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…
Exactly right. Any way we can find to create low barriers of entry into media is a good thing. We have to find a way to preserve the manic weirdness of the old internet.
> 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.
Some of it, particularly the funding for investigative journalism and research, is valuable and on a completely different plane of standards than (some) random blogs.
This is by far the most immature accusation of all accusations i have heard from people on podcasts. He lost me when he said "Most podcasts are conversations for people to eavesdrop on — recorded talk that precludes real-life talk about real life with zombie talk about podcasts". This is like saying "Chemistry is just mixing chemicals on conical flasks and lighting up bunsen burners". This is oversimplyfying the existence of podcasts. What about social media ? Does it not preclude from real life connectivity. What about videos ? does it not preclude from real life experience ? What about any form of art ? Does it not preclude us from observing the art of nature. You can basically say this argument to anything. Its an empty argument.
> 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…
You've convinced me that "I'm Against Podcasts" is a stupid statement. I think you're absolutely on-point for saying that, 10-20 years from now, we'll look back on podcasts that are widely acknowledged as classic. At the same time, I think criticisms by this author are mostly valid and probably helpful (inasmuch as they push people to innovate and take risks with the medium). The criticisms are just overly broad and…
Like I said, "This article is fantastic" :-)
The author isn't wrong, in that you can't really be wrong about a subjective opinion. The man dislikes podcasts, and that's a-ok.
I just happen to love them for all the same reasons he hates them. He's right that far too many podcasts sound like Ira Glass wannabes. He's right that the production quality isn't very high most of the time. There's plenty of garbage.
But the fact that podcasting allows garbage to exist? That's pure gold.
I used to be quite fond of many podcasts, but my love has been recently waning, mostly owing to two obnoxious trends: 1) Re-runs, which make no sense in the podcast realm; and 2) podcasts airing episodes from other shows on the same podcast network. Both practices are increasingly common, and they rapidly fill my feed with content I don't care to listen to. It's hard to housekeep since I mostly listen while driving.
>podcasts airing episodes from other shows on the same podcast network
I get your point but it's also allowed me to discover podcasts I probably wouldn't have otherwise learned about. And my general experience is that, if the cross-post is on a favorite podcast, it's probably worth at least a trial run.
I mostly pre-curate a playlist before getting in the car. There are very few podcasts where I listen to all or even most episodes. I do wish there was a better voice interface of some sort so that I could better interact while driving.
> Podcasts are bad because podcasts sound bad — and podcasts sound bad because podcasters aren’t thinking hard enough about what their talk sounds like. But this is exactly why we should cherish podcasts! They're one of the last vestiges of the old, weird, free Internet that we have left. Podcasts (mostly) sound bad because the people making them are (mostly) amateurs, which means they don't know the ins and outs of…
Hell, I can deal with shitty microphones, I just wish people would figure out that you need to record all speakers' audio independently and not rely on Skype or Discord or whatever relaying it to a single location. Robovoice is the worst.
I just listened to an interview podcast that was clearly done on Skype. Interviewer on the left stereo channel, interviewee on the right. Despite the sucky sound quality of Skype and mics, the stereo separation made it relatively easy to follow.
Of course, this one is all about kitchen remodeling. I don't expect kitchen remodeling experts to also be audio engineers.
What an edgy, contrarian critique. Watch as the author translates his criticisms of some podcasts that he doesn't like into a global criticism of all podcasts. I wonder if this guy still insists on listening _exclusively_ to LPs and lossless audio formats. Here are some things about podcasts that I love: * some podcasts are true gems -- extremely high quality content * free * no ads or ads are trivial to avoid * blat…
Can you point me to some high quality podcasts? Most I have listened to have so much fluff and unnecessary banter that I subconsciously tune out.
I have been trying to get on the podcast bandwagon but having a hard time finding something to like.
It's pretty clear what's happening here: the author prefers music to podcasts, and then tries his best to make some sort of argument to justify this. His arguments are at best nonsensical and at worst completely contradictory. I was considering writing out a response to each of his points but it's honestly not worth my time. A lot of what the author says is a blatant slap in the face to podcasters that spend so many…
"I have strong feelings, and therefore I will invent rational-sounding excuses to justify my feelings, and I know they are right because they are mine!" kind of writing.
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…
Lou Reed made it pretty big though. I agree with the article. Especially this part: > Forget the lousy microphones and the dinky interstitial stock music — the thing that derails most podcasts is the blab. There are two kinds, more or less. The first is that soft, inquisitive staccato popularized by Ira Glass on “This American Life,” the source from which so much pod-voice appears to have sprung. The second mode is p…
Weird. The podcasts I listen to are mostly improvised long form conversations between interesting people: EconTalk, Partially Examined Life, Primo Nutmeg, The Henry George Program, Software Engineering Daily, A16Z, Track Changes, Joe Rogan, Tyler Cowan, and so on. Mainstream anything is kind of bad, but the supply of truly interesting podcasts is quite tremendous.
This article reads like a wordy extension of the author's "Twitter fit". I feel like I read a lot of "I tweeted something" articles these days. Ironic that the one tidbit about how it "sounds" (but not actually talking about sounds) is about people wanting to be heard, and the foundation of this is "I tweeted something one day".
I don't mind the tweet follow-up articles at all - in fact I'd hope that writers with a platform would use said platform to expound on their twitter musings more often. Twitter is perfect for taking the temperature on an issue.
That said - I felt that this article was a bit of a waste of the initial interest the tweet garnered.