Ever since electric vehicles hit the market, the future of this industry has been full of commentaries and, in this article the authors left out more of the consumer optional burgeoning preference of the Hybrid market. In my opinion, I can't wait 'till the countries around the world move away from fossil fuel transportation as climate change may be linked to ongoing fossil fuel environmental tragedies such as the severity of weather and disastrous fires! Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D.

Commentary

EV Owners Report Being Happier Than Ever

• by Tanya Gazdik , Staff Writer, 60 minutes ago

Despite volatility in electric vehicle sales, current owners report a new high in satisfaction.

That’s according to the JD Power 2026 U.S. Electric Vehicle Experience (EVX) Ownership Study.

Overall satisfaction among current battery electric vehicle (BEV) owners is at its highest level since the study’s inception in 2021. Notably, nearly all owners of new BEVs (96%) say they would consider purchasing or leasing another BEV for their next vehicle.

The Tesla Model 3 ranks the highest overall followed by the Tesla Model Y and BMW i4. The Ford Mustang Mach-E ranks highest among mass market brands followed by the Hyundai Ioniq 6 and Kia EV9.

EV market share declined sharply following the discontinuation of the federal tax credit program in September 2025.

“But that dip belies steadily growing customer satisfaction among owners of new EVs,” said Brent Gruber, executive director of the EV practice at JD Power in a release. ”What’s more, the vast majority of current EV owners say they will consider purchasing another EV for their next vehicle, regardless of whether they benefited from the now-expired federal tax credit.”

The availability of public charging is by far the most improved index factor in both premium and mass market BEV segments. Satisfaction among premium battery electric vehicle (BEV) owners is 652 (on a 1,000-point scale) and 511 among mass market owners, up 101 and 115 points, respectively, year over year. 

The continued growth of publicly available chargers and the opening of the Tesla Supercharger network to non-Tesla models have notably improved satisfaction among mass market BEV owners during the past several years. Furthermore, satisfaction among Tesla owners is rebounding as they adapt to the expanded access of the charging network.

BEVs continue to have higher satisfaction than plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs). Overall satisfaction continues to be higher among BEV owners in both the premium (786) and mass market (727) segments versus comparable PHEV owners, particularly when it comes to satisfaction with the cost of ownership. 

Premium BEVs score 114 points higher than premium PHEVs in this area, while mass market BEVs outperform their PHEV counterparts by 117 points. Although PHEVs benefit from improved battery performance compared with traditional internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles, they still carry the maintenance requirements of an internal combustion engine—cost and service needs that BEVs are able to avoid entirely.

The U.S. Electric Vehicle Experience (EVX) Ownership Study, now in its sixth year, focuses on the crucial first year of ownership.The 2026 study includes 10 factors (in alphabetical order): accuracy of stated battery range; availability of public charging stations; battery range; cost of ownership; driving enjoyment; ease of charging at home; interior and exterior styling; safety and technology features; service experience; and vehicle quality and reliability.

The study is conducted in collaboration with PlugShare, the leading EV driver app maker and research firm. This study sets the standard for benchmarking satisfaction with the critical attributes that affect the total or overall EV ownership experience for both BEV and PHEV vehicles. 

Survey respondents for the 2026 study include 5,741 owners of 2025 and 2026 model-year BEVs and PHEVs. The study was fielded from August through December 2025.  

 Looking how best to market to the moms of Generation Z ?  Here's some marketing tips for local-direct businesses you may want to share with how best to market their business to busy moms: Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D.

  

Commentary

The 3 A's of Marketing to The Gen Z Parent

• by Maria Bailey , Columnist, 2 hours ago

Gen Z parents are not shopping the way millennials did. They’re not starting with a brand website. They’re not relying on polished ads. And they’re definitely not trusting one sponsored Instagram post. Gen Z moms and dads are intentional and purposeful as they curate parenthood. They are discovering, validating, and deciding what to buy in entirely new ways.

If you want to win with Gen Z parents, you need to master the 3 A’s.

AI: Be Where Discovery Starts

Discovery no longer begins with a Google search bar. It begins inside AI tools. You may have seen this in your own online behavior.  When was the last time you clicked on a blue link?

Parents are asking: 

• What’s the best stroller for city living?
• Is this diaper brand worth the price?
• What baby wash is safest for sensitive skin?

And long language models are delivering answers from AI-driven environments like ChatGPT, Google AI Overviews, and search engines that summarize the web instead of sending traffic to it.

For brands trying to reach Gen Z moms and dads, it’s imperative to show up in AI search. If your product is not mentioned in trusted content across blogs, Reddit threads, YouTube transcripts, reviews, and retail listings, AI will not surface it.

AI does not invent authority. It pulls from it. Brands have to be smarter in the content they create and the strategy behind their influencer or content creator partnerships.

Brands must:

• Create content that answers real parenting questions
• Ensure product details are consistent across retail, blogs, and social whether you create it or someone posts about your products
• Show up in long-form, searchable formats not just short social posts, this means mom blogs count more than followers on a single Instagram post.

Discovery is now conversational. Your content needs to be, too.

Authenticity: Trust Is Built on Reddit, Not Ads

Gen Z parents are skeptical by default. They question brand claims. They know everything can be altered with technology.

When they want truth, they go to community. Platforms like Reddit have become modern word-of-mouth engines. A mom will search:

• “Is Brand X actually worth it?”
• “Has anyone tried this for eczema?”

She wants lived experience. Not marketing copy or perfectly curated sponsored monotone images on Instagram.

Reddit works because:

• Conversations feel unfiltered
• Real parents share long-form feedback
• Pros and cons are discussed openly

For brands, this changes the strategy. You cannot control Reddit. But you can influence what shows up there by encouraging real, authentic reviews, listening to comments online and create communities around your brand.

Authenticity isn’t a message. It’s proof that Gen Z parents demand proof before purchase.

Algorithms: Visibility Is Earned, Not Assumed

Even great content doesn’t matter if algorithms don’t serve it up to viewers. It’s important to know the ecosystem of each popular social platform even in its simplest form.

• TikTok prioritizes watch time and engagement
• Instagram rewards engagement- saves, shares, and consistency
• YouTube values retention and searchable titles
• Amazon ranks based on conversion rate, reviews, and sales history

What Brands Need to Do to Capture the Gen Z Parent’s Attention

The good news is that brands don’t need to throw out the baby with the bathwater and start over with Gen Z parents.  Instead, brands need to be more strategic with the tactics many are currently doing.

• Search-optimized titles and descriptions in Influencer content
• Add FAQs to enrich product pages
• Ensure consistency across all channels including paid content
• Make sure Influencer content is indexed for AI

Brands that understand the 3 A’s stop thinking in campaigns and start thinking in systems. Gen Z parents grew up with systems, and they win for today’s moms and dads.

 Not getting enough political chat? Here's the latest commentary on what the experts say: Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D.

Commentary

Late Night Improv Entertainment: More Politicians, Please

• by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, 7 hours ago

Why do we watch politicians on late-night TV? Not always to get their positions on major policy topics.

Viewers want to have some unexpected talk. Or entertainment. Perhaps politicians do as well.

Sometimes we want to see them make fools of themselves. They may stay stupid or outrageous things -- in between more serious discussion topics.

Best of all, we are uncertain what might happen. And that’s the whole point.

This is why many Republican-minded voters like President Trump. Because his remarks can be crazy, impromptu, entertaining, or totally off the cuff -- filled with lots of wild insinuations and of course, mistruths and outright lies.

All this reflects on where the Federal Communications Commission is going with its hard-edged “equal time” rules over the air daytime or late-night talk shows, which has had a pseudo-exemption when it comes to politicians as guests sitting alongside celebrity and Hollywood talent.

This comes in the midst of much scrutiny over ABC’s “The View” and more recently CBS’ “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert," which intended to have James Talarico, a Texas Democratic candidate for Congress, on its show.

But corporate executives at Paramount Skydance put the kibosh on it. In turn, “Late Show" producers decided to air a 15-minute segment on YouTube that pulled in some 8.2 million views.

TV Watch took a spin on what fellow MediaPost columnist Adam Buckman referenced when he said watching politicians can be a waste of time when they make “fools of themselves” on TV shows.

Sure, and perhaps that is the point. Viewers will want to watch that.

Running for Congress can be about presenting a profile that largely offers politicians a pristine, honest image. But they are human. In the hands of a quality late-night comedian-interviewer, this can also mean good “entertainment.”

With a politician on late-night shows, we don’t know what we are going to get. However, if we see Brad Pitt, Scarlett Johansson, Margot Robbie, or George Clooney on a late-night show, we know pretty much why they are there -- to promote their latest TV show, movie, cause or specific product/service -- and that is very predictable.

In the current political environment, not only do we need more politicians, but we should find better ways of talking with them.

The best TV is the unexpected -- and hopefully entertaining.

 Seems like Paramount is an important factor to own these days, and the bidders are quite determined to own this legacy brand: Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D.

  

Paramount Reportedly Ups WBD Bid To $32 A Share

• by Wayne Friedman , 5 hours ago

Paramount Skydance is pushing ahead in its attempt to buy Warner Bros. Discovery, intending to increase its bid to $32 per share to purchase the entire company, according to reports.

Paramount's current formal offer for the company is $30 a share. Earlier reports noted that the company was willing to raise this offer to $31 a share.

This comes as WBD will conclude its seven-day extension of deal-making talks on February 23 at 11:59 p.m.

As a competing bidder for WBD, Netflix gave the company its approval to go ahead with that extension on possible merger talks.

Netflix's deal is valued at $27.75 a share to buy a major piece of the company -- its streaming and studios business.

WBD has set a shareholder vote on the Netflix transaction for March 20 -- a deal the WBD board of directors continues to recommend.

If WBD dramatically moves to shift to the Paramount deal, it would need to pay Netflix a $2.8 billion termination fee, which Paramount has agreed to pay for.

Paramount executives had no comment by press time in response to inquiries from Television News Daily.

On Friday, Paramount said it cleared U.S. antitrust concerns by federal agencies.

Over the weekend, President Trump in a social media post said that Netflix must fire its board member Susan Rice or the company would “pay the consequences.” Rice has made critical remarks about recent business interactions with Trump.

Mid-Monday trading shows WBD's stock up flat at $28.76; Paramount, 3% lower to $10.43; and Netflix's stock down 4% to $75.30.

 

Tariff Reversal Could Trigger More Ad Dollars

• by Laurie Sullivan , 5 hours ago

Consumer technology and automotive sectors have been cited as having "pulled back" the most on digital ads, but today's U.S. Supreme Court ruling could remove the immediate cost pressures that prompted companies to make those cuts.

The ruling found some of President Donald Trump’s tariffs illegal, but stopped short of saying whether or how the federal government must refund businesses for duties they have paid. The law is intended for use in national emergencies. The shift could have major implications for the global economy. 

The justices ruled 6-3, and conservative Chief Justice John Roberts wrote the majority opinion for the ruling.

The ruling upheld a lower court's decision that Trump's use of this 1977 law exceeded his authority. The law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), did not grant Trump the power he claimed to impose tariffs.

Roberts cited a prior Supreme Court ruling, writing that "the president must 'point to clear congressional authorization' to justify his extraordinary assertion of the power to impose tariffs," according to Reuters. 

The ruling removes one primary roadblock to infuse investments in digital advertising.

Time reports that companies that had to pay tariffs might have an opportunity to seek a refund from the Treasury Department, but Justice Brett Kavanaugh, writing in dissent, noted that “refunds of billions of dollars would have significant consequences” for the U.S. economy, and warned that the “process is likely to be a ‘mess.'"

The Court also said nothing about whether -- and if so, how -- the government would return the billions of dollars that it collected from importers, he told Time.

U.S. tariffs implemented in 2025 by the Trump administration have disrupted every industry, but none as much as retail and automotive.

"While the decision provides some near-term relief, it does not eliminate the broader trade policy uncertainty facing retailers and brands," said Emarketer Analyst Zak Stambor. "We expect the ruling to create a modest tailwind for retail sales beginning this year, though that benefit will gradually fade by 2028."

Emarketer revised its forecast on Friday for retail, estimating sales will grow 3.5% to $7.78 trillion this year, roughly $13 billion higher than its previous outlook.

A report published in September 2025 from Emarketer expected retail and automotive to take the biggest hit and cut the most ad spending.

Emarketer across all sectors expected U.S. digital ad spend to reach $338.27 billion this year, representing a 9.5% year-over-year growth. An earlier forecast predicted 11.5% growth in 2025.

The Interactive Advertising Bureau had already forecast that U.S. marketers overall would spend 9.5% more in 2026 compared with 2025 on digital advertising.

The growth, forecast through polling domestic buy-side ad buyers at agencies and brands, is partly due to “major cyclical events” including the midterm elections, Winter Olympics, and the FIFA World Cup. Excluding those events, the IAB said, growth still wavers between 7.1% and 7.8%.

The News/Media Alliance, applauding Friday’s U.S. Supreme Court Ruling, shared its views on how tariffs hurt publishing.

“We support strong trade enforcement to protect U.S. industries and U.S. jobs," Danielle Coffey, president and CEO of the News/Media Alliance, wrote in prepared remarks. She called tariffs "counterproductive and unnecessary."

Further implementation of tariffs would result in the loss of thousands of jobs in the already-stressed U.S. publishing, printing, and paper industries, leading to less quality journalism available to the American people, Coffey wrote.

The U.S. Constitution grants Congress -- not the president -- the authority to issue taxes and tariffs, although Trump turned to a statutory authority by invoking IEEPA to impose the tariffs on nearly every U.S. trading partner without the approval of Congress, according to Reuters.

Trump did impose additional tariffs under other laws that are not at issue in this case, Reuters explained. Based on government data from October to mid-December, those represent about one-third of the revenue from tariffs.

 Just to best understand a rather new term, "proprietary  media"....Proprietary media (or inventory media) is ad space a media agency buys upfront with its own funds, acting as a principal rather than an agent. The agency owns this inventory, often reselling it to clients at a markup without disclosing the original price or allowing audits. Key synonyms include inventory media, principal-based buying, or principal media. Another reason, why I always have liked calling on local-direct clients and saving them lots of unnecessary revenue losses: Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D.

Commentary

Are You an Advertiser -- Or Just Your Agency's Favorite Customer?

• by Maarten Albarda , Featured Contributor, 4 hours ago

If there’s one thing that never changes, it’s the industry's ability to dress up a potential conflict of interest as a "strategic solution” or a “competitive advantage.”  Proprietary or principal media is the current poster child for this.

Lately, many agency media pitches include these "exclusive" bundles. The story is compelling: better pricing and increased agility. And: “It’s the media you would buy anyway, but now we have bought it for our clients and you can get it at our exclusive price.”  But let’s be honest: When your advisor is also the seller, the line between "best for the client" and "best for the agency’s margin" becomes a mess.

The U.S. market is leaning into principal media hard. Recent forecasts for 2026 suggest proprietary media will continue to be a massive revenue engine for agencies as they look to offset declining traditional margins. We’re seeing a "K-shaped" media economy where the top holding companies are leveraging their massive scale (like the recently merged Omnicom and IPG) to obtain and market proprietary bundles in fragmented spaces like Retail Media and CTV.

The ANA has been sounding the alarm on transparency for years, and while we’ve seen some wins like advertisers significantly tightening the transparency and media audit language in their contracts, there is still a massive $26.8 billion lost annually to inefficiencies.

That’s because many advertisers have not addressed the various elephants in the room. Proprietary media, mixed in with standard media buys and shielded by limited audit rights, makes it nearly impossible to tell if what you pay is what you should be paying -- or even should be buying in the first place.

ISBA in the UK is what the ANA is in the U.S. It has just released a major governance paper on the topic of proprietary media, because U.K. advertisers are seeking ways to push back.

Don’t get me wrong, and I’ve said this before: Proprietary media isn’t inherently "evil." It can offer genuine value, especially in accessing premium inventory that’s hard to get. But it’s a tool that requires a very sharp set of guardrails. Without them, you’re not an advertiser; you’re just a customer of your agency’s inventory business.

So if you’re going to play in this sandbox, don’t do it on the agency's terms, but create your own set of rules, enforced by third-party audit rights. For instance, create an internal strategy that defines exactly when proprietary media is allowed, and what kind of approvals are needed to include them in the mix.

Demand campaign-level transparency. If it’s proprietary, it needs to be its own line item, have its own reporting, and its own performance metrics. Do not accept "bundled" reporting that hides the markup. Put a hard cap on what percentage of your total budget can go into proprietary solutions and only deviate from that cap with approval in advance.

And most importantly: Update your contracts to ensure you have the right to see the data. If the agency says, "you can't audit this because it's proprietary," that’s a red flag you need to discuss.

Proprietary media is a reality in 2026. You can use it to find value, or it can be used to extract value from you. The difference is entirely in your governance.

 A little education re: AI...learning what to believe and what may be less believable!  Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D.

Commentary

The Hidden Risk In AI-Driven Marketing: Not Knowing the Data Behind the Model

• by Danyelle Horrillo , 4 hours ago

AI is involved in every step of the media process, generating output faster than a human ever could. The risk isn’t AI itself; it’s how much we rely on it without understanding the data behind the models shaping decisions.

What “AI Data” Actually Means

When marketers hear “AI uses data,” it’s easy to assume it means campaign results alone. It’s far more layered than that.

Most AI-driven tools rely on some combination of:

• Training data: Historical datasets used to teach the model, often a mix of public, platform-level, or proprietary datasets.
• Input data: Briefs, targeting parameters, budgets, performance metrics, and prompts.
• Reference or enrichment data: Benchmarks, modeled audiences, third-party datasets, or performance trends.
• Feedback loops: Past results that influence future recommendations, sometimes reinforcing old patterns.

Every tool has its own nuances, and vendors vary in transparency levels.

Why This Matters

Knowing AI data sources isn’t a technical exercise for the ops team; it has implications for how media strategies are built and optimized. AI models learn from patterns, and those patterns shape strategy. If the underlying data over-represents certain platforms, formats, or attribution models, recommendations will naturally skew in that direction, even if it’s not the best strategic move. The output may look like “optimization,” even when it no longer aligns with business goals.

Optimization Without Context Is Still Optimization

AI is good at optimizing toward whatever it’s instructed to value. But KPIs are incomplete without human interception:

• CTR doesn’t equal brand impact.
• Cheap conversions don’t equal quality.
• Short-term efficiency doesn’t equal long-term growth.

Without context, incrementality, offline performance, seasonality, or real-world constraints, AI can confidently optimize in the wrong direction, without understanding why those decisions matter.

Bad Data Gets Scaled         

AI can scale bad data. Inconsistent naming conventions, incomplete UTMs, blended attribution models, and platform-analytics gaps will still produce an output: “garbage in, garbage out faster and at scale.”

The Transparency Gap with AI-Powered Tools

Many AI-powered tools operate as black boxes - recommendations without rationale, or insights without clarity into inputs. There isn’t always a clear breakdown of training data sources, data influencing results, or how frequently models are updated. Yet marketers are expected to act on and defend those outputs.

What We as Marketers Should Be Asking About AI

Knowing the data sources is part of the job. Ask vendors:

• What data sources train this model?
• How are attribution methodologies handled?
• Can recommendations be audited?
• How frequently is the model updated?
• Is there any data intentionally excluded?
• Can we customize this data used?

Vague answers are a red flag.

AI Is An Assistant, Not A Strategist

AI is a powerful tool, but it’s still a tool. AI processes data, marketers provide meaning. Human judgement sets the objectives, applies business context, and pressure tests recommendations.

Understanding where AI gets its data is a strategic responsibility. Marketers who get ahead won’t be the ones who use AI blindly. They’ll be the ones who question it, validate it, and use it intentionally, knowing the data behind the model.