Here is something that might be a good idea for a sales meeting! Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D.

Commentary

AI Is New And Not New

• by J. Walker Smith , Op-Ed Contributor, May 27, 2026

Perhaps the most interesting thing about AI is that it is new yet nothing new.

AI is certainly new to marketing, and bringing all sorts of new challenges with it, although it may not be as big as headlines would have us believe.

Last year, the CMO Survey of the American Marketing Association, conducted in partnership with Duke and Deloitte, found a mere 17.2% of marketers reporting the use of AI to optimize or automate marketing.

Perhaps the percentage this year will be a step-change higher, but the self-estimated three-year projection by marketers last year was only 44.2%.

Nonetheless, AI is breaking out all over. It is a new force to be reckoned with. But in many ways, AI is nothing but the same reckoning as before.

Indeed, this is typical of marketing innovations. Almost always, they are nothing but new ways of solving the same old problems. Which is definitely the case with AI.

Take search, for example.

Eight Oh Two, an SEO and PPC marketing agency, reported this year that 37% of brand-related searches now start with AI instead of a search engine.

This is a big shift, but it’s hardly anything new. There were headlines galore when Amazon became a viable competitor to Google for initial product searches.

The marketing issue then and now was shifting strategy and investments to meet consumers where they live. AI will require change, but the challenge itself is nothing new. Brands just have to adjust accordingly again.

This is true of every change being wrought by AI right now. Recommendations, in particular.

A recent study by location marketing platform Uberall found that 83% of restaurants are “invisible” to consumers in AI search because they don’t get mentioned when people ask AI for restaurants “nearby.”

But this, too, is nothing new. We have known for a long time about the importance of showing up on the first page of Google search results. That’s where the eyeballs are.

So, getting there is the task of getting in front of consumers. Broadly speaking, this is the necessity of getting into the consideration set, or at least the first step in doing so. That’s what SEO is all about.

For AI, it’s called GEO. Which is just a new name for an old challenge. It’s about crafting content and brand information that will get picked up by LLMs. LLMs are different, but what they do and the strategic challenge of influencing them is the same.

Influence is another thing about AI that is nothing new. Increasingly, people are relying on AI for product comparisons and purchasing recommendations.

In this sense, AI is the influencer of demand. But influencing influencers is a long-standing task in marketing -- from children influencing mothers to friends influencing friends to content creators influencing followers on social media.

Marketers have been at this for so long that they have gotten very good at influencing the influencers. Marketers may need to go back to school on AI, but the basic idea is no different than before.

Much of this involves getting the attention of LLMs, and attention was the hot issue in marketing immediately before AI appeared on the scene.

In fact, attention is an issue as old as marketing itself and was the reason why the Advertising Research Foundation developed the original inverted pyramid back in 1961.

That funnel was not a purchase funnel, but a funnel for media-buying that began with the necessity of getting attention. All AI is doing is forcing marketers to solve the same old problem again. The answer will be different, but the issue is the same as always.

Marketers are also concerned that AI only cares about facts, not emotions, and that AI will operate independently of efforts by brands to enforce consistency of messaging with consumers. But these, too, are not new concerns.

It was concern about consistency that kept the Coca-Cola Company from using its flagship brand name with its first diet cola, thus naming it Tab instead.

It was a concern when Larry Light introduced the idea of brand journalism using many individual stories to deliver McDonald’s “I’m Likin’ It” campaign.

It has been an ongoing concern as media have proliferated and fragmented. It is certainly an issue in managing the modern-day army of independent influencers that brands are using as gateways to consumers.

So, there is nothing new about this concern when it comes to AI. Brands will have to manage consistency differently for AI, but the issue of consistency is an age-old challenge in marketing.

In these ways and others, AI is not new at all. Yet, there is one thing about AI that is very different and new. In years past, humans have been the audience for awareness, attention, recommendations, consideration, influence and consistency. That’s true for AI right now, but this is sure to change.

The way I’ve described it before is to say that marketers will have to learn how to “advertise to algorithms.” Which is to say that AI is going to transform shoppers into agents as consumers delegate shopping and buying. Hence, much of the marketplace ahead will be AI-to-AI. 

Everything about marketing in the past has been designed for human audiences. Every theoretical concept, every practical application, everything has been about persuading humans.

So far, AI is just another tool for persuading humans, and thus the same challenges as ever. But when consumers hand off shopping and buying to AI agents, humans will be completely out of the loop.

This is not an issue that marketers have had to face before. Humans have always been the target.

But algorithms or AI itself will soon be the target. That’s fundamentally new. All the other stuff is old wine in a new bottle. AI agents are a new vintage.

Until then, marketers would do well not to get ahead of themselves or allow themselves to be intimidated by the changes at work with AI.

The nature of today’s challenges are identical to the challenges of the past. Marketers have successfully met those challenges. There is no reason to suspect anything different now -- as long as it’s people at the receiving end.

 

Commentary

CBS News Shocker: Weiss Hires TV News Novice To Run '60 Minutes'

• by Adam Buckman , Featured Columnist, 7 hours ago

CBS News editor-in-chief Bari Weiss is bringing in an outsider with no prior experience in TV news to run “60 Minutes.”

The announcement on Thursday was shocking news. “60 Minutes” is the third-highest rated show in all of network prime time, behind two CBS dramas, “Tracker” and “Marshall.”

The show is the highest-rated and most consistent performer of any show to ever come out of the CBS news division. 

The newbie is a guy named Nick Bilton, 47. He is described in a CBS press release as a print journalist, book author, podcaster and a maker of documentaries such as 2021’s “Fake Famous,” a documentary about internet fame, available on HBO Max.

Nowhere does his experience include TV network news reporting or producing. And yet, he has been hired to lead the most storied news program in the history of television.

“Nick is one of the most entrepreneurial journalists of our time and the perfect leader for one of the most entrepreneurial news brands of all time,” said a prepared statement from Weiss. 

“We have huge ambition for ‘60 Minutes’ to reach new heights through deep, revelatory journalism that breaks news, exposes wrongdoing, widens public understanding and forces accountability from every institution and every center of power,” the statement said.

The statement raises questions. What do “entrepreneurial” skills have to do with running “60 Minutes”? And in what way is “60 Minutes” itself “entrepreneurial”?

Moreover, Weiss’s vision for “60 Minutes,” as stated above, reads more like a description of how the show is now, and how it has been for 58 years.

It is a brand that is already well-known for its revelatory journalism that breaks news, exposes wrongdoing, widens public understanding and forces accountability from every institution and every center of power.

These are the very assets that Weiss’ statement implies that the show has not yet reached. 

“New heights”? It is hard to understand how a show that has already reached every height in its field can now reach new ones with an executive producer who has no experience in anything like it.

As the show’s new executive producer, Bilton replaces Tanya Simon, 55, a 30-year veteran of CBS News, who held the job for a little over a year.

Simon was just the fourth executive producer in the history of “60 Minutes” and the first woman in the role.

Among the close-knit staff of “60 Minutes,” Simon was one of the family. She is the daughter of the late “60 Minutes” correspondent Bob Simon, and the show’s correspondents and production staff all supported her for the position of executive producer.

The hiring of the news novice Bilton to take the helm of “60 Minutes” is part of an ongoing shakeup of the show being undertaken by Weiss, the internet firebrand who is also an outsider that had no experience in TV news at any level when she was brought in as editor-in-chief of CBS News last October.

During the Weiss reign, life at “60 Minutes” has been turbulent. Long-time correspondent Anderson Cooper left the show earlier this month, and correspondent Cecilia Vega, who came to the show in 2023, is also leaving.

In addition, CBS News declined to renew the contract of Sharyn Alfonsi, the “60 Minutes” correspondent who publicly criticized Weiss last December for yanking a story from “60 Minutes” at the last minute.

In the story, Alfonsi reported on a maximum-security prison in El Salvador where the Trump administration was sending Venezuelan migrants.

Weiss’s move was interpreted by many as an effort to placate Trump. In a statement this week, Alfonsi reportedly said the decision not to renew her contract is “a deliberate choice to penalize a journalist for refusing to sanitize factually accurate reporting.”

For all I know, there may be many problems at CBS News to which Weiss and CBS News President Tom Cibrowski could devote their time.

By all appearances, “60 Minutes” is not one of them. This is a case of fixing something that isn’t broken.

But Weiss is the one who reportedly told CBS News staffers last November that she intends to blow things up.

But if she intends to blow up “60 Minutes,” then she may as well torch the entire news division too. 

 

Not Every Brand Should Jump On The ChatGPT Ads Bandwagon

• by Molly Lopez , Yesterday

ChatGPT’s self-serve ads rollout is not just a cool new feature for businesses. It is a signal that the tech ecosystem has entered a new era, one where platforms can move from user acquisition to user monetization faster than ever before.

Facebook launched in 2004. Five years later, it opened its self-serve ads platform. LinkedIn launched in 2003. Five years later, it did the same.

ChatGPT was made available to the public in November 2022. OpenAI is now rolling out a beta self-serve Ads Manager that allows advertisers to register, set budgets, upload ads, launch campaigns, and view performance directly in the platform.

That pace is not just fast. It is a statement.

Typically, ad platform rollouts are slow for a reason. There is internal validation, user trust concerns, limited testing with select partners.

OpenAI is doing something much bolder. It is building the plane while flying, and it is letting more than just Fortune 1000 brands and giant agencies get a seat on board.

That creates real opportunity. It also creates real risk.

The benefit is obvious: intent. People do not come to ChatGPT just to scroll. They come to solve, compare, research and make decisions. That creates a completely different advertising environment than traditional social media.

For the right business, that is incredibly valuable.

But “right business” is the key phrase.

The companies that should be testing ChatGPT Ads are the ones with experimental media budget, not brands looking for a silver bullet.

Do not move all your dollars here at once. There will be a learning curve for everyone, including the advertisers, the agencies, and the platform itself.

This also makes the most sense for companies that already have a strong Google Ads presence and know what keywords, questions, and pain points actually convert. If you know what people search before they buy from you, you are in a much better position to understand where ChatGPT may fit into the journey.

It is also worth testing if you are already seeing organic traction from AI search. If customers are telling you they found you through ChatGPT, or if your analytics are starting to show AI-assisted discovery, that is a signal worth paying attention to.

Where brands need to be careful is trying to force ChatGPT into a branding channel. This is not the place to simply “show up” because everyone is talking about it. The best use cases will be helpful, specific, and tied to complex problems.

For example, someone asking, “How do I build a pond in my backyard?” could be a great moment for a landscaping company to enter the conversation. But a juice brand trying to bid on “creative snack ideas for toddlers” may feel like a stretch unless the answer is genuinely useful.

The brands that win here will not be the loudest. They will be the most helpful.

So yes, companies should pay attention to ChatGPT Ads. Yes, they should test. Yes, they should learn early.

But the smartest brands will not jump on the bandwagon just to say they were first. They will enter with strategy, restraint, and a very clear understanding of what value they can provide before they ask for the click.

 

Half Of Advertisers Buying Programmatic Are Underperforming...

• by Joe Mandese , 4 hours ago

Ever since 19th Century retail marketer John Wannamaker's "which half" quip, the ad industry has been transfixed by binary results, so it's not surprising that the just-released first quarter 2026 edition of the Association of National Advertisers' quarterly "Programmatic Transparency Benchmark" reports has divided programmatic advertising ROI into a tale of two performance cohorts: the "lower half" and the "upper half."

Specifically, the analysis finds the performance gap is spreading between the two.

Utilizing the ANA's proprietary TrueAdSpend analytics metric, the Q1 report found a delta of 21.9 points between the upper and lower half's programmatic advertising results: the upper half converted 54.0% of its programmatic ad spend into "qualified impressions;" while the lower half converted just 32.1%.

programmatic performance is increasingly driven by the ability to actively manage quality, price, measurement, and curate supply at scale,” said Bob Liodice, CEO of the ANA. “Higher-performing advertisers continue to convert spend more efficiently, while lower-performing advertisers are falling further behind.”

Importantly, the ANA found that the differentiation had little do do with programmatic media-buying costs, and more to do with programmatic inventory "quality."

While transaction costs differed by just 2.4 percentage points between the upper and lower cohorts, "media productivity" losses differed by 19.4 percentage points.

"Programmatic performance is increasingly driven by the ability to actively manage quality, price, measurement, and curate supply at scale,” ANA CEO Bob Liodice explains in a statement provided with the report, noting, “Higher-performing advertisers continue to convert spend more efficiently, while lower-performing advertisers are falling further behind.”

 Are your local-direct clients certain of what demo their reaching and creating engagement potential in their media marketing quest? Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D.

Commentary

50+ Video Homes Show More 'Hybrid' Streaming, Linear

• by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, May 20, 2026

As it turn out, TV households for viewers age 50 and up are a bit more progressive than some analysts realize when it comes to adopting new TV-video technology.

TV households for those 50 years old and up actually over-index compared to 18-49 households when it comes to having both streaming and linear TV platforms in homes.

"These 'hybrid' households are actually overrepresented in the population (index 114)," according to a report from Advertising Research Foundation’s DASH TV Universe Study report. “In comparison, households headed by 18-49 year-olds are actually underrepresented (index 85)."

It adds that nearly 46 million 50+ households -- about 70% -- are reachable with linear and streaming ads.

Also, it estimates that 11 million 50-plus households are linear TV-exclusive, and 10 million have streaming exclusivity.

In addition, those newer virtual pay TV platforms (vMVPD) -- as well as ad-supported streaming platforms (AVOD) -- are showing rising indexes for those 50 years of age and up -- with a 102 index and a 93 index, respectively.

Looking at TV homes with viewers 18-49, both vMVPD and AVOD are trending down -- at a 102 index and 107 index, respectively.

DASH says there are 68.2 million households led by people age 50 and up and 66.6 million households led by people ages 18 to 49.

Nielsen estimates that overall, in terms of demographic population, there are 136.12 million persons ages 18-49 and 126.96 million persons 50 years and up in the U.S.

The number of TV homes totals 128.1 million in the U.S., with a total population of 323.1 million.

 Something new to tune to loosen up the day you might have had: Philip Jay LeNoble, Ph.D.

Comedian Plots First-Ever Late-Night Show for YouTube

• by Adam Buckman , Featured Columnist, 8 hours ago

A new late-night show premiering Thursday is billed as the first-ever late-night show developed and designed specifically for YouTube.

The show, titled “Good Night with Ben Gleib,” originates from the Los Angeles home of Gleib, 47, a comedian who has a long resumé of cable comedy specials, movie and TV appearances, podcast interviews and show hosting (“Idiotest” on Game Show Network, 2014-17).

Gleib reportedly plans to produce 42 episodes of “Good Night” and 42 episodes of a companion “after-show” at an estimated cost of $1.5 million, Deadline.com reported.

The show starts running on YouTube on Thursday (May 28) at 10 p.m. Eastern. Plans call for one episode to be released every Thursday.

advertisement

advertisement

In a promotional video on YouTube, Gleib positions the show in the context of the changes roiling late-night on network TV.

“Now is the perfect time,” Gleib says. “This is when late-night is under threat. This is when late-night is being canceled. People are talking … is it the end of late night?”

He feels that as a platform, YouTube frees his show from the turbulence that can arise from corporate ownership, especially now. 

“The genre means so much to me. I love the format of it and I don’t think it should die. The natural progression is for it to move to YouTube,” Gleib says.

“This is the time to have an independently owned [show], not [one owned] by corporate multinational conglomerates that control narratives and have agendas,” he says. 

“It’s literally just a show about comedy … a mainstream show that is not overtly political to one side,” Gleib says.

The show will be financed at least in part through Creative Visions, a nonprofit based in Malibu, California.

The organization’s website, creativevisions.org, says it was founded in 1998 “to support creative activists who are using their creativity for good.”

Creative Visions is soliciting donations to support the show. “We can improve people’s lives by exposing them to life-changing ideas through comedy,” the organization says.

In its description of the show, Creative Visions imbues “Good Night with Ben Gleib” with ideals and goals that are loftier than the way Gleib describes the show.

“I want this to be a place we can all gather, feel good, laugh and just unwind,” Gleib says on the promotional video.

Creative Visions, on the other hand, positions Gleib’s comedy show as one that can “enrich the lives of people around the globe,” which seems like a lot to expect from a digital comedy show.

“Join us in creating the first late-night talk show for the internet, evolving the genre to not just feature celebrities, but also the thought leaders, change makers and innovators with the solutions to the problems we all face,” Creative Visions says.

“Through this show we can enrich the lives of people around the globe, by exposing the masses for the first time to these life-changing and planet-saving ideas,” the organization says.

In his promotional video, Gleib says nothing about saving the planet or changing lives around the globe. 

In a promotional clip also seen on YouTube, the comedian is seen interviewing a sex therapist who counsels him on how to persuade a partner to participate in a threesome.

As for “the masses” referenced by Creative Visions, what do they have to lose by taking a few minutes to sample “Good Night with Ben Gleib”? Nothing but their chains, said Marx and Engels.

 

 

Commentary

Netflix Goes Familiar with Morning, Weekday Live Show

• by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, 8 hours ago

Netflix now looks more like a TV broadcast network: It is scheduling a regular, weekday early morning video podcast.

“The Breakfast Club,” a morning show co-hosted by Charlamagne tha God, will stream live every weekday. And that show will essentially compete with other live morning shows on other platforms -- mostly TV broadcast networks or local TV stations.

But it also means going head-to-head with the likes of YouTube. This is part of Netflix overall effort for video podcasts -- as part of a major programming expansion.

This comes as YouTube has aggressively expanded video podcast efforts, including live programming every weekday. It even has a “live” tab to see upcoming scheduled video podcasts.

Shows on YouTube includes “The Pat McAfee Show” which is also simulcast on ESPN, as well as a number of news and politics-focused shows like “Breaking Points” and “The Majority Report with Sam Seder.”

Netflix wants to actively join this pursuit -- now as a “must have” premium platform for many U.S. and other subscribers. For many it’s just a necessary utility now. But increasing it wants more: More regular tune in

Netflix has seen flattening of average daily use by its subscribers over the last few years. For example, in the first half of 2025, average subscriber viewing per day actually slipped about 6% year-over-year in the U.S. to 1.4 hours, according to MoffettNathanson Research.

Other third-party estimates (eMarketer and Nielsen) show average daily time spent by U.S. subscribers was around 60 to 64 minutes per day.

This doesn’t mean Netflix is going to add in normal looking TV newscasts, or even opinion-tinged newscasts. Fully opinionated, free-spirit podcasts are the way to go.

National and local TV newscasts typically skew to a crowd 60 and older years old. Like it or not, podcasts offer up spicy, opinionated content that can observe news and deliver compelling spin to its consumers and fans. And they can skew younger.

But now comes the moment where we wonder about the type of advertisers that will support such content. Are many brands still worried about ‘brand-safe” content? How do video podcasts then fit into the mix?

Considering its growing diverse content, Netflix -- more or less -- wants to find a broad range of advertising interest in all types of new content going forward (video podcasts, special sporting events, gaming) -- targeting young and old viewers.

Again the key word here is broad-based -- which makes sound familiar to that other familiar word: Broadcasting.