WEBVTT 00:00:00.597 --> 00:00:04.717 Hello, welcome back to the edition podcast. I'm Charlotte Henry. 00:00:05.317 --> 00:00:08.777 Thank you to Clean My Mac from MacPore for sponsoring this week's show. 00:00:09.057 --> 00:00:13.137 And thank you, Mark Stenberg from Adweek for coming back to the show. 00:00:13.237 --> 00:00:15.077 I'm so thrilled to have you here. How are you? 00:00:15.997 --> 00:00:20.497 I'm good. You know, always, always happy to come back on. Yeah, it's been far too long. 00:00:20.977 --> 00:00:25.357 It's a shame though that you're coming on on such a quiet week where there's 00:00:25.357 --> 00:00:30.217 nothing really happening in the world of digital media, medium or broad broadly. 00:00:30.957 --> 00:00:35.217 So it's a quiet time, isn't it? Warner Brothers Discovery. We first had the 00:00:35.217 --> 00:00:38.377 Netflix bid come in and by all accounts be accepted. 00:00:38.777 --> 00:00:45.557 We then had David Ellison wasn't having it. And so we had a hostile bid from Paramount. 00:00:45.717 --> 00:00:48.537 And as we're recording this, something could happen by the time I've edited 00:00:48.537 --> 00:00:52.177 this and put it out. But that's where we stand at the moment where we're recording this. 00:00:53.260 --> 00:00:56.500 Where on earth does this go next mark it's 00:00:56.500 --> 00:00:59.440 such a good question i was i was sort of saying to you i mean this is giving 00:00:59.440 --> 00:01:02.660 me flashbacks a little bit to the when ellison 00:01:02.660 --> 00:01:07.420 was first trying to acquire paramount and it turned into this multi-month saga 00:01:07.420 --> 00:01:13.380 and some reporters i know almost start to get reticent to like cover every twist 00:01:13.380 --> 00:01:17.460 and turn in it because you start to think oh this is going to be you know a 00:01:17.460 --> 00:01:22.480 long hike and we're going to be covering a lot of different uh you know twists to it. 00:01:22.660 --> 00:01:26.520 So your guess in many ways is as good as mine as to where this goes. 00:01:26.680 --> 00:01:30.540 I was just reading some of the latest stuff about like the financial composition 00:01:30.540 --> 00:01:36.240 of the Paramount bid that involves a real coterie of characters and different 00:01:36.240 --> 00:01:40.560 sovereign investment funds and relatives of the president and everything. 00:01:40.740 --> 00:01:44.480 So I think like there's a lot of different angles to parse it from. 00:01:45.100 --> 00:01:50.780 You have to wonder like on some level it comes down to I feel like Netflix has 00:01:50.780 --> 00:01:53.780 more cash and that cash has fewer strings. 00:01:54.020 --> 00:01:59.000 But now you have Paramount putting up a larger offer and it theoretically has 00:01:59.000 --> 00:02:04.140 the political agency by way of Jared Kushner, by way of the Ellison connection, etc. 00:02:04.520 --> 00:02:09.340 So on some level, it becomes what has more weight here, the ear of the president 00:02:09.340 --> 00:02:11.540 or the stronger financial deal. 00:02:12.080 --> 00:02:16.020 Trump himself has said whoever pays the most should get it, which is classic 00:02:16.020 --> 00:02:17.920 art of the deal perspective on it. 00:02:18.020 --> 00:02:20.940 I don't know if he's going to sort of heed his own advice, But I think if it 00:02:20.940 --> 00:02:25.240 did come down to just a money thing, it'll be interesting to see how far Netflix 00:02:25.240 --> 00:02:29.720 will go to match Paramount because Paramount obviously was the one who kicked 00:02:29.720 --> 00:02:32.320 this whole thing off. They're very intent on having this asset. 00:02:32.560 --> 00:02:36.100 Netflix to me seemed like they were sort of just responding to an opportunity. 00:02:36.220 --> 00:02:38.800 So if this really turns into a bidding war. 00:02:39.658 --> 00:02:44.038 How high is Netflix willing to go? Are they going to beat that $30 per share 00:02:44.038 --> 00:02:46.618 that the Ellison's just put up? That would be interesting to see. 00:02:46.818 --> 00:02:52.178 And there is a fundamental difference, isn't there, between the two bids that 00:02:52.178 --> 00:02:57.878 I think is slightly getting lost, which is the Netflix big is just for the Warner 00:02:57.878 --> 00:03:00.058 Brothers stuff, HBO and so on. 00:03:00.478 --> 00:03:05.398 The Paramount bid is for everything. It's for Discovery, Warner Brothers Discovery, 00:03:05.598 --> 00:03:06.678 the whole shooting match. 00:03:07.198 --> 00:03:13.438 Why do you think that is? I think that Netflix knows that it wants no part of the cable industry. 00:03:13.858 --> 00:03:18.338 I think that it wants the I mean, and the fact that Paramount does is almost 00:03:18.338 --> 00:03:21.338 sort of inexplicable. I mean, that was like very counterintuitive. 00:03:21.598 --> 00:03:25.018 Like you have Comcast splitting into cable and streaming. You've got Warner 00:03:25.018 --> 00:03:26.498 Brothers splitting into cable and streaming. 00:03:26.758 --> 00:03:30.998 Everybody's thinking cable is throwing off cash, but it's a melting ice cube. 00:03:31.138 --> 00:03:32.078 Nobody wants to buy that. 00:03:32.258 --> 00:03:35.638 Here comes Alison saying, no, we want the cable elements as well, 00:03:35.738 --> 00:03:38.358 because because Paramount has, you know, a cable portfolio. 00:03:38.958 --> 00:03:41.998 Theoretically, they could combine, you know, the MTVs of the world with the 00:03:41.998 --> 00:03:47.218 CNNs of the world and have a stronger cable portfolio that could be really cash 00:03:47.218 --> 00:03:48.918 generative for many more years. 00:03:49.198 --> 00:03:52.238 But Netflix's logic makes a lot more sense. 00:03:52.398 --> 00:03:55.098 Frankly, it's saying, look, we're only interested in the future of this business, 00:03:55.258 --> 00:03:57.798 not the past, no matter how lucrative it is at the moment. 00:03:57.938 --> 00:04:01.358 But that does, you have like the Hollywood types who are sort of like, 00:04:01.518 --> 00:04:05.518 you know, clutching their pearls, envisioning two different dystopic futures. 00:04:05.518 --> 00:04:09.038 One in which, I mean, both of these, consolidation-wise, you're going to have 00:04:09.038 --> 00:04:11.358 one fewer bidder for IP, for shows, etc. 00:04:11.698 --> 00:04:14.718 That is concerning, but that is just a byproduct of consolidation. 00:04:14.738 --> 00:04:16.318 So I don't see how you get around that. 00:04:16.478 --> 00:04:19.698 The concern with Netflix is that they'll stop putting Warner Brothers movies 00:04:19.698 --> 00:04:23.298 in theaters, right? And so that has, like, Hollywood-type concern. 00:04:23.518 --> 00:04:27.518 And then with Paramount... I'm not convinced that's realistic because we know, 00:04:27.798 --> 00:04:32.638 and I know this from, awful plug here, from researching my book, 00:04:32.758 --> 00:04:35.378 Streaming Wars, out now, great holiday go. 00:04:35.518 --> 00:04:39.458 That Netflix really cares about winning the awards. Hmm. 00:04:40.675 --> 00:04:48.875 So at the worst, it is surely going to let those Warner Brothers movies go into 00:04:48.875 --> 00:04:52.515 theatres for at least the minimum time they need to to get into the award ceremonies. 00:04:54.595 --> 00:04:57.475 Surely. And yeah, and you know, and that's what they're saying. 00:04:57.715 --> 00:05:03.235 But you have their track record versus their promises and nobody can know for 00:05:03.235 --> 00:05:06.095 sure. I would imagine like best case scenario, right? 00:05:06.195 --> 00:05:11.615 Like best case scenario, Netflix puts Warner Brothers movies in theaters for 00:05:11.615 --> 00:05:14.235 the exact same duration that they're in theaters today. 00:05:14.835 --> 00:05:17.855 More likely scenario, it's a reduced version of that. 00:05:18.175 --> 00:05:21.615 Worst case scenario, it's a it's a fraction of that. You know what I mean? 00:05:21.655 --> 00:05:24.695 So it's hard to envision it being the same or better. 00:05:24.915 --> 00:05:28.835 Whereas like the case with Paramount is, OK, they have a studio business as 00:05:28.835 --> 00:05:33.235 well. They have a history of showcasing those in theaters. 00:05:33.675 --> 00:05:38.495 If they were to end up in control of Warner Brothers, there's far less concern 00:05:38.495 --> 00:05:40.035 that that would be in jeopardy. 00:05:40.155 --> 00:05:45.395 But with both, it's, you know, probably not going to be better in the future 00:05:45.395 --> 00:05:47.135 than it is now in terms of like theater showcasing. 00:05:47.815 --> 00:05:52.135 There's so much to come in this story. I'll have you back in a few weeks when we find out more. 00:05:53.215 --> 00:05:57.055 Really reason I wanted you here. well 00:05:57.055 --> 00:05:59.835 there are many reasons I wanted to hang out with you but there are really a sensible reason 00:05:59.835 --> 00:06:06.235 I wanted you on the show is to kind of do both the highlights of the year and 00:06:06.235 --> 00:06:11.935 then look to 2026 and what we think might be coming so you've covered so many 00:06:11.935 --> 00:06:17.975 stories this year including in your new newsletter what for you has stood out about 2025? 00:06:19.871 --> 00:06:25.051 Yeah. Thank you for the plug on background. Great media newsletter once a week. Subscribe to Adweek. 00:06:25.631 --> 00:06:28.271 And it comes out on a different day to the edition. So, you know, 00:06:28.411 --> 00:06:30.291 you can read that and then you can read yours. 00:06:30.551 --> 00:06:34.171 Yeah. Yeah. You know, I think there are a few big trends. The one for me that 00:06:34.171 --> 00:06:38.771 comes up constantly is going to be a subcategory of AI, but specifically the 00:06:38.771 --> 00:06:42.431 declining traffic that publishers are seeing from search. 00:06:42.651 --> 00:06:45.771 For the last few years, social traffic had been dwindling. 00:06:46.011 --> 00:06:50.491 This year, you really saw a drop off. I was talking to people from People Inc. the other day. 00:06:50.631 --> 00:06:55.131 They're saying the last six months, it really accelerated in terms of like that decline. 00:06:55.351 --> 00:06:58.851 So I think a lot of publishers will spin up a narrative about, 00:06:59.111 --> 00:07:04.051 you know, Google's been sending less search, you know, methodically over the last 15 years. 00:07:04.231 --> 00:07:07.391 This is just an incremental, but they're sort of saying that publicly, 00:07:07.591 --> 00:07:10.351 but then privately they're, you know, preparing for Google zero, 00:07:10.751 --> 00:07:13.511 seeing traffic declines of 10 to 40%. 00:07:14.111 --> 00:07:17.471 That's really material to their business. What I'm really curious about is at 00:07:17.471 --> 00:07:19.751 what point does that start to affect their subscription business, 00:07:20.131 --> 00:07:22.831 their commerce business, and not just their advertising business? 00:07:23.631 --> 00:07:28.211 That's been huge. It's a sea change in sort of reading behaviors and consumption 00:07:28.211 --> 00:07:33.251 behaviors that then goes on to spark all these downstream pivots from publishers 00:07:33.251 --> 00:07:34.971 where they're like, if we're not going to get traffic, 00:07:35.211 --> 00:07:36.991 the biggest thing that we're seeing is publishers are saying, 00:07:37.131 --> 00:07:40.631 okay, when we do get a visitor on site, we need to make sure they stay on the 00:07:40.631 --> 00:07:41.911 site way longer than normal. 00:07:41.911 --> 00:07:45.671 So we're using AI to improve recirculation, to make our sites stickier. 00:07:45.871 --> 00:07:46.891 We're trying to be more pragmatic. 00:07:47.111 --> 00:07:50.991 We're leaning into all these other strategies to basically juice engagement. 00:07:51.231 --> 00:07:56.351 So that's huge. I think it's going to be a real extinction moment for a lot 00:07:56.351 --> 00:07:58.391 of independent web-based... Do you mean that sincerely? 00:07:59.571 --> 00:08:03.991 Actually there will be websites and companies that own these websites that just 00:08:03.991 --> 00:08:05.451 go, we can't do this anymore. Goodbye. 00:08:06.111 --> 00:08:11.671 I think so. Unfortunately, I think a lot of independent publishers whose website 00:08:11.671 --> 00:08:16.651 is the front of their business and really the majority of their business, 00:08:16.651 --> 00:08:20.091 I think, are in for a really rough next two years. 00:08:20.271 --> 00:08:24.671 I mean, I just did this story. One sort of tranche of that is what happens to 00:08:24.671 --> 00:08:26.471 independent recipe bloggers, 00:08:26.711 --> 00:08:31.051 which I know are not like the backbone of the economy, But I think you Google 00:08:31.051 --> 00:08:36.051 chicken tzatziki recipe, you're going to get five pages of results all from 00:08:36.051 --> 00:08:37.851 mom and pop independent publications. 00:08:38.291 --> 00:08:41.331 Those kinds of websites are really imperiled. 00:08:42.071 --> 00:08:45.891 And I think if you haven't spent the last few years building on your email list, 00:08:46.011 --> 00:08:48.571 building a subscription list, building out social, building out video, 00:08:48.851 --> 00:08:53.551 building out events. It's like if you just are still like we run a website and 00:08:53.551 --> 00:08:55.511 one website alone, you know what I mean? 00:08:55.571 --> 00:08:59.271 Like maybe you're People Inc and you've got 40 of the biggest websites on the earth. 00:08:59.651 --> 00:09:03.411 That's different. But if you are an independent website operator, 00:09:04.031 --> 00:09:06.451 yeah, you're looking at a tough road to hoe. 00:09:06.631 --> 00:09:10.351 Well, you've really cheered me up. Thank you so much. That's really great to 00:09:10.351 --> 00:09:14.031 go into the holiday season feeling so uplifted. Thank you. 00:09:14.671 --> 00:09:19.131 Well, you know, you've got your, sorry, you've got your, I mean, you built your product. 00:09:19.131 --> 00:09:22.231 As a as a subscription product with an email so 00:09:22.231 --> 00:09:25.851 those are the i don't want to be you know to be callous here but if you have 00:09:25.851 --> 00:09:31.591 made it to 2026 and you still don't have any other sort of like distribution 00:09:31.591 --> 00:09:35.531 vehicle other than hopefully people find us on search then you've not really 00:09:35.531 --> 00:09:39.271 kept up with the times and frankly i i am not going to shed too many tears. 00:09:40.163 --> 00:09:43.523 Talk to me about the conversations about AI you've had this year, 00:09:43.583 --> 00:09:46.923 because I imagine that almost all your conversations, almost every day, 00:09:47.163 --> 00:09:50.543 don't take very long to get to the phrase AI. 00:09:51.543 --> 00:09:55.743 Tell me what's been happening there. What publishers have been doing this year 00:09:55.743 --> 00:09:58.843 to move in with the times, essentially? 00:09:59.443 --> 00:10:04.263 Yeah, I think that related to what I was just saying is this idea of like, 00:10:04.383 --> 00:10:07.843 okay, hey, how are publishers going to be compensated? 00:10:07.943 --> 00:10:13.223 How can they be paid when their data is ingested by LLMs and then regurgitated 00:10:13.223 --> 00:10:15.763 to provide answers in these different answer engines? 00:10:15.903 --> 00:10:19.843 That conversation has been on the tips of everyone's tongues. How can we get paid? 00:10:20.063 --> 00:10:24.803 You've got like 15 one-off deals that OpenAI has done with like Axel Springer 00:10:24.803 --> 00:10:27.963 and The Atlantic and The Financial Times, 00:10:28.183 --> 00:10:31.563 but 99% of content creators and website creators have 00:10:31.563 --> 00:10:34.463 not been paid and there's no system in process for them 00:10:34.463 --> 00:10:37.223 to be paid so tracking development on that front 00:10:37.223 --> 00:10:40.443 has been really interesting to me and something i've had a lot of conversations about 00:10:40.443 --> 00:10:43.263 yeah what do you make of the legal battles because 00:10:43.263 --> 00:10:47.083 we every you know i've seen different deals have been done and not done but 00:10:47.083 --> 00:10:50.903 there have also been some pretty uh raucous legal battles you mentioned the 00:10:50.903 --> 00:10:55.283 new york times for example they've been pretty robust in their stance particularly 00:10:55.283 --> 00:11:00.983 towards open ai am i right and chat in particular how do you see how that has played out this year. 00:11:02.083 --> 00:11:05.863 Frankly, unfortunately, there's not been much of an update. 00:11:06.143 --> 00:11:10.743 I mean, a lot of the updates on that front are the lawsuit has not been dismissed. 00:11:11.043 --> 00:11:14.663 You know what I mean? Or like, so it's like, it's still working its way through 00:11:14.663 --> 00:11:17.823 the courts. And I think OpenAI is obviously, and all these others perplexities 00:11:17.823 --> 00:11:21.023 been sued by a number of publications. It's a multi-year saga. 00:11:21.103 --> 00:11:26.363 And I think, unfortunately, like, I'm so grateful to those publications for doing that. 00:11:26.503 --> 00:11:30.423 But you really start to do this thing where you're like, the world is so different 00:11:30.423 --> 00:11:36.143 from when even that lawsuit was first filed to when it could presumably be close to finishing. 00:11:36.543 --> 00:11:40.663 And the political administration has obviously proven itself to be typically 00:11:40.663 --> 00:11:43.763 more on the side of AI than on, you know, content creators. 00:11:44.063 --> 00:11:51.743 So I don't have a lot of hope that it's some sort of sea change victory for content creation. 00:11:52.723 --> 00:11:58.143 Although it is a good, I mean, I'm looking at Mark Furious that he keeps being so miserable. 00:11:58.143 --> 00:12:02.223 Yeah it's um it's it's tbd 00:12:02.223 --> 00:12:05.243 we have to see how that like pans out but if i were a betting man 00:12:05.243 --> 00:12:08.763 i don't think that the courts are going to find this 00:12:08.763 --> 00:12:13.243 process of ingesting and regurgitating content to be fully in abrogation of 00:12:13.243 --> 00:12:17.683 copyright law and say back it all up you know what i mean undo the last three 00:12:17.683 --> 00:12:21.883 years of ai development i think more likely what we're going to see is i was 00:12:21.883 --> 00:12:25.603 talking to a good source about this last week on some level these models are 00:12:25.603 --> 00:12:27.023 going to can keep getting more sophisticated, 00:12:27.043 --> 00:12:33.583 but the volume of data that exists for them to ingest and train on doesn't grow exponentially. 00:12:33.843 --> 00:12:37.223 In fact, you could argue that they've largely trained on the available data. 00:12:37.463 --> 00:12:39.843 So there's conversations about like synthetic data and that kind of thing. 00:12:40.802 --> 00:12:44.462 However many decades of internet data compared 00:12:44.462 --> 00:12:47.402 to well it will be now months because that they 00:12:47.402 --> 00:12:50.082 will get in future right exactly so the 00:12:50.082 --> 00:12:53.042 question that becomes how much better are these answer engines 00:12:53.042 --> 00:12:55.782 going to get you know what i mean i think there had 00:12:55.782 --> 00:12:59.402 been a lot of concern over they're going to be you know agentic 00:12:59.402 --> 00:13:02.242 avatars are going to replace and it's like we've seen like 00:13:02.242 --> 00:13:05.082 a real plateauing of some of the evolution of these 00:13:05.082 --> 00:13:08.042 models i think jim and i came out and was the most impressive. 00:13:08.042 --> 00:13:11.182 Of the bunch recently but the latest model from chat 00:13:11.182 --> 00:13:13.882 gpt was somewhat underwhelming and i think 00:13:13.882 --> 00:13:16.862 that there's a real reason to believe that without vast new 00:13:16.862 --> 00:13:20.142 troves of training data to be unlocked and with publishers starting 00:13:20.142 --> 00:13:23.282 to link arms and block bots and demand payment 00:13:23.282 --> 00:13:26.222 for crawling we're starting to see the access to 00:13:26.222 --> 00:13:29.162 that available data constrict as well so there's a real question 00:13:29.162 --> 00:13:32.062 as to maybe these publishers sorry maybe these answer engines 00:13:32.062 --> 00:13:35.342 do have to start paying if they want continued access 00:13:35.342 --> 00:13:38.322 to quality data to allow their models to 00:13:38.322 --> 00:13:41.302 continue to improve so i think that there's an argument to 00:13:41.302 --> 00:13:44.322 be to be made that we might be on the cusp of 00:13:44.322 --> 00:13:47.382 maybe in the next year starting to see a marketplace for 00:13:47.382 --> 00:13:50.262 for data scraping to to exist and 00:13:50.262 --> 00:13:53.402 and then that maybe changes the narrative about how sustainable 00:13:53.402 --> 00:13:56.442 it is still to be an independent publisher but a lot 00:13:56.442 --> 00:13:59.202 of interesting we'll come to the future in 00:13:59.202 --> 00:14:02.242 a minute what's been your favorite story that you've 00:14:02.242 --> 00:14:05.422 covered this year and written this year great question 00:14:05.422 --> 00:14:08.222 i think man i have a few of them but i will 00:14:08.222 --> 00:14:11.022 say i think that it's been a really one sort of 00:14:11.022 --> 00:14:13.742 story or trend that like kind of encapsulates a lot 00:14:13.742 --> 00:14:18.822 of sub trends has been i've called this like a coming out year for creator media 00:14:18.822 --> 00:14:24.102 in many ways to find to give you a more encouraging trend thank you for yourself 00:14:24.102 --> 00:14:28.102 specifically i think like whatever your thoughts are on the free press it being 00:14:28.102 --> 00:14:32.262 acquired for 150 million dollars is kind of a watermark moment for like, 00:14:32.442 --> 00:14:35.842 this was a Substack blog four years ago. Yeah. But it's an. 00:14:36.598 --> 00:14:43.498 So I agree with you to a point, but the thing about that is it's still gone. I built this huge thing. 00:14:44.484 --> 00:14:48.804 But actually what we need is daddy to come in and give us 150 million quid and 00:14:48.804 --> 00:14:51.444 go the big, take us back into the big house. 00:14:52.144 --> 00:14:56.164 So I completely agree. I think the free press is on, it's on the spectrum. 00:14:56.324 --> 00:15:01.064 But there are other different success stories that I think reflect different 00:15:01.064 --> 00:15:02.964 possible routes forward. 00:15:03.184 --> 00:15:08.584 I think you've seen like the success of the bulwark or even like a feed me or a dispatch. 00:15:08.764 --> 00:15:12.724 Obsessed. All offering interesting signals. I think one trend that I'm like 00:15:12.724 --> 00:15:16.624 kind of still waiting to write a story about is this new like hybrid model that 00:15:16.624 --> 00:15:18.144 we're seeing between like you 00:15:18.144 --> 00:15:21.364 see like I've seen it specifically with like Alex Heath and Casey Newton, 00:15:21.804 --> 00:15:24.644 but even like Scott Galloway and Kara Swisher a little bit where they're like 00:15:24.644 --> 00:15:29.444 technically independent creators, but then they partner with existing publishers. 00:15:29.444 --> 00:15:33.024 There's even, you could say, I would imagine this is in the future for an Ezra 00:15:33.024 --> 00:15:37.044 Klein or even the odd lots people at Bloomberg are like, there's a thinking 00:15:37.044 --> 00:15:39.204 of rather than going fully solo, 00:15:39.564 --> 00:15:43.444 you kind of go solo, but then you strike a partnership with the publisher where 00:15:43.444 --> 00:15:47.984 they do the sales or the marketing or the distribution, the sort of like unsexy 00:15:47.984 --> 00:15:49.044 business element of it all. 00:15:49.164 --> 00:15:53.824 And then you end up more with this like creator network, a lot of the kind that 00:15:53.824 --> 00:15:56.224 Vox Media is really at work on building. 00:15:56.224 --> 00:15:59.784 And it strikes an interesting balance between you get sort of the benefits of 00:15:59.784 --> 00:16:03.184 being solo, but you get the benefits of having some infrastructure behind you 00:16:03.184 --> 00:16:05.304 to do the unsexy bits of running a business. 00:16:05.564 --> 00:16:07.664 And we have started to see that this year, haven't we? 00:16:08.204 --> 00:16:11.624 Yeah. And I think keeping an eye on that will be really interesting. 00:16:11.864 --> 00:16:15.764 And then sort of like related to that, if I had like one other big trend bucket 00:16:15.764 --> 00:16:20.464 that a lot of things fall into, it's just like the year that video ate the Internet kind of thing. 00:16:20.584 --> 00:16:23.964 I think like you're seeing a lot more publishers embrace social video. 00:16:23.964 --> 00:16:27.164 I think, you know, you've seen the Times and the Washington Post roll out vertical 00:16:27.164 --> 00:16:28.484 video feeds on their app. 00:16:28.624 --> 00:16:33.364 Again, sort of like replicating TikTok with podcasts, which are now vodcasts. 00:16:33.464 --> 00:16:36.444 There's actually some some data coming out on Wednesday. 00:16:36.564 --> 00:16:38.824 And I think us being on this podcast sort of exemplifies it. 00:16:39.024 --> 00:16:42.464 71% of podcasts now have video elements. 00:16:42.824 --> 00:16:47.984 Only 29% are audio only. I don't know how that switched year over year. I finally succumbed. 00:16:48.590 --> 00:16:53.330 I have to imagine it's a pretty dramatic change, especially from two years ago. 00:16:53.330 --> 00:16:59.710 So I think that has had massive implications for how people find new podcasts 00:16:59.710 --> 00:17:01.450 and learn about new creators. 00:17:01.670 --> 00:17:04.330 And then I think the really interesting thing that I wrote a story about a few 00:17:04.330 --> 00:17:09.750 weeks ago was like, I think this positions YouTube as if it needed more advantages 00:17:09.750 --> 00:17:12.750 to be more of a central figure in the media space. 00:17:12.830 --> 00:17:15.830 And I wrote a story that's like, it's going to be the next big media incubator. 00:17:15.830 --> 00:17:17.910 What Substack was over the next few years. 00:17:18.110 --> 00:17:22.350 You're now seeing creators, even like journalism creators, like Taylor Lorenz 00:17:22.350 --> 00:17:26.410 and Tara Palmieri and Dave Jorgensen and Nicholas Carlson say, 00:17:26.590 --> 00:17:30.010 I'm starting a new media business. My homepage is going to be YouTube. 00:17:30.770 --> 00:17:34.930 And so I think that's a really interesting- It's absolutely fascinating. 00:17:34.930 --> 00:17:40.510 We'll look to the future in a minute, but I just want to thank CleanMyMac from 00:17:40.510 --> 00:17:42.290 MapHore for sponsoring this show. 00:17:42.910 --> 00:17:47.450 This week's episode is sponsored by CleanMyMac. I'm thrilled they're supporting 00:17:47.450 --> 00:17:49.930 this show because I'm a big fan of the product. 00:17:50.190 --> 00:17:53.170 During the holiday season, people bake cookies, share treats, 00:17:53.370 --> 00:17:55.570 and wrap up work before the year ends. 00:17:56.170 --> 00:18:00.770 It's also where Macs get overloaded with digital cookies, cash files and system 00:18:00.770 --> 00:18:03.230 junk piling up after months of use. 00:18:03.570 --> 00:18:06.870 The season's warmth meets its busiest tech moment. 00:18:07.330 --> 00:18:09.990 Holiday joy collides with digital clutter. 00:18:10.850 --> 00:18:14.650 Clean My Mac clears the wrong cookies so you can enjoy the right ones. 00:18:15.090 --> 00:18:18.310 Holidays taste better without Mac junk on the menu. 00:18:18.570 --> 00:18:22.570 Clean My Mac is your digital cookie cutter for a fresh start. 00:18:22.570 --> 00:18:26.930 The wrong cookies slow down your Mac. The right ones sweeten your holidays. 00:18:27.290 --> 00:18:31.050 And CleanMyMac has helped me keep my machines running smoothly for years. 00:18:31.370 --> 00:18:38.370 Get tidy today. Try seven days free and use my code ADDITION for 20% off at 00:18:38.370 --> 00:18:43.970 clny.com slash A-D-D-I-T-I-O-N. 00:18:44.090 --> 00:18:53.570 That's clny.com slash ADDITION A-D-D-I-T-I-O-N. all uppercase. 00:18:53.710 --> 00:18:56.670 Thanks to CleanMyMac for supporting the show. 00:18:57.070 --> 00:19:00.110 So then, let's look ahead to the new year. 00:19:01.679 --> 00:19:06.499 What's the big story of 2026? You don't get to say AI, because that's been the story of 2025. 00:19:07.039 --> 00:19:13.759 I always joke that the metaverse and crypto were the stories of 2024 and then the 1st of January 2025. 00:19:15.039 --> 00:19:18.919 Everyone got changed to talk about AI. What's going to be the new thing in 26? 00:19:20.419 --> 00:19:24.439 I think it continues to be from a media perspective. 00:19:24.719 --> 00:19:27.899 I think the sort of two major extensions of trends that I just talked about, 00:19:28.039 --> 00:19:32.839 the creatorification of media, both in terms of how we talked about these sort 00:19:32.839 --> 00:19:36.359 of creator-publisher partnerships. I think we're gonna see more of those. 00:19:36.519 --> 00:19:40.579 I think we're gonna see publishers treating their top talent more like creators. 00:19:40.599 --> 00:19:46.039 I think they're gonna continue to put more faces on videos and create more social 00:19:46.039 --> 00:19:47.559 video and have more podcasts. 00:19:47.799 --> 00:19:51.679 And basically institutions that were sort of faceless and nameless for a long 00:19:51.679 --> 00:19:55.179 time are increasingly following the lead of influencers and saying, 00:19:55.239 --> 00:19:56.799 we have to lead with personality. 00:19:56.799 --> 00:20:02.839 We have to put people on camera and we're going to see that become more foregrounded in their offerings. 00:20:03.099 --> 00:20:07.319 I do agree with that. Well, I think an interesting corollary to that that ties 00:20:07.319 --> 00:20:11.199 with this sort of videification thing is I'm always trying to think of like. 00:20:11.659 --> 00:20:12.939 Okay, I don't know how it is for you. 00:20:13.059 --> 00:20:16.399 If you look at my feed nowadays, it's a million different videos. 00:20:16.699 --> 00:20:20.379 They're often like very amateur, which is theoretically a draw. 00:20:20.639 --> 00:20:25.879 I think what we're going to start seeing is publishers creating social video 00:20:25.879 --> 00:20:29.919 that more closely resembles what news shows used to look like. 00:20:30.039 --> 00:20:34.459 Or basically, we're going to see the quality of those social video productions 00:20:34.459 --> 00:20:38.299 continue to increase and be produced at a more rapid pace. 00:20:38.579 --> 00:20:41.839 So I think like your social feeds are going to look more like TV. 00:20:42.159 --> 00:20:46.499 And I think that publishers, their contributions to that are going to be those 00:20:46.499 --> 00:20:50.759 products or those outputs are going to look more like premium news television. 00:20:50.979 --> 00:20:56.439 So I think that could be an interesting trend. I'll say on a more depressing note, I think that... 00:20:57.970 --> 00:21:01.550 Consolidation is going to continue. I think specifically lifestyle media. 00:21:02.130 --> 00:21:06.370 If you're a lifestyle media publisher and you don't have some sort of B2B arm 00:21:06.370 --> 00:21:09.130 or you don't have some sort of professional audience that you're serving, 00:21:09.230 --> 00:21:12.310 like I think Vogue's done a relatively admirable job of saying, 00:21:12.450 --> 00:21:14.690 okay, we're going to have Vogue Professional or something like that. 00:21:14.790 --> 00:21:19.710 Like if you are just catering to fashion or lifestyle or health and wellness 00:21:19.710 --> 00:21:22.750 or whatever, that is increasingly the domain of social media creators. 00:21:22.950 --> 00:21:26.630 So unless if you're a publisher, unless you're dominated on social media, 00:21:26.910 --> 00:21:31.090 or unless you are serving an audience that is willing to pay for information, 00:21:31.410 --> 00:21:35.570 I think we're going to see the Condé Nasts and the Hearsts and the others of 00:21:35.570 --> 00:21:40.730 their ilk shudder a lot more of this sort of second tier publications in those portfolios. 00:21:40.850 --> 00:21:45.010 The big ones, there's two to three lifestyle publishers in every category are 00:21:45.010 --> 00:21:46.830 going to make it and they're going to get really big. 00:21:46.910 --> 00:21:51.770 But I think the also-rans are going to really see the end of their road in the 00:21:51.770 --> 00:21:53.950 next year or so. So a little sad. 00:21:54.670 --> 00:22:01.310 For me, I think next year, I agree with you about the creatification of media, 00:22:01.550 --> 00:22:04.790 for one thing. I think we're seeing that already. 00:22:05.110 --> 00:22:09.730 You mentioned Kara Swisher and Scott Galloway, Emily Sundberg, Ezra Klein, I think. 00:22:09.890 --> 00:22:12.910 How many people that watch or listen to Ezra Klein show know he's actually a 00:22:12.910 --> 00:22:13.950 New York Times columnist? 00:22:14.130 --> 00:22:17.430 I would get not as many as know about his podcast. 00:22:17.690 --> 00:22:20.670 I would guess there's a significant proportion of his listeners 00:22:20.670 --> 00:22:23.470 slash viewers that do not 00:22:23.470 --> 00:22:29.310 know he's a new york times columnist i would guess yeah and so i think that 00:22:29.310 --> 00:22:33.850 is going to matter i think personality and personal connection really does matter 00:22:33.850 --> 00:22:40.690 but i also wonder if publishers have actually learned from the past how and 00:22:40.690 --> 00:22:42.450 are we going to see that in 2026. 00:22:43.530 --> 00:22:48.490 Whereby you know we gave up everything to facebook and the infamous pivot to video, 00:22:49.170 --> 00:22:53.970 they gave up everything to the social platforms more broadly oh my god you've 00:22:53.970 --> 00:22:56.270 got to pump everything out on twitter because it's going to send all the links 00:22:56.270 --> 00:22:59.830 this way until elon musk decides he doesn't want to send links your way anymore. 00:23:01.085 --> 00:23:05.945 And I wonder if in 2026, people are going to do a bit more, for example, 00:23:06.085 --> 00:23:11.565 what Nilay Patel has done at The Verge and gone, no, no, if you want The Verge, 00:23:11.645 --> 00:23:13.165 you have to come to theverge.com. 00:23:13.425 --> 00:23:19.885 And we have a dedicated enough fan base in an important enough niche that actually 00:23:19.885 --> 00:23:23.725 we can get away with that. I think it's very hard, and I think it's particularly 00:23:23.725 --> 00:23:25.385 hard for general news outlets. 00:23:25.765 --> 00:23:31.445 And we've seen that already. But I wonder if in next year, people are going to go, 00:23:31.845 --> 00:23:35.805 yeah, we need to be where people are, but also they need to come to us because 00:23:35.805 --> 00:23:40.865 we can't just hand it over to people who can tweak an algorithm at any given moment. 00:23:40.865 --> 00:23:44.505 I hope we see in 26 that people have actually learned from their mistakes. 00:23:44.805 --> 00:23:48.865 Yeah, that's a really interesting. I mean, that has been a constant source of 00:23:48.865 --> 00:23:52.165 tension in the media industry for at least the last decade. 00:23:52.345 --> 00:23:57.065 Do you fish where the fish are or do you try to get the fish back to your pond? 00:23:57.245 --> 00:24:00.385 And I think like a lot of publishers have said, yeah, we'll do both at the same time. 00:24:00.605 --> 00:24:05.385 I think that I actually was like at a panel a few months ago and somebody asked 00:24:05.385 --> 00:24:10.425 me, I was telling this story, the Dallas Morning News got bought by Hearst for like $88 million. 00:24:10.965 --> 00:24:14.805 They'd been independently owned for 140 years. I was talking to their CEO. 00:24:14.805 --> 00:24:17.725 I said you know why sell now and he 00:24:17.725 --> 00:24:20.785 basically said AI and I said 00:24:20.785 --> 00:24:23.965 y'all were around when the internet came to 00:24:23.965 --> 00:24:27.865 be y'all were around when social media came to be you didn't sell then you know 00:24:27.865 --> 00:24:32.425 sort of what's different about AI and the feeling was whereas those two elements 00:24:32.425 --> 00:24:37.385 those those two innovations sort of opened up new markets the advent of AI really 00:24:37.385 --> 00:24:41.965 feels like it's closing down or reducing the size of the open internet. 00:24:42.245 --> 00:24:46.285 And that's the real concern. And so I've always been an advocate for like create 00:24:46.285 --> 00:24:48.485 content that makes people need to come to your website. 00:24:48.725 --> 00:24:50.665 But I think you're starting to see publishers. 00:24:51.462 --> 00:24:56.082 I would say, increasingly kind of face the music and say, it's getting really 00:24:56.082 --> 00:24:59.842 hard for people to come to our website. We're seeing fewer people come to our website. 00:25:00.482 --> 00:25:04.302 We need to go to those places where they are and set up camp there. 00:25:04.462 --> 00:25:06.282 And I think you see this with like the Daily Beast. 00:25:06.462 --> 00:25:11.182 They've like, they treat Substack as a different surface area for them to sell 00:25:11.182 --> 00:25:13.222 into. And they treat YouTube as a different area. 00:25:13.382 --> 00:25:20.002 And the idea of like website as home base is going to, I actually have that is one of my trends. 00:25:20.282 --> 00:25:24.002 I said sort of the open web becomes more showcased than storefront. 00:25:24.182 --> 00:25:29.182 It's where maybe a small percentage of your audience goes, your content lives there. 00:25:29.362 --> 00:25:31.762 It communicates a brand message if someone's looking for you. 00:25:31.862 --> 00:25:36.022 But I see this as like publishers increasingly being, imagine you don't have 00:25:36.022 --> 00:25:38.502 a website, you know, imagine that the internet doesn't exist. 00:25:38.642 --> 00:25:42.562 You're distributed. You have podcasts, you have newsletters, 00:25:42.802 --> 00:25:45.062 you have social, you're on YouTube. 00:25:45.622 --> 00:25:48.762 And you, of course, you still have your website. But the idea, especially 00:25:48.762 --> 00:25:51.962 with the way answer engines are changing consumer habits 00:25:51.962 --> 00:25:54.782 the idea that like you're going to get many people to 00:25:54.782 --> 00:25:57.602 your website needs to be kind of a 00:25:57.602 --> 00:26:00.302 nice to have rather than a necessity for your 00:26:00.302 --> 00:26:05.062 business i suspect you're going to be proven right and i think that's a real 00:26:05.062 --> 00:26:08.882 shame because not just because i grew up in the era of the open internet and 00:26:08.882 --> 00:26:13.902 i like browsing different websites or whatever that's fine i understand i'm 00:26:13.902 --> 00:26:19.722 an outlier but I think it's also giving up and I think it's succumbing to a trend. 00:26:20.922 --> 00:26:24.482 Where we should have learned already not to just succumb to trends now I think 00:26:24.482 --> 00:26:29.922 AI different is different to social media trends because there will be things 00:26:29.922 --> 00:26:35.222 in very pretty much where AI will be transformative at least to a point but 00:26:35.222 --> 00:26:38.602 if you're saying if you're just giving up. 00:26:39.723 --> 00:26:43.343 And say, no, we don't need people to come to our website. We're going to allow 00:26:43.343 --> 00:26:48.163 these other platforms to dictate who sees our work, how they see our work, 00:26:48.263 --> 00:26:51.883 when they see our work. I think you're asking for trouble. 00:26:52.723 --> 00:26:55.343 Yeah. And I will say like the sort of, I didn't mention this, 00:26:55.963 --> 00:27:00.383 it goes unsaid, but it shouldn't. We're seeing a lot of publishers launch apps. 00:27:00.963 --> 00:27:04.803 Yeah. That was literally the subject of my last newsletter. I don't know why 00:27:04.803 --> 00:27:06.103 I haven't brought it up until now. 00:27:06.623 --> 00:27:10.603 But like, that is absolutely a knock on implication of all of this. 00:27:10.743 --> 00:27:13.843 And that's, I don't, I don't think that's, that's not a giving up that's saying, 00:27:13.943 --> 00:27:17.543 okay, people aren't going to go to our website, but if we push them to our app 00:27:17.543 --> 00:27:23.083 and you know, then we control that experience, the circulation rates are way greater. 00:27:23.223 --> 00:27:24.823 The conversion rates are greater. 00:27:24.983 --> 00:27:27.943 So I think I was talking to somebody who works in SEO the other 00:27:27.943 --> 00:27:31.243 day and she was saying it's become a greater priority 00:27:31.243 --> 00:27:34.123 than ever to push people to app because it's 00:27:34.123 --> 00:27:37.543 just getting so hard for people to find you in search so that's 00:27:37.543 --> 00:27:40.843 a way of sort of like splitting the baby a little bit you're maybe saying to 00:27:40.843 --> 00:27:45.223 yourself the website might be a thing in the past but people coming to our destination 00:27:45.223 --> 00:27:48.663 to consume our car that doesn't have to change it just might be app instead 00:27:48.663 --> 00:27:52.223 of website yeah that doesn't also doesn't matter if it's a newsletter archive 00:27:52.223 --> 00:27:55.283 because people can't find you in their inbox I'm just always sceptical. 00:27:55.463 --> 00:28:01.163 And I do think in 2026, people are going to, I hope they're going to plant their 00:28:01.163 --> 00:28:04.803 flag in the ground a bit and say, no, this is where we are. 00:28:05.463 --> 00:28:09.103 Yeah, you can, we post a newsletter on Substack as well. 00:28:09.283 --> 00:28:13.843 Yeah, you can follow our YouTube video feed because it's the best place to publish 00:28:13.843 --> 00:28:16.563 video. But really, you want the full experience. 00:28:17.563 --> 00:28:19.983 Come to us. Yeah, subscribe to the. 00:28:23.903 --> 00:28:28.503 About, as you've hinted at from last year or this year, 2026 is also going to 00:28:28.503 --> 00:28:31.923 have to be about building connections between the audience. 00:28:32.283 --> 00:28:35.103 You can't, one thing is for sure, whatever I think or like. 00:28:35.772 --> 00:28:40.952 You're not in 2026 going to get away with hoping someone puts your search term 00:28:40.952 --> 00:28:45.472 into Google and clicks to your website. You are going to have to build a loyalty, 00:28:45.752 --> 00:28:47.852 an audience and a connection with that audience. 00:28:48.232 --> 00:28:52.472 Well, and I will say like on the website argument, I think a really relevant 00:28:52.472 --> 00:28:53.052 trend that we're seeing. 00:28:53.192 --> 00:28:56.892 So AI gets sort of positioned in so many ways as threat and in many ways it 00:28:56.892 --> 00:29:00.072 is, but it is also opportunity. And you're specifically seeing that. 00:29:00.172 --> 00:29:05.392 I've got a story probably coming out tomorrow about Time Magazine that has struck 00:29:05.392 --> 00:29:08.732 this big partnership over the last year with like a transformation agency. 00:29:09.032 --> 00:29:13.512 They re-architected all their data so that it can be more easily accessed. 00:29:13.512 --> 00:29:17.372 And they've started, that took six months or so. And now they're using that 00:29:17.372 --> 00:29:20.972 data to build out all these bespoke AI products that live on their website. 00:29:21.232 --> 00:29:24.952 They're basically redesigning the site to be far stickier. 00:29:25.092 --> 00:29:31.812 And they've seen a 22% increase in ad revenue, a 53% increase in user engagement, 00:29:31.992 --> 00:29:33.972 nearly a tripling of homepage revenue. 00:29:34.152 --> 00:29:38.252 And I think you've seen this with other sites to the verge, which you mentioned 00:29:38.252 --> 00:29:40.632 did a site redesign specifically to make it stickier. 00:29:40.832 --> 00:29:44.532 I've seen this with apartment therapy. You're seeing this with a lot of leading 00:29:44.532 --> 00:29:48.632 publishers where they're saying Newsweek did a big redesign that's got AI kind 00:29:48.632 --> 00:29:50.072 of infused into every element of it. 00:29:50.232 --> 00:29:54.052 They're saying, yes, we're going to get fewer visitors, but using AI, 00:29:54.052 --> 00:29:58.992 we can do a way better job of determining what this individual user likes very 00:29:58.992 --> 00:30:01.452 quickly and then show them a lot more of that content. 00:30:02.032 --> 00:30:06.352 And whether it's even using like answer engines on site, like USA Today has 00:30:06.352 --> 00:30:11.732 this widget that's created by an ad tech company where, and now Time has this too. 00:30:11.732 --> 00:30:17.192 You're on the site and you can interact with it like a chat gpt but it's only 00:30:17.192 --> 00:30:22.272 giving you answers from the data that the website has kind of thing so it's 00:30:22.272 --> 00:30:25.552 like times giving you so basically we're saying okay a few people are visiting 00:30:25.552 --> 00:30:29.132 websites sure but we can use this technology to make sure that each one of those 00:30:29.132 --> 00:30:31.292 visits counts for a lot more so, 00:30:32.162 --> 00:30:36.922 That makes a lot of sense. My final prediction is I think we're still going 00:30:36.922 --> 00:30:39.922 to see a continuing growth in connection to physical media. 00:30:40.162 --> 00:30:45.722 I think as everything becomes AI-fied and sort of much more slop. 00:30:46.642 --> 00:30:50.142 I think people are going to really want tangible stuff, whether it's the vinyl 00:30:50.142 --> 00:30:54.162 records that are behind me, the magazines that are cluttering up my flat, whatever. 00:30:54.162 --> 00:30:59.502 I think people are going to grow a bigger connection to physical media as well. 00:30:59.502 --> 00:31:02.842 My other prediction is, of course, that Mark Stenberg will be back next year. 00:31:02.922 --> 00:31:06.442 He's not going to escape for so long this time. I'm so grateful to have you, 00:31:06.582 --> 00:31:07.822 Mark. How can people keep up with you? 00:31:08.982 --> 00:31:13.422 You can just find my work on adweek.com. I write the newsletter on Background, 00:31:13.702 --> 00:31:18.382 which you can subscribe to and then follow me on Instagram. 00:31:18.502 --> 00:31:20.902 I'm no longer even promoting my Twitter at this point. 00:31:21.602 --> 00:31:24.882 Wow. Follow me on Instagram. Yeah, Mark Stenberg. It's quite fun. 00:31:24.882 --> 00:31:31.982 And I enjoy seeing your sort of various sporting and eating journeys over on Instagram. 00:31:32.222 --> 00:31:36.082 I'm Charlotte Henry, and you can follow me at Charlotte Henry across almost 00:31:36.082 --> 00:31:37.382 every social media platform. 00:31:37.622 --> 00:31:41.742 And head to the edition.net, yes, the website, where you can read newsletter 00:31:41.742 --> 00:31:44.382 archives, blog posts, see videos and so on. 00:31:44.522 --> 00:31:47.662 And subscribe to the newsletter there, which I hope you do. 00:31:47.882 --> 00:31:50.822 And my latest book, Streaming Wars, is out as well. 00:31:50.902 --> 00:31:53.242 So I hope you pick that up from wherever you get your books. 00:31:53.242 --> 00:31:57.602 Thanks thank you once again mark and i'll see you all well i'll see you all 00:31:57.602 --> 00:32:03.782 next year because this is the last show proper for 2025 there'll be a tv plus 00:32:03.782 --> 00:32:09.222 talk come out but this is the last show like this so have a very merry christmas and a happy new year.