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

211–220 of 300 posts

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#211

Post by Kye »

DamnInteresting wrote: post #195
Kye wrote: post #80

The author needs to find better podcasts. He acknowledges this, but still remains dismissive of podcasts. The Knowledge Project and Exponent replaced every self-help babbler and tech blogger for me. My Brother, My Brother and Me and The Dollop are better entertainment than most of the best TV shows and movies. It's interesting that this is the opposite of one of the more convincing podcast takes I've seen. I forget w…

Just a heads up that The Dollop unapologetically built their huge, lucrative following via naked plagiarism. I have my own history podcast (with a much smaller audience than The Dollop), and a few years back I discovered that they were re-reading lengthy segments of my original podcast scripts word-for-word on their podcast without permission or attribution. When I called them out they claimed this is "Fair Use", and…

It looks like their defense is that they make it clear they're reading what someone else wrote and making jokes. That wasn't clear, but I do understand where they're coming from. I listen for the jokes, not the history. They should be more upfront about their sources.

It's similar to MBMBaM reading Yahoo Answers questions word for word while being silly about it. Except they do make the source clear. I do agree with them that it fits under fair use since it usually protects parody and commentary. They list all their sources now, so it's moot.

I was much more moved by hearing that Lore basically reads off wikis. They don't add anything. That's why I switched to Myths and Legends.

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#212

Post by DamnInteresting »

ghaff wrote: post #205
DamnInteresting wrote: post #197

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…

Yeah, I understand their intention, but personally I am seldom intrigued by the alternate offering. Consequently, to my ears, each such crossover becomes a very long advertisement, and these crossovers have been popping up a lot as podcast networks continue to grow. If the preview were in the form of a short excerpt, enough to give me a sense of the other show's vibe, I would call that a livable compromise, but I can't abide having entire episodes foisted on me.

But maybe I am an outlier, and if so, I will just be unhappy about it all by myself.

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#213

Post by astura »

Someone call the wambulance.

The entertainment police are out in full swing telling people they are being entertained "wrong."

Look, I really don't care for listening to music, it's just not entertaining to me. I can't explain the reasons why, just not my thing, music just doesn't tickle my fancy so I never listen to it. I also really don't care for live theater or art museums. However, I don't go writing wordy and overwrought op-eds or blog posts saying how I'm 'against' those things, because I different people understand people enjoy different things than me.

I read the first several paragraphs and skimmed the rest because its truly insufferable.

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#214

Post by biztos »

ianai wrote: post #75
bunderbunder wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I, too, dislike the "eavesdropping on other people's tipsy pub conversation" genre of podcasts. I generally don't love the professionalized "least common denominator of an NPR listening audience's tastes, delivered in carefully rehearsed NPR voice" podcasts, either. My solution is to not bother with those podcasts. There are so many others that I find to be more worthy of my time. Admittedly, it's probably a small fr…

When do people take in their podcasts? I’m thinking it’s during he work commute or at work?

I listen while:

* cooking or cleaning (usually politics or culture stuff)

* working if the work isn't too intense (usually lighter stuff)

* on the treadmill (30 minutes of tech stuff)

* doing random stuff and just want a voice in the background, like some people keep a TV on.

I don't listen while commuting because my walking-and-public-transit commute requires that I stay alert and doesn't give me any sit-down time. Nor do I usually see anybody with headphones on during the tram ride. For longer stretches that would make sense, or maybe in a car.

[Edit: list format]

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#216

Post by ghaff »

DamnInteresting wrote: post #212
ghaff wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

Yeah, I understand their intention, but personally I am seldom intrigued by the alternate offering. Consequently, to my ears, each such crossover becomes a very long advertisement, and these crossovers have been popping up a lot as podcast networks continue to grow. If the preview were in the form of a short excerpt, enough to give me a sense of the other show's vibe, I would call that a livable compromise, but I can…

Fair enough. It's certainly more about mutual back scratching than it is audience service.

I'm probably less affected because I pretty much choose individual episodes to watch anyway rather than just listen to everything on a given podcast. I don't commute so I don't spend a huge amount of time in my car and therefore don't listen to a huge number of podcasts overall. (I rarely listen at home.)

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#217

Post by jamesakirk »

inapis wrote: post #207
jordanpg wrote: post #109

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.

Hardcore History

Drifter's Sympathy

S-Town

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#218

Post by DamnInteresting »

Kye wrote: post #211
DamnInteresting wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a heads up that The Dollop unapologetically built their huge, lucrative following via naked plagiarism. I have my own history podcast (with a much smaller audience than The Dollop), and a few years back I discovered that they were re-reading lengthy segments of my original podcast scripts word-for-word on their podcast without permission or attribution. When I called them out they claimed this is "Fair Use", and…

It looks like their defense is that they make it clear they're reading what someone else wrote and making jokes. That wasn't clear, but I do understand where they're coming from. I listen for the jokes, not the history. They should be more upfront about their sources. It's similar to MBMBaM reading Yahoo Answers questions word for word while being silly about it. Except they do make the source clear. I do agree with…

Well, if they had been reading one single article they found online, and just reading it aloud and making jokes about it, I might accept (though still be annoyed by) the "oops we forgot to attribute" defense. But if you look at what The Dollop actually did, they took 5-6 paragraphs from one article, 7-8 paragraphs from another article, a few solitary paragraphs from others, and just glued it all together and never said a word about where the text came from. Cribbing segments from various places like that, and "forgetting" to attribute, that is classic, flagrant plagiarism.

Like you say, MBMBaM credits their source. They're also using 1-2 sentences from a public forum, not a dozen paragraphs from a competing podcast.

Re: I'm Against Podcasts

#219

Post by ghaff »

Gravityloss wrote: post #185
coldtea wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.…

>And please, do get all the people in the same room!

Often easier said than done. As I wrote elsewhere, I definitely prefer to be in the same room as the person I'm interviewing for both technical and conversational reasons. But it can really limit the number of people you can get on a show--even more so if it has to be in your studio.

Lots of people record podcasts and videos at events like conferences (partly for this reason). Sure, the audio isn't pristine but IMO it's perfectly listenable if done right. I gave up stressing about getting perfect studio sound years ago.

Post reply on HN