Why Cable News Audio Doesn't Work as Radio Artwork

ID10T Techcast

ID10T Techcast is a weekly podcast where Tyler Woodward, a broadcast engineer, goes over the past week's news in Linux, tech and broadcasting and tells you what he thinks about it. Episodes run 15 to 30 minutes.

Every episode runs through the week's stories, like Linux security holes and open source, Big Tech and AI companies, the FCC, and radio and TV, then ends with one longer opinion piece. Some weeks it's a security hole, some weeks it's why radio isn't dead yet.

The show is for right to repair, privacy, a real nationwide US privacy law like Europe's GDPR, decentralized social media like Mastodon and Bluesky, and independent and community radio. It's critical of big corporations, tech billionaires and AI companies, and it calls out both political parties when they earn it. Everything's explained in plain English, no jargon.

More at ID10T.fm.

All Episodes

ID10T Techcast

Why Cable News Audio Doesn't Work as Radio

May 15, 2026 • Tyler Woodward

0:00 | 6:33

Send Fan Mail

Cable news channels have the staff, the brand recognition, and news gathering operations most radio stations can only dream of. Instead of building real audio products, they route the 24/7 TV feed to a streaming platform and call it done. CNN on TuneIn, Fox on SiriusXM, MSNBC's linear feed. You can technically listen. That doesn't make it radio.

Real audio assumes you can't see anything. The writing accounts for it, the pacing accounts for it, and when something visual happens, someone describes it. TV assumes you're watching, so when the anchor says "as you can see here" and a map fills the screen, audio listeners get silence. That's not a small problem. That's the whole product.

The proof it can be done is right there. WTOP in DC has run commercial all-news radio since 1969 and consistently ranks as the highest-rated station in the market, period. The BBC and CBC built radio as its own discipline. MSNBC's podcast operation shows they know how to produce for ears when they choose to. What's missing isn't talent or content. It's the decision to treat the live feed as something other than a TV byproduct.

Support the show

Follow ID10T Techcast
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/id10ttechcast
Threads: https://www.threads.com/@id10ttechcast
Facebook: https://facebook.com/id10ttechcast
Everything else is at https://ID10T.fm

WEBVTT

00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:05.200
Cable news is not a radio product. Dumping a

00:00:05.200 --> 00:00:09.359
24 -7 TV audio feed onto TuneIn and calling it

00:00:09.359 --> 00:00:19.579
radio isn't a strategy, it's a shortcut. This

00:00:19.579 --> 00:00:22.399
is my opinion as someone who works in broadcasting

00:00:22.399 --> 00:00:25.460
and spends probably too much time thinking about

00:00:25.460 --> 00:00:30.289
radio. Take it for what it is. Cable news channels

00:00:30.289 --> 00:00:33.950
have the infrastructure, the staff, the brand

00:00:33.950 --> 00:00:37.329
recognition, and the content volume to build

00:00:37.329 --> 00:00:41.310
genuinely compelling audio products. They have

00:00:41.310 --> 00:00:44.590
people who know how to talk, and news gathering

00:00:44.590 --> 00:00:47.549
operations most radio stations can only dream

00:00:47.549 --> 00:00:52.490
of. Instead, they route the 24 -7 TV audio feed

00:00:52.490 --> 00:00:57.469
to streaming platforms and call it done. CNN

00:00:57.469 --> 00:01:02.409
is on TuneIn. Fox News is on SiriusXM, MS Now

00:01:02.409 --> 00:01:05.969
has a linear feed on TuneIn as well. You can

00:01:05.969 --> 00:01:10.329
listen to all of them, but listening to TV without

00:01:10.329 --> 00:01:13.790
the picture isn't the same thing as audio, and

00:01:13.790 --> 00:01:17.469
the fact that you can technically do it, doesn't

00:01:17.469 --> 00:01:21.629
make it a radio product. Real audio is built

00:01:21.629 --> 00:01:26.209
around the assumption that you cannot see anything.

00:01:26.730 --> 00:01:30.909
The writing accounts for it. The pacing accounts

00:01:30.909 --> 00:01:35.849
for it. And when something visual happens, someone

00:01:35.849 --> 00:01:40.069
describes it. When there's a graphic, someone

00:01:40.069 --> 00:01:43.329
reads it. When there's a clip, the anchor sets

00:01:43.329 --> 00:01:46.269
it up so you know what you're about to hear and

00:01:46.269 --> 00:01:49.989
why it matters. None of that is complicated,

00:01:50.670 --> 00:01:55.069
but all of it is deliberate. TV assumes you're

00:01:55.069 --> 00:01:58.719
watching. When an anchor says, as you can see

00:01:58.719 --> 00:02:02.680
here, and pauses while a map fills the screen,

00:02:03.439 --> 00:02:06.400
audio listeners get silence and no idea what

00:02:06.400 --> 00:02:10.159
they're supposed to be seeing. When a breaking

00:02:10.159 --> 00:02:14.439
news chiron goes up, it doesn't go anywhere on

00:02:14.439 --> 00:02:18.479
audio. It just sits there as invisible text nobody

00:02:18.479 --> 00:02:22.120
reads aloud because everyone in the studio assumes

00:02:22.120 --> 00:02:27.289
you can see it. That's not a small problem. That's

00:02:27.289 --> 00:02:31.689
the whole product. The proof that it can be done

00:02:31.689 --> 00:02:34.569
differently isn't hard to find. And you don't

00:02:34.569 --> 00:02:54.719
have to leave the country to find it. all of

00:02:54.719 --> 00:02:59.000
it. It consistently ranks as the highest rated

00:02:59.000 --> 00:03:02.800
radio station in the DC market, not the highest

00:03:02.800 --> 00:03:06.719
rated news station, the highest rated station

00:03:06.719 --> 00:03:11.379
period, and has the Murrow awards to back it

00:03:11.379 --> 00:03:16.159
up. It built a great audio product and sold ads

00:03:16.159 --> 00:03:23.039
against it for over 55 years. The BBC and CBC

00:03:23.259 --> 00:03:26.400
get brought up in conversations like this because

00:03:26.400 --> 00:03:29.620
they did the same thing at a larger scale and

00:03:29.620 --> 00:03:35.819
earlier. BBC Radio and CBC Radio were built as

00:03:35.819 --> 00:03:39.659
distinct operations from their television sides,

00:03:40.479 --> 00:03:44.319
written and produced specifically for listeners.

00:03:45.400 --> 00:03:49.460
CBC Radio has been commercial -free since 1974.

00:03:50.259 --> 00:03:55.330
The BBC runs on a TV license fee. Those funding

00:03:55.330 --> 00:03:59.949
models are real differences, and anyone who says

00:03:59.949 --> 00:04:05.870
they don't matter is wrong. But WTOP is right

00:04:05.870 --> 00:04:10.050
there as evidence that a commercial free argument

00:04:10.050 --> 00:04:15.050
is a deflection. The question was never about

00:04:15.050 --> 00:04:18.550
the funding model, it was about whether you treat

00:04:18.550 --> 00:04:24.339
audio as its own discipline, or as a TV by -product?

00:04:24.839 --> 00:04:28.339
All three answered that question the same way,

00:04:28.620 --> 00:04:31.639
just with different revenue structures behind

00:04:31.639 --> 00:04:36.040
it. If the business case for a fully produced

00:04:36.040 --> 00:04:39.600
commercial feed is still a tough sell internally,

00:04:40.439 --> 00:04:43.600
SiriusXM and TuneIn already have the infrastructure

00:04:43.600 --> 00:04:48.990
for tiered models. A standard ad -supported feed,

00:04:49.389 --> 00:04:52.769
and a premium ad -free option, that's not a novel

00:04:52.769 --> 00:04:56.829
idea. Neither the production problem nor the

00:04:56.829 --> 00:05:00.029
monetization problem is actually hard to solve.

00:05:00.930 --> 00:05:04.170
MS Now is worth noting here because they're doing

00:05:04.170 --> 00:05:08.230
both things simultaneously. Their podcast operation

00:05:08.230 --> 00:05:11.790
is legitimate. Rachel Maddell Presents Ultra

00:05:11.790 --> 00:05:16.449
earned an Edward R. Murrow Award in 2025. and

00:05:16.449 --> 00:05:20.449
those narrative series are produced for years,

00:05:20.949 --> 00:05:25.250
not reproduced from TV. The criticism isn't about

00:05:25.250 --> 00:05:29.310
that work, it's specifically about the live 24

00:05:29.310 --> 00:05:32.990
-7 feed that gets dumped on the streaming platform

00:05:32.990 --> 00:05:37.149
and called radio. The national news audio space

00:05:37.149 --> 00:05:40.870
isn't crowded. Public radio serves a different

00:05:40.870 --> 00:05:46.029
mission. There's real room for a cable news operation

00:05:46.029 --> 00:05:51.230
to build something audio first. The audience

00:05:51.230 --> 00:05:55.949
exists. The content pipeline exists. The talent

00:05:55.949 --> 00:06:00.769
exists. What's missing is the decision to treat

00:06:00.769 --> 00:06:05.629
the live feed as something other than a TV byproduct.

00:06:07.110 --> 00:06:11.250
Nobody is choosing TuneIn CNN because it's a

00:06:11.250 --> 00:06:14.290
great radio product. They're there because it's

00:06:14.290 --> 00:06:19.930
available and the brand is familiar. That's inertia,

00:06:20.870 --> 00:06:25.389
not a product strategy. WTOP has been answering

00:06:25.389 --> 00:06:31.569
this question since 1969. Cable News just hasn't

00:06:31.569 --> 00:06:32.970
bothered to ask it.