• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

This is terrible news for the future of on-air talent

I think it is more likely than not A.I. will prove tremendously destructive to the availability of on-air jobs.

Both Audacy and Beasley are mentioning "A.I." in their corporate-speak blather these days. They probably are not alone, but those happen to be the two examples I've seen firsthand.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out how they wish to deploy it.

 
I think it is more likely than not A.I. will prove tremendously destructive to the availability of on-air jobs.

What else is new? My take on it is this: If it sucks, and people don't like it, they won't listen, and the stations won't make money.

On the other hand, there are already a lot of stations that have zero audience. So this is a cost effective way to fill the time.

There are a lot of voice jobs that real talent don't like doing. This is a way to get it done.

So I think there's a place for it. But not every place is appropriate.
 
There are a lot of voice jobs that real talent don't like doing. This is a way to get it done.

Most of the talent I know of are very busy doing voicetracking among other things. You're right, they probably don't like it very much but you know what they do like? Being employed and being able to pay their bills and raise their families.

A.I. is going to kill countless jobs whether they're in radio or elsewhere. It's going to be far worse than what happened when all the American manufacturing jobs got outsourced to China because with A.I. the transformation is going to happen much faster, and the rate of unemployment is going to take off like a rocket.

As for radio, music stations are already heavily voicetracked outside of mornings so it seems clear that A.I. voices will take over from humans doing that job. The corporations understand those jocks are tracking multiple stations in faraway markets with little connection to each one these days, and that makes them expendable. Since they're not providing any real companionship anymore, does it really matter if a pleasant A.I. voice is reading the liner or introducing the song?

Your casual, "this is a way to get it done" attitude when talking about mass firings is pretty contemptible but we can't say you're wrong. That's inevitably the phrase being uttered in every corporate boardroom right about now. If it leads to bigger bonuses in the C-Suite, they will always "get it done".
 
A.I. is going to kill countless jobs whether they're in radio or elsewhere.

Maybe. Then again, there's something called AFTRA. Do you know what that is? They're signing up radio stations across the country. SAG-AFTRA signed a very lucrative contract with the movie studios last summer. That contract was all about AI. So if people are concerned about their jobs, maybe they should look into getting signed with AFTRA.

If it leads to bigger bonuses in the C-Suite, they will always "get it done".

Everybody is looking out for themselves. That includes the management. No big surprise. Getting a job is not accepting charity. It's a business just like everything else. Management signs big contracts. Maybe other parts of the food chain should look into doing that. I'm a big fan of every part of the industry becoming more professional, and that begins with a contract.
 
Last edited:
When Corporate CEOs and other top executives are replaced by AI then the technology will have truly arrived.:oops::ROFLMAO:

I can see an AI management software package that would replace all those people. You can call it the "C-Suite Suite".🤪
AI can replace some management functions, but not all.
 
Maybe. Then again, there's something called AFTRA. Do you know what that is? They're signing up radio stations across the country. SAG-AFTRA signed a very lucrative contract with the movie studios last summer. That contract was all about AI. So if people are concerned about their jobs, maybe they should look into getting signed with AFTRA.
Much like buggy-whip manufacturers did when automobile came around, those of us who are / were in the business don't want to talk about it, but broadcast radio is in the first aid station at best....headed for the ER....then the ICU. Yeah, we can point here and there, twist the numbers around, etc., but the industry is NOT healthy. A while back someone quoted a survey stating that "ONLY 30% of listening by those under 15 was streaming...as if that was a big win for radio. Incredibly short sighted.

Unionization will just add larger nails to the coffin.

Our opinions here in the industry don't matter, and young people simply don't bother much with broadcast radio. My car immediately signs into my phone and plays my YouTube Music; I don't have to do a thing. Exactly the music I like, no commercials, no voice tracked garbage, no AI.

Union or no union, when the needle moves into the red, or other business opportunities look better, the fat lady has sung. The unionization will just move the process along faster.
 
Maybe. Then again, there's something called AFTRA. Do you know what that is? They're signing up radio stations across the country. SAG-AFTRA signed a very lucrative contract with the movie studios last summer. That contract was all about AI. So if people are concerned about their jobs, maybe they should look into getting signed with AFTRA.
Very, very few stations and mostly just ones in major, major markets have union representation.

None of the stations I worked with in Miami, Dallas, Houston, Chicago, LA, San Diego, San Francisco, Phoenix and other larger US markets had union representation for the staff. All were leading stations in their markets.
 
Yep. Just ask the thousands of former newspaper people who thought membership in the Newspaper Guild would save their jobs no matter how bad things got for the industry.
There are many cases where a union is the only way for staff members to go. But if there is open management to staff and back dialogue and fair pay and benefits, unionization only encourages automation.

I walked into a union shop in Puerto Rico where the AM and FM were, respectively, dead last and a "no-show" in ratings and could not even stay on the air a full day at a time... despite 6 full timers sitting at the transmitter site. I had to take both off the air and rebuild as the staff had destroyed the equipment.

I started hiring a new airstaff and one of them called for a decertification before we went back on. 18 to 6 and the union was decertified, not before the union rep had pulled a gun on me outside the NLRB office! We went back on the air, and in 90 days the AM was #1 in women and #2 overall and the FM had the highest FM share in the market. Everyone was paid more than the union rate, and there were ratings bonuses and lots of perks, too.

I was "tripped" and accidentally kicked 6 times at WERC in Birmingham. Decertified three months later. On the other hand, I helped organize a "company committee" (Spanish term for independent one-company union) in Ecuador because, with about 100 employees, I could not work with every one all the time. The result was discovering some things I did that the staff disliked... and correcting them... and setting up a plan for incentives, pay evaluation and the like that improved morale a lot! Among them I'd even go to "union parties" at their homes as a friend... many still email me and cross post on Facebook!

The key is cooperation for a common goal that benefits owners and the staff alike. When it turns adversarial, nobody wins... just what the Newspaper Guild brought on itself.
 
Very, very few stations and mostly just ones in major, major markets have union representation.

None of the stations I worked with in Miami, Dallas, Houston, Chicago, LA, San Diego, San Francisco, Phoenix and other larger US markets had union representation for the staff. All were leading stations in their markets.

This is a recent thing. In a lot of cases, they're doing it specifically about AI:



Some red states are passing laws about AI:


Talk about federal regulation as well:

 
Unions are a great idea, but they can't save jobs in an industry if that industry has other more pressing issues.

Sure, maybe joining a union will help save present day radio voice talent. Or not. I mean, in the case of newspapers, mentioned upthread, unionization could only do so much. The introduction of free internet ads reduced newspaper revenues by 40% within a couple years in the late 1990's, which eventually caused job losses as papers combined or folded. Unions unfortunately couldn't prevent that.

It looks like Radio is facing similar challenges, AI or no AI.
 
I think there's room for both. I've been experimenting with AI for some classical music programming we air on Sundays. The intros sound natural and the pronunciation is right (oddly enough). I won't use it for all the station's programming, especially not for our jazz shows. But in some cases, AI does work and can be a real time saver.
 
I think there's room for both. I've been experimenting with AI for some classical music programming we air on Sundays. The intros sound natural and the pronunciation is right (oddly enough). I won't use it for all the station's programming, especially not for our jazz shows. But in some cases, AI does work and can be a real time saver.
Synthesized voices have come a long way. Remember "Perfect Paul," the artificial voice of NOAA weather radio? "He" had a vaguely Scandinavian accent, and the phrasing was never quite right. Now, you can scarcely tell the difference.
 
And the "new" NOAA weather radio voice is 10 year old tech. It's much more intelligible than old "Perfect Paul", but no one is listening to it thinking they're hearing a real person speak. The main tell is it has the same inflection every time it says "mostly cloudy."

The newest tech is nearly indistinguishable from an actual speaker. This company has a sample of a narration of a couple paragraphs from Tolkien's "Hobbit" on their web page (look for "audiobook") that is pretty convincing, even if they put a lot of effort into getting this sample just right. AI Voice Generator & Text to Speech
 
Synthesized voices have come a long way. Remember "Perfect Paul," the artificial voice of NOAA weather radio? "He" had a vaguely Scandinavian accent, and the phrasing was never quite right. Now, you can scarcely tell the difference.
The local NWS had an Open House several years ago and we discussed the automated alerts. They worked very hard on the pronunciations.
 
Back
Top Bottom