained the group with the lowest consumer confidence.

The consumer confidence report was released amid a slowing labour market. The September jobs report, released late last week, showed 119,000 jobs were added to the US economy as the unemployment rate ticked up 0.1 of a percentage point to 4.4 percent.

However, there is limited economic data available to fully gauge the sentiment of the US economy because the government shutdown, the longest in US history, hindered federal agencies’ ability to gather the data needed to assess current conditions.

“More worries about what lies ahead … hence, putting purchases for major items on hold,” Jennifer Lee, senior economist at BMO, wrote to Reuters.

The economic data followed dovish comments from policymakers in the past few days that helped cement rate cut expectations.

On Monday, Federal Reserve Governor Christopher Waller said the job market was weak enough to warrant another quarter-point rate cut in December although action beyond that depended on a flood of data that was delayed by the federal government shutdown.

Source link

Consumers spend $22 more a month for streaming services. Why do prices keep rising?

Six years ago, when San Jose author Katie Keridan joined Disney+, the cost was just $6.99 a month, giving her family access to hundreds of movies like “The Lion King” and thousands of TV episodes, including Star Wars series “The Mandalorian” with no commercials.

But since then, the price of an ad-free streaming plan has ballooned to $18.99 a month. That was the last straw for 42-year-old Keridan, whose husband canceled Disney+ last month.

“It was getting to where every year, it was going up, and in this economy, every dollar matters, and so we really had to sit down and take a hard look at how many streaming services are we paying for,” Keridan said. “What’s the return on enjoyment that we’re getting as a family from the streaming services? And how do we factor that into a budget to make sure that all of our bills are paid at the end of a month?”

It’s a conversation more people who subscribe to streaming services are having amid an uncertain economy.

Once sold at discounted rates, many platforms have raised prices at a clip consumers say frustrates them. The entertainment companies, under pressure from investors to bolster profits, have justified upping the cost of their plans to help pay for the premium content they provide. But some viewers aren’t buying it.

Customers are paying $22 more for subscription video streaming services than they were a year ago, according to consulting firm Deloitte. As of October, U.S. households on average shelled out $70 a month, compared to $48 a year ago, Deloitte said.

About 70% of consumers surveyed last month said they were frustrated the entertainment services that they subscribe to are raising prices and about a third said they have cut back on subscriptions in the last three months due to financial concerns, according to Deloitte.

“There’s a frustration, just in terms of both apathy, but also from a perspective that they just don’t think it’s worth the monthly subscription cost because of just fatigue,” said Rohith Nandagiri, managing director at Deloitte Consulting LLP.

Disney+ has raised prices on its streaming service nearly every year since it launched in 2019 at $6.99 a month. The company bumped prices on ad-free plans by $1 in 2021, followed by $3 increases in 2022 and 2023, a $2 price raise in 2024 and, most recently, a $3 increase this year to $18.99 a month.

Disney isn’t the only streamer to raise prices. Other companies, including Netflix, HBO Max and Apple TV also hiked prices on many of their subscription plans this year.

Some analysts say streamers are charging more because many services are adding live sports, the rights to which can cost millions of dollars. Streaming services for years have also given consumers access to big budget TV shows and original movies, and as production costs rise, they expect viewers to pay more, too.

But some consumers like Keridan have a different perspective. As much as some streaming platforms are adding new content like live sports, they are also choosing not to renew some big budget shows like “Star Wars: The Acolyte.” Keridan, a Marvel and Star Wars fan, said she mainly watched Disney+ for movies such as “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” and shows like “The Mandalorian.” Now she’s going back to watching some programs ad-free on Blu-Ray discs.

While Keridan cut Disney+, her family still subscribes to YouTube Premium and Paramount+. She said she uses YouTube Premium for workout videos instead of paying for a gym membership. Her family enjoys watching Star Trek programs on Paramount+, like the third season of “Star Trek: Strange New Worlds,” Keridan said.

Other consumers are choosing to keep their streaming subscriptions but look for cost savings through cheaper plans with ads, or by bundling services.

“Consumers are more willing today than ever to withstand advertising and for the sake of being able to get content for a lower subscription rate,” said Brent Magid, CEO and president of Minneapolis-based media consulting firm Magid. “We’ve seen that number increase just as people’s budgets have gotten tighter.”

Keridan said she’s already cutting other types of spending in her household in addition to quitting Disney+. The amount of money her family spends on groceries has gone up, and in order to save cash, they’ve cut back on traveling for the year. Typically, Keridan says, they would go on two or three vacations annually, but this year, they will only go to Disneyland in Anaheim.

But even the Happiest Place on Earth hasn’t escaped price hikes.

“Just as the streaming fees have risen, park fees have risen,” Keridan said. “And so it just seems every price of anything is rising these days, and they’re now directly in competition with each other. We can’t keep them all, so we have to make hard cuts.”

Source link

Trump accuses foreign-owned meat-packers of inflating U.S. beef prices and calls for investigation

President Trump on Friday accused foreign-owned meat-packers of driving up the price of beef in the U.S. and asked the Department of Justice to open an investigation.

The Republican president announced the move on social media days after his party suffered losses in key elections in which the winning Democratic candidates focused relentlessly on the public’s concerns about the cost of living.

“I have asked the DOJ to immediately begin an investigation into the Meat Packing Companies who are driving up the price of Beef through Illicit Collusion, Price Fixing, and Price Manipulation,” Trump wrote in the social media post.

“We will always protect our American Ranchers, and they are being blamed for what is being done by Majority Foreign Owned Meat Packers, who artificially inflate prices, and jeopardize the security of our Nation’s food supply,” he continued.

Trump offered no proof to support his allegations.

Beef prices have soared to record levels in part after drought and years of low prices led to the smallest U.S. herd size in decades. Trump’s tariffs on Brazil, a major beef exporter, have also curbed imports.

Concentration in the meat-packing business has long been a concern for farmers and politicians on both sides of the aisle. There are four major meat-packing companies in the United States, and the largest beef company, JBS, is headquartered in Brazil. JBS USA did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday.

“Action must be taken immediately to protect Consumers, combat Illegal Monopolies, and ensure these Corporations are not criminally profiting at the expense of the American People,” Trump said.

Last month, Trump suggested the U.S. would buy Argentine beef to bring down stubbornly high prices for American consumers, angering U.S. cattle ranchers.

Trump’s accusations have renewed a bipartisan presidential fight against rising food prices.

Then-President Biden talked with independent farmers and ranchers about initiatives to reduce food prices by increasing competition within the meat industry. And then-Vice President Kamala Harris, whom Trump defeated last year, used her campaign to vow to crack down on food producers and major supermarkets “ price gouging.”

Superville and Karnowski write for the Associated Press. Karnowski reported from Minneapolis.

Source link

YouTube vs. Disney: What’s behind the fight

YouTube TV customers are bracing for another frustrating weekend.

For the last week, YouTube TV’s 10 million subscribers have been denied access to ESPN, ABC and other Walt Disney Co. channels in a dispute that has swelled into one of the largest TV blackouts in a decade. Instead of turning on “College GameDay,” “Monday Night Football” or “Dancing With the Stars,” customers have been greeted with a grim message: “Disney channels are unavailable.”

The standoff began Oct. 30 when the two behemoths hit an impasse in their negotiations over a new distribution contract covering Disney’s channels and ABC stations.

Google, which owns YouTube, has rebuffed Disney’s demands for fee increases for ESPN, ABC and other channels. The Burbank entertainment giant has been seeking a revenue boost to support its content production and streaming ambitions, and help pay for ESPN’s gargantuan sports rights deals.

Talks are ongoing, but the two sides remain apart on major issues — prolonging the stalemate.

“Everyone is kind of sick of these big-time companies trying to get the best of one another,” said Nick Newton, 30, who lives near San Francisco and subscribes to YouTube TV. “The people who are suffering are the middle-class and lower-class people that just love sports … because it’s our escape from the real world.”

Both companies declined to comment for this article.

The skirmish is just the latest between YouTube and programming companies. Since August, Rupert Murdoch’s Fox Corp., Comcast’s NBCUniversal and Spanish-language broadcaster TelevisaUnivision have all complained that YouTube TV was trying to use its market muscle to squeeze them for concessions.

Here’s a look at what’s driving the escalating tensions:

Google’s growing clout in television

The struggle between Disney and YouTube reflects television’s fast-shifting dynamics.

Disney has long entered carriage negotiations with tremendous leverage, in large part because it owns ESPN, which is a must-have channel for legions of sports fans.

Programmers, including Disney, structured their distribution contracts to expire near a pivotal programming event, such as a new season of NFL football. The timing motivated both sides to quickly reach a deal rather than risk alienating customers.

But for Google’s parent, Alphabet, YouTube TV is just a sliver of their business. The tech company generated $350 billion in revenue last year, the vast majority coming from Google search and advertising. That gives YouTube a longer leash to hold out for contract terms it finds acceptable.

“This dispute is not that painful for Google,” said analyst Richard Greenfield of LightShed Partners, noting that YouTube TV could probably withstand “two weekends without college football, and two weeks without ‘Monday Night Football’ — as long as their consumers stay with them.”

Disney, however, depends on TV advertising and pay-TV distribution fees. The week-long blackout has already dampened TV ratings, which means less revenue for the company.

Consumers like YouTube TV

For decades, throngs of consumers loathed their cable company — a sentiment that Disney and other programmers were able to use in their favor in past battles. Customer defections prompted several pay-TV companies to find a compromise to restore the darkened TV channels and stanch the subscriber bleeding.

But YouTube is banking on a more loyal user base, including millions of customers who switched to the service from higher-priced legacy providers.

“I’ll stick this thing out with YouTube TV,” Newton said, adding that he hoped the dispute didn’t drag on for weeks.

“This is one of the problems facing Disney,” Greenfield said. “It’s been a noticeable change in tone from past carriage fee battles. If customer losses stay at a minimum, then Disney is going to be in a tough place.”

It boils down to power and money

YouTube TV is the fastest-growing television service in the U.S. Analysts expect that, within a couple of years, YouTube TV will have more pay-TV customers than industry leaders Spectrum and Comcast.

In the current negotiations, Google has asked Disney to agree to lower its rates when YouTube TV surpasses Comcast’s and Spectrum’s subscriber counts. Disney maintains that YouTube already pays preferred rates, in recognition of its competitive standing, and that Google is trying to drive down the value of Disney’s networks.

“YouTube TV and its owner, Google … want to use their power and extraordinary resources to eliminate competition and devalue the very content that helped them build their service,” top Disney executives wrote last Friday in an email to their staff.

People close to YouTube TV reject the characterization, saying the service has been a valuable partner by providing a strong service that brings Disney billions of dollars a year in distribution revenue.

“The bottom line is that our channels are extremely valuable, and we can only continue to program them with the sports and entertainment viewers love most if we stand our ground,” the Disney executives wrote in last week’s email. “We are asking nothing more of YouTube TV than what we have gotten from every other distributor — fair rates for our channels.”

Higher sports rights fees

A major reason Disney is asking for higher fees is because it’s grappling with a huge escalation in sports costs.

Disney is on the hook to pay $2.6 billion a year to the NBA, another $2.7 billion annually to the NFL, and $325 million a year for the rights to stream World Wrestling Entertainment. Such sports rights contracts have nearly doubled in the last decade, leading to the strain on TV broadcasters.

In addition, deep-pocketed streaming services, including Amazon, Apple and Netflix, have jumped into sports broadcasting, driving up the cost for the legacy broadcasters.

The crowded field also strains the wallets of sports fans, and appears to be adding to the fatigue over the YouTube TV-Disney fight.

Newton wrote in a recent Twitter post that he was spending $400 a month for his various internet, phone and TV services, including Disney+ and NFL Sunday Ticket, which is distributed by YouTube TV.

“I’m already on all the major subscriptions to watch football these days,” Newton, a third-generation San Francisco 49ers fan, said. “You need Netflix. You need Peacock, you need Amazon Prime and the list goes on and on. I’m at the point where I’m not paying for anything else.”

Source link

Why prices keep going up for streaming services

Last week, HBO Max announced it raised its standard subscription by $1.50 to $18.49 a month — up 23% from when the streaming service launched five years ago amid the pandemic.

Such announcements have become almost routine in the television business as inflation hits streaming platforms that are under growing pressure to turn a profit and pay for higher programming costs.

Once seen as a cheaper alternative to cable, the cost of a streaming subscription for the top platforms continues to rise, much like higher prices for groceries, gasoline and housing.

In fact, the average price for subscriptions to the top 10 paid subscription streaming services in the U.S. increased 12% this year, following double-digit percentage increases per year since 2022, according to Victoria, British Columbia-based Convergence Research Group.

The research firm included streamers such as Netflix, Disney+, Hulu, Peacock, Apple TV and others in its data set. It factors subscriptions that are with ads or ad-free and does not take into account bundling. All of the major streaming services in the U.S. raised their prices on plans this year, except for Paramount+ and Amazon Prime Video, which boosted rates last year.

The price hikes reflect the tough economic realities of media companies that need to replace dwindling revenue from legacy pay TV channels that have seen sharp declines in viewership.

“The rest of their businesses have effectively been under attack by streaming and so they need this area to be profitable in order to compensate for the decline in their own businesses,” said Brahm Eiley, president of the Convergence Research Group. “It’s been tremendous pressure on them.”

Streaming services have been running as loss leaders for some time, said Tim Hanlon, chief executive of Vertere Group LLC, a media consulting firm.

“There’s no question that streaming is now under the gun to be its own profit center,” Hanlon said.

If rates go much higher, consumers may balk, experts said.

“The industry is playing a dangerous game by continuing to raise prices,” said Andrew Hare, senior vice president for the media research consultancy Magid. “We’re nearing a boiling point of rising churn and overwhelming choice.”

Magid has also already seen an uptick in the percentage of consumers who intend to cancel at least one streaming service in the next six months. The figure was 24% in the second quarter of 2025, up from 19% a year earlier.

“Hard as it is to imagine, the cable bundle is starting to look like a better value all the time,” Hare said.

Here is a look at which major streamers have raised prices on their ad-free streaming plans this year.

HBO Max

HBO Max raised prices across all of its plans. Its lowest-cost, ad-free streaming plan went up by $1.50 to $18.49 a month, while the annual version of that plan also increased $15 to $184.99.

HBO Max’s parent company, Warner Bros. Discovery, had 125.7 million global streaming subscribers in the second quarter, up 22% from a year earlier.

Like other streamers, HBO cited the need to help pay for quality content. The platform offers big-budget shows including drama “The Gilded Age” and “House of the Dragon,” which takes place in the “Game of Thrones” universe.

Consumers should brace themselves for more price hikes. Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav said at a Goldman Sachs investors conference last month that he believes HBO Max is underpriced.

“We want a good deal for consumers, but I think over time there’s real opportunity, particularly for us in that quality area to raise prices,” Zaslav said.

Peacock

Big-time sports properties have been moving to streaming platforms and guess who is going to help foot the bill? Consumers, of course.

Ahead of becoming a major provider of NBA games this season, Peacock increased prices on its plans, including the premium plus ad-free streaming service, by $3 to $16.99 a month. That was the third price hike since Peacock launched in 2020, where its ad-free plan started at $9.99 a month.

The Comcast-owned streamer, which has 41 million paid subscribers, has weekly games on Mondays and Tuesdays and will have a Peacock exclusive NFL game on Dec. 27. Peacock next year will air the Milan Cortina Winter Olympics and continue to stream major sporting events such as NFL games.

In a July earnings call, Comcast Corp. President Mike Cavanagh touted how Peacock will have the most hours of live sports of any streamer next year.

Netflix

Netflix has also gotten into the sports business, with the addition of two NFL games on Christmas Day.

The streamer, which remains the industry juggernaut, is also expected to add Major League Baseball’s Home Run Derby and an opening night game when MLB finalizes a new media rights deal this year.

The company cited its entry into high-priced sports when it raised its prices on most of its plans, including on its cheapest ad-free monthly plan by $2.50 to $17.99 in the U.S. earlier this year.

“As we continue to invest in programming and deliver more value for our members, we will occasionally ask our members to pay a little more so that we can re-invest to further improve Netflix,” Netflix said in a letter to shareholders in January.

The slice of sports is coming at the expense of fans who need multiple subscriptions — if they want to keep up with every NFL game.

“A certain type of fan is starting to recognize they are being fleeced,” Hanlon said.

Higher prices on ad-free plans can help drive traffic to a streamer’s lowest-priced plans with ads. Netflix launched its subscription plan with ads in 2022 at $6.99 a month and it has only increased by a $1 to $7.99 a month since then in January 2025.

While many major streamers offer cheaper plans with ads, others offer free streaming services with ads such as the Roku Channel or Tubi.

A recent research study by Magid found that three-quarters of consumers are fine with watching commercials, if it saves them money.

Four in 10 said they’re “overwhelmed” by the number of services they use. The average number of streaming subscriptions per household in the third quarter is 4.6, up from 4.1 the previous year.

“Together, these trends point to a more value-driven streaming consumer seeking affordability and simplicity,” the study said.

Apple TV

Apple TV was once one of the lowest-priced subscription service plans, launching at $4.99 a month. Since then, prices for Apple’s video streaming service have increased to $12.99 a month, with its latest price jump of $3 in August.

The Cupertino-based company has been trying to make its streaming business more financially sound, but faces a formidable task as it has been a big spender in attracting name talent to its programs and movies.

When Apple TV first launched, it had just nine programs, but since then has expanded its library to include critically acclaimed shows and films including comedy “Ted Lasso,” drama “Severance” and “The Studio.”

Apple said in a statement that while it did raise its prices on its standard monthly ad-free plan, the cost of its annual subscription remains at $99 and Apple One bundled packages did not change.

Disney+

Last month, Disney+ announced it would increase the cost of its ad-free streaming plan by $3 to $18.99 a month. Hulu did not increase its price on its ad-free monthly streaming plan.

It was the fourth consecutive year the Burbank entertainment giant has boosted its streaming prices since launching Disney+ six years ago, when the service cost just $6.99 a month.

Despite the recent price hikes from Disney and others, Eiley from Convergence Research Group thinks there’s still room for customer growth.

At the end of last year, just 36% of U.S. households had a traditional TV subscription, compared with more than half of U.S. households in mid-2022, according to Convergence Research Group data. By the end of 2028, the research firm forecasts just 21% of households will have traditional TV subscriptions.

“There’s still a massive amount of cord cutting going on,” Eiley said.

Source link