Mass-produced AI podcasts disrupt a fragile industry

Artificial intelligence now makes it possible to mass-produce podcasts with completely virtual hosts, a development that is disrupting an industry still finding its footing and operating on a fragile business model. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 13 October 2025
Follow

Mass-produced AI podcasts disrupt a fragile industry

  • No studio, no humans at the microphone, not even a recording — yet out comes a lively podcast, banter and all
  • With each episode costing one dollar to produce, a mere 20 listens is enough to turn a profit

NEW YORK: Artificial intelligence now makes it possible to mass-produce podcasts with completely virtual hosts, a development that is disrupting an industry still finding its footing and operating on a fragile business model.
Since Google launched Audio Overview, the first mass-market podcast generator that creates shows from documents and other inputs, just over a year ago, a wave of startups has rushed in, from ElevenLabs to Wondercraft.
No studio, no humans at the microphone, not even a recording — yet out comes a lively podcast, banter and all. Whether based on a legal document or a school handout, AI tools can deliver a state-of-the-art podcast at the click of a mouse.
A pioneer in this movement is Inception Point AI, which was launched in 2023 and releases about 3,000 podcasts per week with a team of just eight people.
The immediate goal is to play the volume game, said Jeanine Wright, Inception’s founder and the former number two at leading audio studio Wondery.
With each episode costing one dollar to produce, a mere 20 listens is enough to turn a profit. Automation has lowered the threshold for selling advertising space — previously set at several thousand downloads.
Wright gives the example of a “hyper-niche” program about pollen counts in a specific city, heard by a few dozen people that can attract antihistamine advertisers.
With the rise of generative AI, many worry about synthetic content of poor quality — often called “AI slop” — flooding the Internet, particularly social media.
Inception mentions AI’s role in every episode, a disclosure that generates “very little drop-off” among listeners, Wright told AFP.
“We find that if people like the (AI) host and the content, then they don’t care that it’s AI-generated or they’ve accepted it.”

Finding an audience 

Martin Spinelli, a podcast professor at Britain’s University of Sussex, decried a flood of content that will make it “harder for independent podcasters to get noticed and to develop a following” without the promotional budgets on the scale of Google or Apple.
The expected surge in programming will also cut into the advertising revenue of non-AI podcasts.
“If someone can make 17 cents per episode, and then suddenly they make 100,000 episodes, that 17 cents is going to add up,” warned Nate DiMeo, creator of “The Memory Palace,” a pioneering podcast for history buffs.
The industry veteran, whose program began in 2008, said he’s skeptical about the mass adoption of AI podcasts.
But even if listener tastes don’t change significantly, a glut of AI podcasts can “still impact the art form,” independent podcasting where most programs are barely managing to stay afloat.
Currently, the three major platforms — Apple Podcasts, Spotify and YouTube — don’t require creators to disclose when a podcast was created by AI.
“I would pay money for an AI tool that helps me cut through that noise,” said Spinelli, who finds the streaming giants ineffective at connecting niche content with its target audience.
Wright argues it’s pointless to draw a dividing line between AI and non-AI content because “everything will be made with AI,” to one degree or another.
She does believe, however, that AI-generated podcasts with synthetic voices will emerge as a distinct genre — somewhat like live-action films and animation, which have proven their storytelling potential and appeal over time.
“People dismissing all AI-generated content as slop right now are being thoughtless, because there’s a lot of great, compelling AI content that deserves their interest.”
DiMeo doesn’t see it that way.
He compares podcasting to reading a novel or listening to a song.
You simply want to connect “with some other human consciousness,” he said. “Without that, I find there’s less reason to listen.”
 


BBC ‘determined to fight’ Trump defamation claim

Updated 17 November 2025
Follow

BBC ‘determined to fight’ Trump defamation claim

  • Corporation chair Samir Shah says he sees no basis for Trump’s defamation claim, apologized for editing of Trump’s speech
  • Trump’s lawyers said would file case in the US where the US president is expected to face tougher legal standard given the protection of freedom of speech in the constitution

LONDON: The BBC is determined to fight any legal action filed by US President Donald Trump and sees no basis for a defamation case over its editing of one of his speeches, its chair said on Monday.
Trump said on Friday he was likely to sue the British broadcaster this week for up to $5 billion after it spliced together separate excerpts of a speech on January 6, 2021, when his supporters stormed the Capitol. The edit created the impression he had called for violence.
BBC chair Samir Shah sent a letter to Trump to apologize for the edit, the BBC said on Thursday, but it said it strongly disagreed there was a basis for a defamation claim.

SHAH SAYS BBC POSITION HAS NOT CHANGED
Trump told reporters on Friday he would sue for anywhere between $1 billion and $5 billion.
Shah told BBC staff in an email on Monday there was speculation about the possibility of legal action, including potential costs or settlements.
“In all this we are, of course, acutely aware of the privilege of our funding and the need to protect our license fee payers, the British public,” Shah wrote.
“I want to be very clear with you — our position has not changed. There is no basis for a defamation case and we are determined to fight this.”
The documentary, made by a third party, aired in Britain before the November 2024 US election. It showed Trump telling supporters “we’re going to walk down to the Capitol” and we “fight like hell,” a comment he made in a different part of his speech. Trump had in fact said supporters would “cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women.”
The edit was made public after the Daily Telegraph published a leaked internal BBC report.
The report, written by an independent adviser, contained wider criticism of the BBC’s news output, including assertions of anti-Israel bias at BBC Arabic and a lack of balance in stories about trans issues, and led to the resignation of the director-general Tim Davie and head of news Deborah Turness.

NO US BROADCAST
Trump’s lawyers said the edit caused the president “overwhelming reputational and financial harm,” according to a letter seen by Reuters.
They said they would sue in Florida, rather than in Britain, where the one-year limit to file a defamation case has expired.
Trump will face a tougher legal standard in the United States given the protection of freedom of speech in the constitution, lawyers have said.
The BBC is likely to argue that the program was not broadcast and was not available on its streaming service in the US, so voters in Florida could not have seen it.
The BBC, which is funded by a mandatory levy on TV-watching households, is also widely expected to challenge the reputational harm claim on grounds that Trump went on to win the election, and say the edit was not done in malice.