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

I'm Against Podcasts

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 300 posts

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#181

Post by crazygringo »

Weird article.

I personally can't listen to podcasts for another reason though: I find them so frustratingly slow. E.g. when I read the New Yorker, I can read 5x faster, and more importantly skip over sections I'm less interested in. (So even listening at 2x speed still doesn't fix it, and you just can't "scan" a podcast the way your eyes can scan a page.)

When I listen to a podcast, I feel so stuck at the pace of the spoken word.

A big part of it is also probably that I commute by subway so it's easy to read... maybe if I commuted by car I'd appreciate that a slow podcast is better than nothing at all.

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#182

Post by nickelcitymario »

leftyted wrote: post #173
nickelcitymario wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lou Reed made it pretty big though. Not compared to the influence he had on other musicians. The general music loving public is not THAT familiar with him. He was a musician's musician. (Also an asshole and abuser of women, which has nothing to do with this discussion, but I can't praise him without mentioning this.) > There's something phoney about podcasts. I see most podcasts as similar to TED talks or books by…

Sure, The Velvet Underground's influence on pop music exceeded their popularity, but they were relatively successful, just not compared to The Beatles or to Dylan (who influenced Lou Reed and The Beatles). But who is The Velvet Underground of podcasts? Who is the punk of podcasts? It's not Ira Glass. I'm not saying you're wrong to celebrate the "democratization of long form audio" but the popular stuff seems milqueto…

> the popular stuff seems milquetoast

Isn't that true of any medium?

I don't know who the Velvet Underground of podcasts would be. I wouldn't have recognized VU when they were getting started either.

I suspect this is the sort of thing that's easier to recognize when looking back.

I certainly didn't understand punk the way I do now back when I was a punk rocker. All I knew was I could play a little bass (badly) with some friends who played guitar and drums (badly) and sing (badly) and we had a blast doing it. Yet today, looking back, I see so many top-notch musicians who credit punk for the work they've been able to produce.

Of course, this may be my way of passing the buck. "Wait and see" is an easy way for me to dismiss your argument, and I apologize for that. It could be that in 10-20 years we'll look back at podcasting and say, "Meh, that didn't really amount to anything." But I suspect that won't be the case.

(As for my 2 cents on who's killing it at podcasting... I'm personally a fan of the Cracked podcast. It's always entertaining and educational to boot.)

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#183

Post by c0vfefe »

Canadauni wrote: post #4

I was never really into podcasts until I started my current job and commuting regularly. After a while I noticed that listening to music was beginning to fuel my frustration with other drivers and I'd get to work already stressed out. I started listening to talk radio and podcasts and that has really improved my feelings on the road and my state of mind walking into the office. I honestly don't think it has really im…

This is surprising, given the vitriol that is on much of talk radio. What kind of music was making you more frustrated on the road?

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#184

Post by wlesieutre »

Darkstryder wrote: post #159
wlesieutre wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you read 20 articles while driving a car or walking to the store or cleaning your house? I find they're a great way to double-up with activities where I'd otherwise be bored out of my mind, and I can take the opportunity to learn about something, or at the very least not be bored. TV might be more entertaining, but I've never heard anyone argue "Why would you sit down and watch the new Game of Thrones episode, yo…

I do these kind of activities, but mostly divided in 5 to 15mn chunks. (Notably, my commute to work is a mere 10mn walk and I have a toddler child at home requiring frequent attention) I would have trouble dividing a 40mn podcast into five listens divided over 3 days. For those kind of double-up, I find listening music vastly more enjoyable, but that's just my opinion. Lately I actually prefer not doubling-up and jus…

There's short form podcasts that work in 10-20 minute segments too, The Memory Palace is one that I'm subscribed to.

But I totally agree it's nice to not multitask and just let your mind wander sometimes.

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#185

Post by Gravityloss »

coldtea wrote: post #155
nickelcitymario wrote: post #96

This article is fantastic, because it lays out exactly why I love podcasts. Podcasts are to audio what punk rock was to music: freedom to be an amateur. Was punk for everyone? Nope. Were punks particularly talented? Some were, but mostly nope. Yet punk became one of the most influential genres of music of all time because it gave you permission to suck. It's like what's been said about the Velvet Underground: They ne…

> I couldn't be happier to see the elites complaining about podcasts. Especially when the elite's journalistic production (e.g. WP articles) are not really higher quality: just follow some long established conventions, are self-congratulatory, follow the norms of polite talk, try to not ask the "wrong" (elite-wise) questions, put into use all the BS they've learned on "essay/creative writing" class, etc, which is why…

Some print media podcast productions are super amateurish production wise. You can hear it's two persons in a tiny conference room with no sound proofing (so it's really echoey) and a third person phoning in so you can barely hear what they are saying. No editing whatsoever. Maybe recorded with a cell phone?

They should get a summer trainee who has been in a band, or even watch a youtube video on how to do podcasts. It should be easy to set up a normal microphone and put some foam rubber on the wall. And please, do get all the people in the same room!

But the content can actually be good - ie some enthusiastic reporters actually know widely about their subject and can discuss it in an interesting way. Vi Hart of youtube fame was invited to a journalist conference and was saying just the same - that we need good quality journalism and content should be front and center - and stop with the gimmicks and forced video features.

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#186

Post by 49531 »

dls2016 wrote: post #161
village-idiot wrote: post #77

.... so don’t listen to them? I don’t understand why someone’s personal media preferences require an editorial. I’m pretty meh on TV, but you don’t see me writing a few hundred words on it because I understand that nobody gives a shit about my media preferences.

Of course a jean-wearing, podcast-listening, village-idiot wouldn't understand the Washington Post's high-brow takes. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04...

This is such a wonderful piece. Thank you for sharing.

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#187

Post by PascLeRasc »

crazygringo wrote: post #181

Weird article. I personally can't listen to podcasts for another reason though: I find them so frustratingly slow. E.g. when I read the New Yorker, I can read 5x faster, and more importantly skip over sections I'm less interested in. (So even listening at 2x speed still doesn't fix it, and you just can't "scan" a podcast the way your eyes can scan a page.) When I listen to a podcast, I feel so stuck at the pace of th…

Do you have this problem with speaking to people in real life too? Podcasts aren't meant to be an information dump, it's about the interactions between the hosts.

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#188

Post by metamet »

coldtea wrote: post #155
nickelcitymario wrote: post #96

This article is fantastic, because it lays out exactly why I love podcasts. Podcasts are to audio what punk rock was to music: freedom to be an amateur. Was punk for everyone? Nope. Were punks particularly talented? Some were, but mostly nope. Yet punk became one of the most influential genres of music of all time because it gave you permission to suck. It's like what's been said about the Velvet Underground: They ne…

> I couldn't be happier to see the elites complaining about podcasts. Especially when the elite's journalistic production (e.g. WP articles) are not really higher quality: just follow some long established conventions, are self-congratulatory, follow the norms of polite talk, try to not ask the "wrong" (elite-wise) questions, put into use all the BS they've learned on "essay/creative writing" class, etc, which is why…

I think you're oversimplifying the trade of journalism and massively underselling the value and importance of it.

WP isn't "the elites". They're journalists. They have a trade, which is on a completely different plane and set of standards than a random blog.

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#190

Post by mikeash »

Podcasts are radio on demand. They offer all the variety that radio does, or did, and more. They can offer the quality of a good commercial radio show, or the quality of a rotting potato, or anything in between. It’s up to you to find something you like. There’s so much out there that there is probably something you’ll like.

So many of these comments talk as though “podcast” implies news or commentary and that’s it. Did I stumble into an alternate universe? I know those exist (news and commentary podcasts exist, that is), but there’s so much more. The closest I get are news-related comedy shows like Wait Wait or the BBC’s Now Show. I’m always on the lookout for the next episode of Welcome to Night Vale, and on the rare occasions that there’s a new Hardcore History, it’s a real treat. If I run out of something new, I love to listen to an episode or two of the old Dragnet radio series and get immersed in 1950’s Los Angeles.

Podcasts are inferior to text or video? That’s like saying that cheese is inferior to the Central Limit Theorem. The comparison doesn’t even make sense.

I basically can’t listen to podcasts without something physical to do. If I’m idle and trying to listen, I’ll start reading something at the same time and miss half the show. But while I’m out for a walk or doing yard work or cooking or on a long drive? They’re the best! Text or video aren’t sensible there. The only competition would be radio (or, ugh, my own thoughts), where the comparison is just like the comparison between live TV and video on demand.

Post reply on HN