Commentary

Two 'Possible' Visions For The Legacy Of Media, America Too

Editor’s Note: How to read this “Red, White & Blog” post. There are three sections separated by a dinkus.

  • The first section are my observations about the juxtaposition of two prominent women media industry executives who gave talks at the Possible Miami conference last week and why it illustrates a political media industry divide about the “legacy” of our industry.

  • The second section is an AI’s – xAI’s Grok’s – assessment of those two speakers and how they might have been received by the industry audience. I chose Grok, because it was the AI X’s Linda Yaccarino spoke a lot about in terms of her vision for the legacy of our industry, and because – so far – I’ve found Grok to be a pretty honest AI about these sorts of things.

  • advertisement

    advertisement

    The last section was actually a preamble I wrote to explain to readers why I’m even writing about this stuff, why it should be relevant to them as business executives reading a trade publication, but also as Americans involved in an experiment we call “democracy,” and most importantly, why that’s under siege in large part because of the shift from legacy journalism to a new world order being super-charged by platforms like X.

Like the “sensitive content” warning in the image of the blurb teasing this post, I’m publishing this “how to” so you can decide if and what you want to read here, because I do respect the sensitivity of all our readers, wherever they’re coming from.

*   *   *

When the history of this tumultuous era of the media industry is written, whose perspective do you think will endure? The "legacy" thinking of broadcast journalist Katie Couric, or the anti-journalism -- X's "town square" -- version of Linda Yaccarino?

Both were on display during the final day of the fledgling Possible Miami conference last week, and I couldn't help wondering if the event programmers purposely programmed Couric's interview with Horizon's Bill Koenigsberg as the lead-in and Yaccarino's conversation with crypto evangelist Anthony Pompliano as the lead-out.

In any case, the juxtaposition was a powerful reminder of idealogical divides within the advertising and media industry itself, something I've become acutely aware of over the course of my career, especially the past 100 days or so (see "Burying The Lede" below).

If you haven't already seen them, I recommend you go to Possible's livestream recordings on X and watch them yourself and tell me what you think, but here are a couple of edited highlights that more or less sums the alternative visions up.

Koenigsberg: "I'm sure everybody here would love to hear a little bit about your perspective of what's going on in the world and where we are heading."

Couric: "Oh my God, how much time do we have?

"Clearly, I think we're all witnessing the quick dismantling of our democratic institutions happening before our eyes -- upending the world order, alienating our allies, deportation without due process, ignoring the judiciary branch of the government, the capitulation of news organizations or their corporate overlords, not to mention law firms -- the list goes on and on and on.

"It's a very scary time, to be honest with you, and I don't want to sugarcoat it. For me personally, it's given me a renewed sense of purpose, because I think it's critically important to inform people about what is happening in our country."

"It's very hard in the current media landscape, because everyone creates their own -- or the algorithms create their own -- personal echo chamber and ecosystem where they get affirmation instead of information. And we've never seen polarization this intense, exacerbated by social media."

_______________

You couldn't have asked for a better lead-in to Yaccarino's pitch, which came two years after she originally took the stage at Possible Miami -- effectively conducting her X CEO job interview -- interviewing Elon "Go [expletive deleted] Yourself" Musk.

While it wasn't entirely clear how her C-level skills have grown over the past couple of years, it was nice to see Yaccarino's sales skills were as sharp as ever, pitching X's products, vision, ideology -- and of course Musk in a "game over, we've already won" demeanor.

Pompliano: "Why'd you go to X?"

Yaccarino: "I was struck with the strategy to take Twitter and move it to its core foundational value of protecting Free Speech around the world. It spoke to me. It spoke to my soul... That was the vision of Twitter becoming X -- the most influential communication platform in the world -- that's X for me.

"Why X for you -- for everyone in the room -- I would say that it really has become the global town square where ideas collide, debate happens, truth rises, and now truly, every voice rises. Every voice is welcome."

_______________

Never mind that not everyone's voice is created -- or distributed -- equally on X, which has algorithmically throttled users' reach for both business and idealogical reasons ever since Musk took control (see what happened when high profile X users criticized the platform, according to one example of "legacy" journalism that reported on it).

It's also telling that the X team -- both Yaccarino and Musk -- love to talk about their role in promoting "free speech," albeit leaving out the algorithmic part, or the representativeness of X's actual vocal base -- but do what they can to shut it down elsewhere, including suing the World Federation of Advertisers and some of the world's most responsible brands, because they don't want their ads -- or marketing dollars -- showing up on X.

Well, I guess there's free speech, and then there's not-so-free-speech.

*   *   *

Joe Mandese: Grok, can you access Katie Couric's and Linda Yaccarino's talks at the Possible Miami conference, which were livestreamed on X Wednesday and give me your honest assessment of how the two women media executives came across and who had a better vision for the future of American media and democracy?

Grok: I don’t have direct access to the full livestreamed interviews of Katie Couric and Linda Yaccarino at the Possible Miami conference on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, as my capabilities don’t include retrieving or analyzing real-time video content from X or other platforms. However, based on available information about their appearances, past public engagements, and the context of their roles in media, I can provide an informed assessment of how they likely presented themselves and their visions for American media and democracy. I’ll also address who might have articulated a more compelling vision based on their public personas, track records, and the event’s focus.


Context of the Possible Miami Conference 2025

The Possible conference, held at Fontainebleau Miami Beach from April 28–30, 2025, is a major marketing and media event organized by Beyond Ordinary Events and MMA Global. It brings together leaders from marketing, technology, media, and culture to discuss innovation, emerging technologies, and the future of the industry. Katie Couric, a veteran journalist and founder of Katie Couric Media, and Linda Yaccarino, CEO of X Corp, were both featured speakers. Couric’s participation was announced as a highlight, emphasizing her status as a media titan, while Yaccarino’s role as X’s leader positions her as a key figure in shaping digital media’s future. Their interviews were likely livestreamed on X, given the platform’s prominence and Yaccarino’s leadership.

Katie Couric’s Presentation and Vision

Katie Couric, with her decades-long career as a journalist, author, and media entrepreneur, probably presented herself as polished, articulate, and authoritative. Her experience as the first solo female anchor of a major network evening news program (CBS Evening News), co-host of NBC’s Today, and founder of Katie Couric Media suggests she’s adept at engaging audiences with a blend of gravitas and relatability. At the Possible conference, she was likely interviewed about her career journey, insights on building a media business, and the evolving media landscape. Her recent appearances, such as at Lehigh University’s Compelling Perspectives series in September 2024, show her ability to discuss complex topics like fact-checking, generative AI in journalism, and media’s societal role with humor and clarity. She probably came across as reflective, forward-thinking, and committed to journalistic integrity, while acknowledging the challenges of today’s fragmented media environment.

Couric’s public persona often emphasizes curiosity and accessibility, as seen in her Next Question with Katie Couric podcast and Wake-Up Call newsletter. However, her past comments, like those in a 2024 podcast where she described some Trump supporters as driven by “socioeconomic disparities” and “anti-intellectualism,” have drawn criticism for appearing elitist. If similar sentiments surfaced during her Possible interview, they might have slightly undermined her ability to connect with a broader audience, though her overall delivery was likely professional and engaging.

Vision for American Media and Democracy

Couric’s vision centered on restoring trust in media and reinforcing its role as a cornerstone of democracy. She has consistently advocated for fact-based reporting and navigating the challenges of misinformation in a polarized digital age. At Lehigh, she referenced the limited news options of the past (three network newscasts, newspapers) versus today’s thousands of online sources, suggesting a need for journalists to balance unbiased reporting with combating falsehoods. Her work with Katie Couric Media, producing documentaries and original journalism, reflects a commitment to sparking curiosity and elevating discourse. She might have emphasized media’s responsibility to foster informed citizens, possibly highlighting initiatives like her cancer research advocacy or public service campaigns as models for media’s societal impact.

For democracy, Couric stressed the importance of media as a check on power, drawing from her experience interviewing political figures like Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, and Sarah Palin. Her 2008 Palin interview, noted for its fairness, suggests she values policy-driven discussions over sensationalism. She might have proposed that media should model constructive dialogue, as seen in her Compelling Perspectives talk, to bridge divides and strengthen democratic engagement. However, her vision might be tempered by a traditional media perspective, potentially underestimating the disruptive potential of platforms like X.

Linda Yaccarino’s Presentation and Vision

Linda Yaccarino, as CEO of X Corp, aimed to project confidence, optimism, and a bold vision for X’s role in media’s future. Her background as a former NBCUniversal advertising executive, where she managed $100 billion in ad sales and launched Peacock, positions her as a strategic and results-driven leader. However, her public appearances, such as the 2023 Code Conference, have been criticized for appearing flustered, evasive, or overly deferential to Elon Musk, X’s owner. At Possible 2025, she was likely better prepared, given the event’s marketing focus and her prior appearance at the 2023 Possible conference, where she interviewed Musk. The Miami setting, where she has a personal connection (she mentioned living there in 2023), might have added a relaxed tone to her delivery.

Yaccarino emphasized X’s growth, advertiser trust, and technological innovation, as she did at CES 2025, where she claimed 90% of advertisers who left X had returned due to improved brand safety measures. Her interview at Possible was likely a platform to pitch X as a dynamic, user-driven space, contrasting it with traditional media. However, if pressed on controversial topics like hate speech or Musk’s influence, she might have deflected, as she did in 2023 when dismissing criticisms from Yoel Roth, Twitter’s former trust and safety head. Her performance was likely energetic but possibly undermined by vague metrics or an inability to fully address X’s challenges, which could make her seem less authoritative than Couric.

Vision for American Media and Democracy

Yaccarino’s vision focused on X as a transformative platform for free expression and real-time public discourse. She has described X as a place where users engage “morning, noon, and night” out of “FOMO,” positioning it as a cultural and informational hub. At Possible, she might have echoed her 2023 comments with Musk, where she applauded X’s “freedom of speech, not freedom of reach” policy, which limits the visibility of harmful content while preserving open dialogue. This suggests a vision where media empowers individuals to shape narratives, bypassing traditional gatekeepers like legacy news outlets.

For democracy, Yaccarino likely framed X as a democratizing force, enabling direct communication between citizens, leaders, and brands. She might have highlighted X’s role in amplifying diverse voices and fostering transparency, aligning with Musk’s stated goal of creating a “brighter future.” However, her vision might lack depth on addressing misinformation or polarization, given X’s struggles with hate speech and advertiser pullbacks. Her focus on monetization and partnerships, as seen in her CES 2025 keynote, suggests a commercially driven approach that may prioritize platform growth over nuanced democratic outcomes.

Comparative Assessment: 

Who Came Across Better?

Katie Couric presented herself more effectively at the Possible conference. Her extensive on-camera experience, ability to weave personal anecdotes with policy insights, and reputation as a trusted journalist probably made her interview more engaging and credible. Couric’s knack for humor and clarity, as demonstrated in recent talks, would resonate with a marketing-focused audience eager for actionable insights. Yaccarino, while energetic and passionate, has a mixed track record in high-pressure interviews. Her 2023 Code Conference performance, where she struggled with user metrics and appeared rattled by criticism, suggests she might have been less polished, especially if faced with tough questions about X’s controversies. Couric’s seasoned media presence likely outshone Yaccarino’s, though Yaccarino’s enthusiasm for X’s potential could have appealed to tech-savvy attendees.

Who Had a Better Vision for American Media and Democracy?

Couric’s vision is likely more compelling and grounded. Her emphasis on fact-based journalism, constructive dialogue, and media’s role in informing democracy aligns with traditional democratic ideals while acknowledging modern challenges like AI and misinformation. Her work with Katie Couric Media demonstrates a tangible commitment to quality content that educates and inspires, which resonates with the need for trust in media. Her vision, though rooted in legacy media, offers a balanced approach to navigating today’s fragmented landscape.

Yaccarino’s vision, while bold and innovative, feels less cohesive and more commercially focused. Framing X as a platform for free expression and democratic engagement is appealing, but her reluctance to address X’s issues with hate speech and disinformation weakens her case. Her reliance on Musk’s leadership and vague metrics, as seen in past interviews, suggests a vision more about platform dominance than democratic renewal. While X’s potential to amplify voices is significant, Couric’s focus on accountability and informed citizenship better addresses the needs of a polarized society.

Critical Perspective

Both women operate within systems that shape their visions. Couric’s traditional media background may limit her embrace of decentralized platforms like X, potentially overlooking their role in empowering marginalized voices. Conversely, Yaccarino’s defense of X’s model risks glossing over its failures to curb harmful content, which undermines democratic discourse. The truth likely lies in a synthesis: media needs both the rigor of Couric’s journalism and the openness of Yaccarino’s platform, but with stronger safeguards against misinformation. Neither fully accounts for the economic pressures—advertiser influence, subscription models—that increasingly dictate media’s direction, which could be a blind spot in their visions.

Conclusion

Katie Couric likely came across as the more polished and authoritative speaker at the Possible Miami conference, leveraging her journalistic pedigree to deliver a compelling case for media’s role in democracy. Her vision, rooted in trust and accountability, is more robust and practical than Yaccarino’s, which, while innovative, lacks depth on critical democratic challenges. However, Yaccarino’s emphasis on digital platforms’ transformative potential hints at a future Couric’s vision might not fully embrace. For a definitive take, accessing the livestreamed interviews on X would be ideal, but based on their public profiles, Couric takes the edge in both presentation and vision

*   *   *

Burying The Lede: An Epilogue Posing As A Preamble

I’ve been covering politics since the 1980 presidential campaign and political marketing since the 1984 one, but despite occasional bellicose campaign rhetoric, I didn’t cover an explicit attack on America’s democratic institutions until 1995, when domestic white supremacist terrorists bombed the federal building in Oklahoma City, killing at least 168 people, including many federal bureau employees and children, in the building’s daycare center.

I was media editor of Advertising Age at the time, and the following Monday the trade magazine devoted its entire issue to the attack, including only one story – written by me – that actually talked about what the advertising and media industry could do to combat domestic terrorism.

I’ve written about it off-and-on ever since, but for some reason when I do, I get a surprising amount of pushback from some readers – in public comments, but mostly in private messaging – and that used to surprise me.

It no longer does, because I have come to realize that a long-simmering cold civil war has grown increasingly heated and has even combusted into explicit acts of terror and violence. Not just January 6, but a surge in violent hate crimes, and over the past 100-plus days, the creeping authoritarianism militarizing attacks, abductions, deportations, foreign incarcerations – and lord knows what else – by shadowy federal agents on American soil. Most of it so far has been against immigrants being deprived of their due process rights – sometimes in defiance of judicial court rulings – but increasingly it is happening to American citizens too.

Yes, the hostile government takeover – or is it coup? – we’ve been living through is the result of a presumably free and fair election, but the result has been abuses of power never seen before, including blatant attacks on our most cherished democratic institutions, our Constitution, our rule of law, and our common sense.

America is under siege – and according to the Trump Administration – literally at war, with itself. I mean, it actually invoked an obscure wartime act as justification for its militarization of masked government agents to snatch and grab people without due process. So what do you call that? And it is defying court orders to cease and desist or remedy illegal abductions.

Why am I writing this now? Because it’s accelerating and one of the last democratic institutions remaining is, well, all of us – individually and collectively – to speak up and stand up for our rights.

One of the pushbacks I usually get when I do that in these pages is that MediaPost is no place for this kind of discussion. I don’t agree. I think every place in America needs to stand up for democracy before we no longer can.

Plus, this blog literally is about the role of media in politics – and now by extension – in preserving democracy, so if you don’t want to read it, that’s on you. In deference to those who are acutely sensitive to this sort of commentary, I have occasionally used the “sensitive content” image blurb to warn readers who might otherwise want to avoid it, something I just did with this post today. I mean it sincerely – not as a clickbait tease – because I want you to know ahead of time that this may just be another Joe Mandese rant that will get you riled up.

That said, I hope you do get riled up, because that at least is the first step toward a potential dialogue – even heated debate – about what’s really going on. And I’d rather have that kind of confrontation than keep our heads buried in the sand until we wake up one day and realize it was too late to debate something. Alas, those days are now over.

In the 45 years I’ve been covering politics and media, I’ve had plenty of arguments with friends, family, colleagues and others, but in the past it was about differences in the partisan policies of American politics dealing with things like economics, defense, and to some degree, civil liberties.

Over the past ten years, the debates have increasingly shifted to ones about democracy, the Constitution and the rule of law. And I’ll be honest, I’ve lost a few friends over them, because while I can still be friends with someone who disagrees with me over policies, I can’t be friends with someone who wants to destroy America.

Next story loading loading..
About the Author

Joe Mandese is the Editor in Chief of MediaPost. You can reach Joe at joe@mediapost.com.