object(WP_Post)#8442 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(2172) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "36" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2019-06-25 01:36:25" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2019-06-25 01:36:25" ["post_content"]=> string(6573) "

The immediate challenge is not killer robots, its job replacement. If individuals are automated out of jobs, the future for society is bleak.

Computers can already take orders, fold clothes and even drive cars, but where to from here?

The robots are coming. Although often spoken of in future tense, the truth is machine learning is well and truly here. Without realising, consumers interact with ‘smart’ technology at almost every touch point; from robotic vacuums to facial recognition technology, artificial intelligence (AI) is helping to complete tasks faster, cheaper and – sometimes - more effectively than ever before.

In an economy that’s driven by speed and efficiency, it should come as no surprise that a computer’s ability to communicate at a trillion bits per second is favoured above the human capability of about 10 bits.

McKinsey recently reported that 40 per cent of work tasks can be automated using existing technology, prompting everyone from factory workers to lawyers and accountants to consider the threat of being replaced by robots as not just inevitable, but imminent.

For technologists, we are witnessing first-hand how this emerging field is transforming the companies we work for.

In my work at Isentia, we use machine learning to process seven million news items each day. Not long ago this was a task relegated performed solely by humans with the mind-numbing task of flipping through newspapers in search of stories that might relate to a client.

We have a duty to empower those around us to learn everything they can about what their job may evolve into in order to become the very best man-machine partner possible.

Today, machines trawl video, audio and digital content across over 5,500 new sites at a rate of 234 stories per second and present meaningful summaries to clients in real-time.

Whether a story breaks on Twitter and then spills across news platforms and onto television and radio, machine learning can track and analyse how a story evolves with 99 per cent accuracy.

While AI is revolutionising the way that we work, the impact is far greater for those in the tech industry. In our mission to develop software that can learn complex problems without needing to be taught how, the success of the AI industry ultimately comes down to technology professionals: our ability to automate, and the pace at which we expand the field of machine learning.

With an annual growth rate of 19.7 per cent percent (predicted to be worth $15.3 billion by 2019), it’s safe to say our foot is well and truly on the pedal. While this relies greatly on our technical capabilities, it is something that challenges many of us ethically: what set of values should AI be aligned with?

Two of the greatest technologists of our times, Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking, have spoken about both the potential benefit and the harm that an AI arms race could deliver. An eradication of disease is not unfathomable, but nor is a threat to humanity. They hold grave concerns as to whether or not robots can be controlled against misuse or malfunction.

While thought provoking, the immediate challenge is not killer robots, it’s job replacement. Employment may not seem like an ethical problem, but if individuals are automated out of jobs, the future for society is bleak. While the phrase ‘Thank God it’s Friday’ has forged its way into the 9-to-5 vernacular, for most people, jobs create a huge sense of personal and professional satisfaction… not to mention a means to pay bills.

An apocalypse might be somewhat melodramatic, however I do agree that it is important to consider just how closely we should merge biological and digital intelligence.

Computers can already take orders, fold clothes and even drive cars, but where to from here? It’s both exciting and terrifying. The last time we experienced a revolution like this was in the early 1900s when cars, telephones and the airplane all emerged at once.

Contrary to the hype, there lies an enormous opportunity for humans to work with artificial intelligence, not be replaced by it.

Make no mistake: at some level every job can be carried out by a robot. But there are certain jobs, particularly in technology, that require decision making, planning or coding software.

While computers do a brilliant job of executing well-defined activities - such as telling us the fastest route to get from home to work - it is safe to say that humans are an essential component of goal setting, interpreting results, humour, sarcasm and implementing common sense checks.

The most difficult jobs to automate are those that involve managing and developing people. While in this industry most of our jobs are safe (for now), we should heed the advice of Musk and Hawkings and protect those outside our field by proceeding with caution. How then to facilitate human and robots working together harmoniously without the workforce morphing into cyborgs? The secret is to not sail out farther we can row back.

As technologists, we also have a duty to empower those around us to learn everything they can about what their job may evolve into in order to become the very best man-machine partner possible. It's the best, and most ethical, way to prepare for the inevitable advent of AI.

First publish in CIO New Zealand

Andrea Walsh, CIO

" ["post_title"]=> string(39) "It's time to slow down the AI arms race" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(92) "Computers can already take orders, fold clothes and even drive cars, but where to from here?" ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(38) "its-time-to-slow-down-the-ai-arms-race" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2019-06-26 01:01:55" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2019-06-26 01:01:55" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(43) "https://isentiastaging.wpengine.com/?p=1829" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }

object(WP_Post)#8533 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(39139) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "75" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2025-04-16 03:17:43" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-04-16 03:17:43" ["post_content"]=> string(8294) "

In Singapore, the rise of podcasting has shifted from entertainment and lifestyle into a new arena – public discourse and politics. As the 2025 General Election draws near, podcasters are making waves across online news and social media. To kick things off, we used Narrative AI, the first search engine for public opinion, to identify how large the global narrative on podcasts and their influence on audiences is in the last 6 months, using data from X.

We subsequently narrowed the focus of this global trend to Singapore and analysed on Pulsar TRAC more than 7k mentions across platforms like YouTube, Facebook, Reddit, TikTok, podcasts, Online News, blogs and forums to understand where the discourse is coming from, which channels are capturing the podcasters’ content and how audiences are responding to this content. 

Mentions of podcasts in news and social media are growing

Social media is where the larger chunk of podcast conversation is taking place, specifically those episodes that feature a political figure, journalist or those that include healthcare-related discussions. The audiences that engage with these videos, majority being on YouTube, search for political credibility that resonates with them. Young Singaporeans watching these podcasts expect to see leaders who don’t just uphold the image of being a politician, but also someone who is grounded and trustworthy.

Youth and politicians' lives dominate podcast narratives

The audiences that consume these podcasts the most are young Singaporeans looking to participate in the conversation as much as they can. These audiences are being more proactive than ever.

With younger voters consuming media differently, these appearances are efforts by political candidates to connect with the public. Lawrence Wong, Josephine Teo, Indranee Rajah, and Desmond Tan, have used podcasts to communicate directly with the public – sidestepping traditional media filters.

Top podcasters on election-related content

When we focus on who the most mentioned podcasters around election content are, the Straits Times’ podcasts, the Daily Ketchup and Yah Lah BUT emerge on top. These podcasts have figured that the most discourse happens around content that’s either educational or controversial around elections. The public is actively responding to political content shared via podcasts, particularly those by The Straits Times and independent shows like Yah Lah BUT. 

How are podcasts doing on Tiktok?

Satire and irony are key strategies to make politics palatable, especially for younger, digital-native audiences. The Daily Ketchup and Yah Lah BUT are blending serious topics like the GE2025, party agendas, healthcare, and opposition voices with humour that make them almost meme-worthy. Posts such as “PAP really said: ‘Trust me, bro’” TikTok clips show that these are genuinely made for content to go viral while retaining serious undertones too. 

What’s interesting to note is that The Common Folks, with content in Malay and Indonesian, is tapping into a cross-border Southeast Asian audience and has some of the highest engagement on its content. Local slang, cultural jokes, and casual festive content like Raya greetings and songkok jokes have generated thousands of views, at times outperforming English-language political pods. This suggests a large, under-acknowledged appetite for vernacular podcast content that has a blend of humour and relatability. 

Podcasts are no longer just background noise – they’re becoming one of the most relevant ways Singaporeans engage with politics. With high engagement on platforms like TikTok and YouTube, a wide spread of topics from youth issues to party politics, and growing presence in both mainstream and social media, podcasters are carving out a key role in shaping the GE 2025 conversation. 

Interested in learning more? Email us at info@isentia.com

" ["post_title"]=> string(64) "What is making podcasts stand out ahead of the Singapore GE2025?" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(65) "what-is-making-podcasts-stand-out-ahead-of-the-singapore-election" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2025-04-16 04:30:10" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-04-16 04:30:10" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=39139" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }

object(WP_Post)#10832 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(39117) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "36" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2025-04-15 23:08:54" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-04-15 23:08:54" ["post_content"]=> string(10484) "

As the federal election campaign reaches its midpoint, patterns in media coverage and public attention are beginning to shift. Early social engagement was driven by cost-of-living pressures, energy policy, and political point-scoring, but has waned following the first leaders debate, despite this forum providing leaders the opportunity to set the agenda and strategies of the major parties. So how has coverage focus evolved since the first debate and are audiences still engaging with the campaign or switching off?

Social media engagement ahead of the federal election has been sharp and personal. It focused less on policy and more on identity and representation. From debates on topics such as  immigration to housing stress and culture, social media has driven a values-first narrative. But while early attention  was strong, both media coverage and social engagement have started to wane in the weeks since the campaign launched. The first leaders debate briefly reignited attention—trust, identity, and media—but coverage patterns suggest a shift away from daily blow-by-blow reporting towards broader social and cultural tensions.

As the federal election campaign nears its halfway mark, last week’s media highlights show a contest still struggling to cut through. Key moments included the first leader’s debate, the Treasurers Debate, the energy showdown at the National Press Club, and Senator Jacinta Price’s Perth appearance with Peter Dutton, which drew attention for its MAGA-style rhetoric.  The first leaders debate was billed as a chance to reset the race—but for many viewers, it reinforced existing divides. Media attention around the debate momentarily lifted visibility for all major parties—but the spike was short-lived. The only party that has seen continued increases in social media engagement is the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party’s sustained rise in social media engagement may be linked to its digital-first strategy, including an AI-generated campaign ad spruiking a fuel excise cut and a meme-style diss track targeting Anthony Albanese—tactics designed to capture online attention and drive shareability.

The Liberals also pitched a $1200 tax cut, Labor attacked their WFH backflip, and the Greens pushed housing and tax reform. Meanwhile, Dutton warned of a Labor-Greens-Teal alliance. Coverage suggests public engagement is driven more by polarising moments and political theatre than detailed policy.

When the election campaign officially kicked off, cost-of-living pressures dominated the news agenda. Fresh off the back of the federal budget, it’s no surprise that affordable healthcare, lower gas and energy prices, and tax cuts were the key messages party leaders wanted to land with voters. But coverage quickly pivoted. In the past week, foreign diplomacy—particularly how each leader would manage Donald Trump—has surged in prominence. While Trump’s role in tariff threats has made headlines, his influence on the broader election narrative goes beyond trade. Media reporting has increasingly centred on Albanese and Dutton’s capacity to navigate a potential Trump presidency, with ideological alignment, national security, and economic fallout all in play. The first leaders’ debate was expected to refocus the campaign on domestic issues. However, it briefly touched on international concerns, with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese addressing the potential economic impact of Trump's proposed tariffs. Albanese described these tariffs as an "act of economic self-harm" that would dampen global growth, highlighting the intertwining of foreign policy with domestic economic concerns. This suggests that sustained attention is more likely when domestic issues are reframed through the lens of foreign diplomacy, and national identity.

In the social media landscape, Trump was a flashpoint in election-related conversation. His influence—real or perceived—was quickly linked to the Liberal Party, with MAGA-style rhetoric and Trumpian policy cues gaining traction online. These narratives tend to escalate on platforms where ideological alignment and cultural grievance amplify engagement. But it wasn’t all imported culture wars—the federal budget, and the Liberal Party’s fuel excise rebuttal, also drove significant social chatter. In recent weeks, comparisons between major party messaging and Trump-era policy—from international student caps and nuclear energy to debates about school curricula—have continued to dominate discussion.

The first leaders’ debate briefly touched on foreign policy, with Albanese warning Trump’s tariffs could hurt global growth, while Dutton framed it as a test of strong leadership. Domestically, Dutton’s renewed push for nuclear power reignited social media debate—drawing comparisons to Trump-era policies and fuelling discussion about Australia’s energy future. At the same time on social media, promises like HECS cuts, free TAFE, and more funding for public schools sparked genuine engagement, especially among younger voters and education workers, showing that practical, future-focused policies can still cut through. Compared to the start of the campaign, where cost-of-living dominated as a top-line concern, the conversation has expanded: audiences are now weighing both hip-pocket issues and the national values shaping Australia’s future.

While the debate itself tended to be overshadowed by frustrations about access and media control, a few political undercurrents still surfaced. Anthony Albanese drew some positive mentions, but reactions were far from policy-focused. The Liberal Party’s early claim of victory became a point of humour, with several users likening it to Trump-style misinformation tactics. Disillusionment with the major parties ran deep, with repeated calls to “break the donor-fuelled duopoly” and shift support toward independents or smaller parties. Still, these reactions seem more like a symptom of broader voter cynicism than a sign of energised political engagement, reflecting broader themes around the declining trust.

The leaders' debate didn’t reset the race—it refracted it, spotlighting how media coverage is now shaped less by policy detail and more by polarising symbols and cultural cues. As election day nears, the contest for attention is revealing just as much about media strategy and voter fatigue as it is about party platforms.

Discover more of our political news services

" ["post_title"]=> string(78) "Did the leaders debate reignite voter interest or just stoke the culture wars?" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(77) "did-the-leaders-debate-reignite-voter-interest-or-just-stoke-the-culture-wars" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2025-04-15 23:49:24" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-04-15 23:49:24" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=39117" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }

object(WP_Post)#10935 (24) { ["ID"]=> int(35541) ["post_author"]=> string(2) "36" ["post_date"]=> string(19) "2024-11-13 21:55:26" ["post_date_gmt"]=> string(19) "2024-11-13 21:55:26" ["post_content"]=> string(11456) "

The Australian podcasting news industry continues to grow. While Australian audiences do consume content from international brands like the BBC, they also exhibit strong affinity for independent Australian productions over mainstream sources. In a period of uncertainty amidst Apple’s recent update to automatic download policies Australia’s podcast audience has rapidly expanded, with ad revenue rising from $5 million in 2017 to over $100 million in 2024. So how do podcasts fit into the Australian news cycle? As audiences direct attention to independent and international productions, audience targeting, partnerships and media monitoring trends indicate a shift and a need to adapt engagement metrics and messaging strategy.

To highlight the impact of podcasts on audience engagement, we tracked coverage of key news themes in Australian podcasting from January 2020 to November 2024.

Podcasts surged into the mainstream during the pandemic, and they’re now evolving by integrating with platforms like video and audiobooks to meet new audience expectations. 

While general podcast news discussion remains steady, discussion on news podcasts indicates listener engagement peaks around high-impact stories, suggesting that the topic and information itself is what truly resonates with audiences. Outlets like The Australian Financial Review and ABC have expanded into the format, yet even major programs like ABC’s Background Briefing face fluctuating engagement compared to discussion about news content being consumed through podcasts. The data suggests there’s a gap being left by main outlets in the podcasting space. While traditional media adapts, independent producers are gaining traction with stories that deeply resonate on identity and community issues, such as the 2021 Christian Porter case and The Briefing’s 2024 episode on pianist Jayson Gillham’s lawsuit against the Melbourne Symphony Orchestra. Understanding audience preferences and monitoring content trends helps communicators craft strategies that leverage podcasting’s unique appeal.

Podcasts offer creators the freedom to pursue stories with fewer constraints of advertisers, investors, or other stakeholders, leading to content deeply shaped by personal passion and a strong connection to the subject. This independence empowers impactful storytelling, as illustrated by The Teacher’s Pet, where Hedley Thomas’s rigorous reporting on the case of Lynette Dawson uncovered new, critical details and underscored the journalistic integrity driving audience engagement in a shared pursuit of truth. Similarly, New Politics, co-created by Eddy Jokovich, leverages its Patreon-funded model to explore perspectives outside mainstream narratives, showcasing the power of independent journalism through podcasting.

Sports and entertainment tend to generate high visibility and engagement, suggesting they benefit from a faster publishing cadence and broad appeal. However issues like global conflicts draw significant attention, especially among communities directly impacted. The Briefing podcast, for example, addressed the October 2024 conflict in Gaza in a recent episode where Lebanese-Australian journalist Liz Deep-Jones offered a personal perspective. This type of coverage shows how podcasts can provide both journalistic depth and emotional resonance, connecting listeners to complex stories in a more relatable way.

Even if a major broadcaster or outlet owns a podcast production, the unique style and tone set by the hosts and production team often place podcasts outside the conventional PR and communications scope. Unlike the carefully curated talking points found in a typical puff piece or advertorial, podcasts allow for candid, in-depth discussions that explore complex topics with a degree of freedom seldom found in traditional news media channels. This authenticity is driven by the podcast format itself, which favours nuanced discussion offering audiences a more transparent and less scripted narrative style.

Many of the leading news podcasts, like The Quicky by Mamamia, follow a daily release that taps into the rhythm of the 24-hour news cycle, providing timely responses to breaking news. This format appeals to listeners by delivering news in a quick, digestible style, ideal for staying informed on the go and catering to audiences prioritising both convenience and relevance. It’s no surprise, then, that top news highlight podcasts often incorporate ads at multiple points—before, during, and after episodes—capitalising on the high listener engagement these accessible, on-the-go updates create.

Sports and entertainment podcasts tend to attract higher engagement with frequent, easily digestible episodes, often in the preferred 20-30 minute range, which sustain a steady listener base. Personalities like Hamish and Andy, and John Graham exemplify how audience visibility can be driven more by engaging personalities than by traditional news analysis. In contrast, outlets like The Australian Financial Review maintain a more analytical focus with podcasts such as The Fin and Chanticleer, known for their conservative, business-centric tone. Meanwhile, digital-first brands like Mamamia take a more hybrid, accessible approach across varied topics, leveraging podcasting to reach broader audiences and foster engagement with impactful news stories. This range of formats illustrates how different brands tailor their podcast strategies to meet audience preferences, from rapid updates in entertainment to in-depth discussions on current events.

While legacy media outlets leverage their reputations to enhance their podcast presence, credibility alone doesn’t ensure engagement. Instead, PR and communications teams can boost audience connection by aligning content with listeners’ interests and authenticity, helping refine podcasting strategies to capture attention and drive meaningful engagement.

Interested in learning more? Email us at info@isentia.com

" ["post_title"]=> string(77) "How Australian podcasts fit into the news cycle & ignite cultural moments" ["post_excerpt"]=> string(0) "" ["post_status"]=> string(7) "publish" ["comment_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["ping_status"]=> string(4) "open" ["post_password"]=> string(0) "" ["post_name"]=> string(36) "how-podcasts-fit-into-the-news-cycle" ["to_ping"]=> string(0) "" ["pinged"]=> string(0) "" ["post_modified"]=> string(19) "2025-04-14 22:24:35" ["post_modified_gmt"]=> string(19) "2025-04-14 22:24:35" ["post_content_filtered"]=> string(0) "" ["post_parent"]=> int(0) ["guid"]=> string(32) "https://www.isentia.com/?p=35541" ["menu_order"]=> int(0) ["post_type"]=> string(4) "post" ["post_mime_type"]=> string(0) "" ["comment_count"]=> string(1) "0" ["filter"]=> string(3) "raw" }