Exploration #154

Hi all, Happy New Year, and warm welcome to our new subscribers from NYC, South Carolina, Michigan, San Francisco, and South Florida!

Hope you are feeling relaxed from the break and ready to fight the good fight in 2026. We have our work cut out for us. This edition the focus is entirely on public media (we’ll get back to AI, tech and culture in the next edition). We’ve got a report out from the Aspen Institute’s “Future of Public Media” summit, multiple OpEds from NiemanLab’s “Predictions for Journalism 2026,” and finally, an obit of one of the public media personalities that was part of my public media childhood.

But First…

There is still time to register for our January 15 webinar, Innovate with Current: The Future of Public Media. This year didn’t go as many of us had planned. So, now what? How can public media position itself for a successful 2026 amid ongoing uncertainty and change? This session will feature a panel of leaders from across public media sharing their perspectives on where the industry finds itself today and what may be coming next. This conversation is designed for anyone thinking about the future of public media strategy, audience, and sustainability and looking for candid perspectives on what comes next.

The Asteroid Missed, but Gravity Still Has a Say

In the action-movie allegory to public media’s 2025, a giant asteroid was spotted out in space, and its path was ultimately calculated to directly hit rural America. But then heroic members of humanity pooled their resources and funded the means deflect it, and ultimately public media lived to fight another day.

I’m worried about the sequel. Gravity now holds the remnants of the deflected asteroid in orbit, and destruction could still rain down at any moment. Humanity’s resources are finite and they can’t keep funding deflection after deflection. Adaptation is the only means of survival, but the decision-makers won’t try anything different because it disrupts the status quo and there’s no funding for anything other than the status quo. Better to deflect it (and deflect it, and deflect it again) and live to deflect another day.

At some point though, gravity has the final say.

The metaphor was especially on my mind as I scrolled through the Aspen Institute’s summary of “The Future of Public Media” summit that was held (with little fanfare) in November. The report from the summit seems to have been released as we all headed into the most distracted time of year. So, if you missed it, you’re not to blame.

First, a hot take. Based on the report-out, the group convened was decidedly canted toward radio. Reading the summary, you’d think PBS was eliminated along with CPB. It’s near absence (one mention) makes this discussion on the future of public media incomplete. It’s really a discussion on the future of public radio. Important, but not comprehensive as the title would lead you to believe.

Additionally, the group sure seems pretty white. I’m not the right person to launch a larger critique at that level, but I’ll flag it. (And h/t to Laura Garbes for adjusting my filters with her research on public radio’s historic problem in this regard.)

On the plus side, local radio stations were at the table (I didn’t see any joint licensees cited). So often, big thinkers get together and think big thoughts about public media without actually including the practitioners who are making it happen on the ground. Fortunately, that’s not the case here.

I encourage you to thumb through it (it’ll take 15-30 minutes) or, if you’d prefer, check out ChatGPT’s summary and assessment from a thread I have open with it on the future of public media.

But I also want to call out a few cheers and jeers from the summary.

Values

I appreciated that “The group identified these as shared values: Citizenship over consumption; Trust and integrity Community connection; Free access and openness; Original, local reporting; Service to historically underserved communities. These values, rather than platforms or legacy structures, surfaced repeatedly as the underlying foundation for what comes next.” And especially appreciated that “Silvia Rivera (MacArthur Foundation) pushed the group to confront the equity implications: even before the collapse of commercial media, ‘large swaths of communities were not being served.’ Without intentional redesign, public media risks rebuilding a system ‘for the elite again.’”

Public Media = Democracy

This section (unsurprisingly from Judy Woodruff) resonated with me. “The group started by discussing why public media exists. Judy Woodruff (Senior Correspondent, PBS News) grounded the room in first principles: ‘Public media is an essential part of our democracy… If people don’t have access to information, how can they be a good citizen?’ The work, she emphasized, is not about chasing ‘what’s going to bring more eyeballs,’ but understanding ‘what Americans need to know’ to be connected to their communities and to one another. Trust, she noted, remains one of public media’s most durable assets: ‘We are trusted. People do have that trust, that loyalty in public media.’”

Then, from later in the report: “But Gary Knell sharpened the stakes: if public media simply doubles down on its existing donor-audience base, it will become ‘resistance radio’—narrower, more partisan, less civic.”

I’m glad that someone is calling out that we are an essential part of democracy. While I’m not advocating that we become more partisan, we need to stress that more. Public media is democracy and a fight against public media is a fight against democracy.

I’ve cited Victor Pickard’s work here before on how healthier democracies have more robust public media entities. But I’ll do it again. This is from his April 2025 OpEd in The Nation: “Research shows that access to public media correlates with increased political knowledge and civic engagement and lower levels of extremist views. Public media are also more likely to provide diverse and critical media coverage of important social issues. Moreover, unlike commercial media that must privilege returns on investments, public media are more likely to cover stories and engage audiences that aren’t profitable, thus reducing inequalities in news provision. In these countries, public broadcasters are treated as vital democratic infrastructures, providing essential services that a commercial system will not. Indeed, research shows a positive correlation between the strength of public media systems and the health of democracies. Conversely, “flawed democracies” such as the US tend to have weaker public media systems that rely more on commercial support.” (See also, his 2021 OpEd in CJR.)

AI and the Death of Story?

AI and its impacts also got a mention in the day’s discussions: “Vilas Dhar (President, Patrick J. McGovern Foundation) focused on how AI could disrupt the system. With AI-intermediating content, he asked, ‘What is a good version of [an] AI-intermediated world where our public media content reaches our audience?’ Michael Giarrusso (AP) argued that in an AI-driven environment, content must be ‘digestible’ and modular. ... Participants also discussed structural constraints. Several said that current definitions of 'public media' are outdated. Knell (BCG) said existing distinctions are 'completely antiquated,' and that the system is not designed for emerging content forms like immersive media or data visualizations. Steve Waldman (Rebuild Local News) compared local reporters to ecological keystone species: 'We are the plankton… of this content food chain.'”

This is an important point. As we look at the future of media, is “story” really our competitive advantage? Or does the definition of public media need to evolve beyond storytelling to other forms of information presentation and distribution.

Welcome to Thunderdome?

And then, from the section on the End of the Day Reflection: “Co-hosts Vivian Schiller (Aspen), Gary Knell (BCG) and Laura Walker (Bennington) gave a candid assessment to close the day. They agreed the system needs a blueprint: a shared definition of what public media is and should become. Without such clarity, Knell warned, the sector risks devolving into a “Hunger Games in public media,” competing for shrinking resources rather than building a cohesive future.”

Obviously I’d prefer a “Mad Max” metaphor, nevertheless, I have a distinct fear that the real Hunger Games in public media will be around who gets to define public media’s next act. The year 2025 wasn’t the most promising of starts, and there is definitely an ‘opportunity in chaos’ pack lurking in the dystopia just beyond the safety of the fire’s light.

In a future where public media will not be exclusively audio or video - if it is even audio and video at all - there needs to be better representation from the perspectives of multiple types of media. It’s fashionable these days to discuss “first principles,” but there is a distinction between honestly assessing public media’s value to civil society and marching backwards into the future. In 2026, someone needs to convene a group that is more firmly focused on the future of media, it’s place in a healthy democracy, and our pro-democracy contributions to that future.

Okay, on to the links.

Webinars and Resources…

Innovate with Current: The Future of Public Media (2026) 
(Thursday, January 15, 1pET/10aPT)
Join Public Media Innovators and Current for our second annual conversation about what the year ahead holds for public media. Suffice to say, 2025 didn’t go the way many of us hoped. So, now what? How can public media position itself for a successful 2026 amid ongoing uncertainty and change? This session will feature a panel of four leaders (two from last year, two new for ‘26) from across public media sharing their perspectives on where the industry finds itself today and what may be coming next. This conversation is designed for anyone thinking about the future of public media strategy, audience, and sustainability and looking for candid perspectives on what comes next. Register here!

What You Need to Know about AI + Search

We had a great turnout for last month’s webinar, but it did hit at a busy time of year. If you missed any part of it, or want to share it with colleagues, you’ll find it above. As I was listening to Richard and Emily present a few themes jumped out at me.

Thoughts on Public Media…

Public media’s next act (Steve Henn - NiemanLab) 
Key Line: "That function — editing and responsible curation — is exactly what the wider news ecosystem dominated by algorithms has lost. Stations should become hubs in a larger civic digital network, linking responsible creators, neighborhood outlets, and community-based reporting with the reach, trust, and membership infrastructure stations already operate. The system can leverage its strengths and meet audiences where they spend so much of their time: on their phones."
Why It Matters: It was tempting to lead with Katherine Maher’s prediction (see below), but amongst all the NiemanLab predictions for public media, Henn's vision resonates with me most. I like that it broadens the definition of what public media could be and who could be public media (as Richard Tofel parenthetically pointed out in his Three Stories I’d Like to See in 2026, “Without public funding, [public media is] really now just an important sector within the larger world of nonprofit news”). But Henn’s vision also prescribes money moving 'cleanly and transparently' across the 'network'. Can public media be that enlightened?

The fight for independence (Katherine Maher - NiemanLab) 
From the Prediction: "Technological disruption has added to the pressure. 30 years after the start of the open web, publishers had coalesced around a fragile tech truce of content-for-traffic. This has collapsed, driven by Google’s AI Overviews, causing publisher referrals to plummet. Into this vacuum flooded AI slop — by August 2025, leading GenAI chatbots were repeating false claims on news topics 35 percent of the time. Simultaneously, audiences are drifting away from institutions entirely. With 38 percent of young adults now relying on social media influencers for news — 77 percent of whom have no affiliation with editorial organizations — the line between verified fact and viral opinion is dissolving."
Why It Matters: Before printed text was a thing (so, like, the 1300s) history tells us that people were more inclined to trust what someone told them far more than something that was written down. It was an oral society in those days, and authenticity (or charisma) mattered more than facts which were systematically verified before presentation. So, the only thing that's new today in the rise of the influencer is scale. Public media needs to figure out how to translate "truth" both through influencers as well as systematic fact presentation. As AI increasingly mediates content, servicing both components of our public will be core to our service to community.
ICYMI: Benjamin Mullin's piece in the NYT was getting quit a bit of buzz leading into the holiday break: NPR’s C.E.O. Was a Right-Wing Target. Then the Real Trouble Started.

Public media sees infrastructure as its next act of service (Kerri Hoffman - NiemanLab) 
From the Prediction: "‘Infrastructure’ is not a word that sets most hearts on fire. But if you care about journalism — especially local journalism — you care about infrastructure, whether you realize it or not.... Right now, many of those underlying systems are controlled by a small number of commercial platforms, ad tech companies, or vendors whose incentives don’t always align with public service. The risk is that public media becomes just another content supplier in someone else’s ecosystem, subject to someone else’s rules. Building shared, mission-driven infrastructure is a way of clearing the path."
Why It Matters: Kerri is right. Infrastructure isn't sexy. It's thankless, since most people only acknowledge it when it fails (much love to the IT, traffic and broadcast engineering pros in the crowd). It also typically takes a while to build, and once built, longer to change. So, while I appreciate her assertion, I think the approach she is defending is already out of date. The infrastructure we need to be supporting is infrastructure for an AI age, not the social/digital age.

Public media will stop acting like a legacy airline (Ethan Toven-Lindsey - NiemanLab) 
From the Prediction: "...[N]ow that we are asking the existential question of what public media really is anyway, we have the opportunity to overhaul our systems.... I believe public media will throw off the constraints of a system that serves larger metropolitan areas at the expense of the rest of the country.... Defunding the Corporation for Public Broadcasting will only serve to accelerate that decentralization, and I believe a more networked system, with a greater number of connections, will emerge."
Why It Matters: When I read Ethan's prediction, I'm struck by the notion that the system he's discussion is a 'mass media' system. And key to visualizing his idea is the notion that we could use technology to stop serving a mass audience and instead serve individual media consumers, or at least individual publics.

The walls around public media keep coming down (Meredith Artley - NiemanLab) 
From the Piece: "The support system for public media can silo the people within it from the rest of the media and technology landscape. There are resource groups, consultants, conferences, and webinars just for public media....These groups exist to help, not to isolate....But the downside of local stations spending so much time in the vast public media support network is that a large, disparate group of hundreds of stations are absent from many larger conversations where there is much to learn and to share."
Why It Matters: Hawai'i Public Radio's GM weighs in with encouragement to be less insular. I've said it here before and I'll repeat it again, for me the best conference of the year is South by Southwest. We'll see if that's still true next year now that they are under new management, but they did book Paula to keynote, so that's a good sign. I know it can be easier to pitch for travel budgets when it’s for conferences from within our systems, but you should try to go to at least one conference outside the system a year if you can. The fresh perspective is vital.
Related: And you can see all of NiemanLabs contributor predictions at Predictions for Journalism 2026.

What the Dissolution of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting Means (Ivan L. Nagy - Columbia Journalism Review) 
From the Article: "Benson looked at the organization’s closure as an opportunity for public media to reinvent itself in a more favorable political context someday in the future....In that event, Benson thinks that CPB, which has long been a political target in Washington, could be rebuilt with a new, more robust structure better able to resist partisan pressure. 'The policy debate will be about how much public media should be even more locally driven, or how much it should engage nationally,' he said."
What It Means: The cloud of CPB’s demise does have the silver lining of hope. Local matters, and many of us have local support. Of course, hope is not a strategy, but it can inspire strategies that empower us to steer our way to clearer skies. As Pat and Ruby said elsewhere: “That work continues, and it matters now more than ever.”
Related: Alex Curley’s piece on CPB’s action: Backed Into an Impossible Corner, CPB Votes to Dissolve 
Also related: Brian Welk’s piece in IndieWire on the dissolution of CPB was my runner-up for featuring here: The Corporation for Public Broadcasting Is Dissolving Rather Than Be ‘Vulnerable to Additional Attacks’ from the Trump Administration 
 

And finally…

Stewart Cheifet, PBS host who chronicled the PC revolution, dies at 87 (Benj Edwards - Ars Technica) And finally, I grew up in a PBS household. I also grew up in a PC household; my dad had an amateur's love for the burgeoning personal computer and video game revolution in the early 80s. As such, "Computer Chronicles" was a normal, weekly occurrence in our house. Reading of Cheifet's passing, I was struck by how much his creation is in the DNA of this newsletter. R.I.P.

See you back here around January 26.