Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How spammers are gaming the podcast charts

chartable.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 32 posts

Re: How spammers are gaming the podcast charts

#21

Post by cwkoss »

mcbits wrote: post #16
CPLX wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couldn't we just skip the technology part and have podcasters send money directly to scammers in exchange for the scammers not listening to their podcasts?

"Scammer" here is someone who signs up and then never listens to anything? Don't send them anything. Scammer and spammer problems solved.

How do you verify if someone actually listened to a podcast vs. someone who has 100+ accounts, a wall of 100 mobile phones constantly 'listening' to 100 podcasts simultaneously to game the system?

Re: How spammers are gaming the podcast charts

#22

Post by ryanwaggoner »

mcbits wrote: post #11

Startup idea for anyone so inclined: Create a podcast distribution service where podcasters pay the current cost of a postage stamp per listener to push podcasts onto devices. If the recipient listens to the podcast, the money is refunded to the podcaster. If they delete it or ignore it for 30 days, they keep the money. The podcasters are allowed to see anonymized metrics for who listens to what. Listeners can use th…

Sweet! I can now sign up to as many podcasts as I want, never listen to anything, and make money.

And so can everyone else.

And podcasters would love to use this distribution system that will net them $0 after risking capital, ONLY if they magically achieve a 100% listen rate in spite of the incredible incentives to have the listen rate be 0%. Otherwise it’ll cost them money.

And for all that hassle and risk, they get a distribution system no better than the free and open one they enjoy now.

Perhaps I’ve misunderstood something, otherwise I don’t think this idea is viable :)

Re: How spammers are gaming the podcast charts

#23

Post by skinnymuch »

a7776f88862 wrote: post #20
ballenf wrote: post #8

A podcaster (and Youtuber) who I really enjoy is CGP Grey. He has been proposing allowing voluntary removal of view numbers from Youtube and similar platforms. I think Apple should fix or remove their rankings but, please , don't add any more metrics. The podcast world is currently mostly immune from so much of the clickbaity trash on Youtube (that arguably isn't even YT's fault). I admit it's very counterintuitive o…

> I admit it's very counterintuitive or almost subversive these days to suggest that internet points be kept secret. Media popularity rankings are toxic for everyone but distribution middlemen and advertisers. They turn what should be heterogeneous markets for content producers and their audiences in many different niches (geographic area, interests, subcultures, etc), into a global winner-take-all popularity race in…

Which of the two groups of people are benefitting from Hacker News showing metrics? Stories show points and total number of comments. Anyone can see anyone’s total karma. And you personally can see your comment karma.

YouTube and and other social media would still get advertising and such without public metrics since you could give private access to them when trying to make deals.

So overall I don’t see how either groups of people mentioned are benefitting much from HN showing metrics.

Re: How spammers are gaming the podcast charts

#25

Post by mcbits »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #22
mcbits wrote: post #11

Startup idea for anyone so inclined: Create a podcast distribution service where podcasters pay the current cost of a postage stamp per listener to push podcasts onto devices. If the recipient listens to the podcast, the money is refunded to the podcaster. If they delete it or ignore it for 30 days, they keep the money. The podcasters are allowed to see anonymized metrics for who listens to what. Listeners can use th…

Sweet! I can now sign up to as many podcasts as I want, never listen to anything, and make money. And so can everyone else. And podcasters would love to use this distribution system that will net them $0 after risking capital, ONLY if they magically achieve a 100% listen rate in spite of the incredible incentives to have the listen rate be 0%. Otherwise it’ll cost them money. And for all that hassle and risk, they ge…

You don't have to sign up for any podcasts. You just sign up and start receiving recommendations. At first, recommendations are free or virtually free for the podcaster, since there is no data about your interests. You start accepting the ones that interest you and rejecting the ones that don't.

Podcasters get access to the entire data set for every listener and can run clustering and regression to their hearts' content. As you listen to podcasts and perhaps rate them, the cost to target you (i.e. your random ID) goes up because the podcasters have better data to work with and should know better than to send you politics podcasts when all you listen to is vampire erotica.

If you become a listener, then they've acquired a listener and you've acquired a podcast that you like. If you're not interested, then they pay the cost of poor targeting, and you are compensated for the inconvenience. Proper incentives all around!

The net cost to the podcaster doesn't have to be $0 for the service to be worthwhile. It only has to be more effective than AdWords and other venues where they pay to expose themselves.

Re: How spammers are gaming the podcast charts

#26

Post by mcbits »

cwkoss wrote: post #21
mcbits wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Scammer" here is someone who signs up and then never listens to anything? Don't send them anything. Scammer and spammer problems solved.

How do you verify if someone actually listened to a podcast vs. someone who has 100+ accounts, a wall of 100 mobile phones constantly 'listening' to 100 podcasts simultaneously to game the system?

That would be a really counterproductive way to game the system. :)

Re: How spammers are gaming the podcast charts

#27

Post by corobo »

ballenf wrote: post #8

A podcaster (and Youtuber) who I really enjoy is CGP Grey. He has been proposing allowing voluntary removal of view numbers from Youtube and similar platforms. I think Apple should fix or remove their rankings but, please , don't add any more metrics. The podcast world is currently mostly immune from so much of the clickbaity trash on Youtube (that arguably isn't even YT's fault). I admit it's very counterintuitive o…

I liked what he was putting down in this (even if it does mean he's on a HN fast!) when I first saw it

I've used uBlock Origin to block the score-related elements in Reddit as well as my own comment scores here. I don't think I pay much attention to the numbers in YouTube etc but will do so there too if I notice I'm checking them

  www.reddit.com##.score-hidden, .score
  news.ycombinator.com##.score

Re: How spammers are gaming the podcast charts

#28

Post by ryanwaggoner »

mcbits wrote: post #25
ryanwaggoner wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sweet! I can now sign up to as many podcasts as I want, never listen to anything, and make money. And so can everyone else. And podcasters would love to use this distribution system that will net them $0 after risking capital, ONLY if they magically achieve a 100% listen rate in spite of the incredible incentives to have the listen rate be 0%. Otherwise it’ll cost them money. And for all that hassle and risk, they ge…

You don't have to sign up for any podcasts. You just sign up and start receiving recommendations. At first, recommendations are free or virtually free for the podcaster, since there is no data about your interests. You start accepting the ones that interest you and rejecting the ones that don't. Podcasters get access to the entire data set for every listener and can run clustering and regression to their hearts' cont…

Sorry, this would never work. Maybe if Apple launched this so that you had already overcome chicken and the egg. But I’d never ever sign up for this as a podcaster (or any kind of audience builder) unless there was literally no other choice because that’s where ALL the listeners are. Even then, I’d probably just do something else rather than allow some sleazy middle-man to screw me over while trying to connect with my fans.

You’re totally missing the point that podcasts are pull, not push. I listen to dozens of them, none of them have ever “spammed” me. That literally makes no sense. I subscribed to them. There’s no way for them to push their podcast on someone who doesn’t want it.

Re: How spammers are gaming the podcast charts

#29

Post by mcbits »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #28
mcbits wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to sign up for any podcasts. You just sign up and start receiving recommendations. At first, recommendations are free or virtually free for the podcaster, since there is no data about your interests. You start accepting the ones that interest you and rejecting the ones that don't. Podcasters get access to the entire data set for every listener and can run clustering and regression to their hearts' cont…

Sorry, this would never work. Maybe if Apple launched this so that you had already overcome chicken and the egg. But I’d never ever sign up for this as a podcaster (or any kind of audience builder) unless there was literally no other choice because that’s where ALL the listeners are. Even then, I’d probably just do something else rather than allow some sleazy middle-man to screw me over while trying to connect with m…

It's not a chicken-and-egg problem. Clearly, building the audience is the harder problem and the priority. When you have an audience, podcasters pay to reach that audience, which is usually done by pestering people with web ads until they install an ad blocker or by hiring sleazy "PR consultants" to spam the ratings and reviews and social media. This would just cut out those middlemen and compensate the audience directly whenever the messaging misses the mark.

Re: How spammers are gaming the podcast charts

#30

Post by a7776f88862 »

skinnymuch wrote: post #23
a7776f88862 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I admit it's very counterintuitive or almost subversive these days to suggest that internet points be kept secret. Media popularity rankings are toxic for everyone but distribution middlemen and advertisers. They turn what should be heterogeneous markets for content producers and their audiences in many different niches (geographic area, interests, subcultures, etc), into a global winner-take-all popularity race in…

Which of the two groups of people are benefitting from Hacker News showing metrics? Stories show points and total number of comments. Anyone can see anyone’s total karma. And you personally can see your comment karma. YouTube and and other social media would still get advertising and such without public metrics since you could give private access to them when trying to make deals. So overall I don’t see how either gr…

> Which of the two groups of people are benefitting from Hacker News showing metrics?

That is a bit of a nonsense question. Neither benefit, because there is no advertising on HN, and HN is not a media distribution business. HN is an online forum, and the original point of post ratings on forums was crowdsourced moderation. The point of online forum moderation is to remove spam, trolling, kooks, and other things that waste your reading time. So moderation is a strictly negative system. Using post ratings for online reputation is what turns it into a positive system.

IMO online reputation based on upvotes is a game with no winners, only losers. Problems include gamification and addiction, groupthink, privacy risks (it is very easy to correlate bits of information to deanonymize pseudonyms, the persistent use of which the point system encourages). What's the benefit? It is much more valuable to focus on the moderation aspects. The problem with online communities today is keeping out spam, trolls, kooks, idiots, and other bad actors. Modding down inane and ignorant postings so that they don't waste people's time is much more valuable in keeping forums interesting and relevant than another 10 upvotes. "Harmless" but useless and time-wasting posts will drive participants away and erode the community. That is the one of the lessons of Eternal September.

Post reply on HN