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

Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

current.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 143 posts

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#61

Post by slg »

pembrook wrote: post #52
ncallaway wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The blog post you linked appears to, in many ways, strongly undermine your argument. You say (when linking to the blog post) > When people say they will pay in surveys, most of them are flat out lying. Here's a recent example: What the blog post says is that actually, the pre-launch survey closely aligned with the outcome: > The really comical part is that I should have known, and I could have known. Actually, one co…

My point on Tim's post was that a majority of his most passionate followers (people who also follow him on twitter and would take the time to answer a survey) would not pay for his content. I have no doubt the 72% contains some overlap with "people who complain about ads." On the lying about willingness to pay reference, I was referring to actual data I've seen, which I posted below. This was from a media company I w…

It depends what metric you are targeting. Some people create podcasts as an avenue to promote themselves, their projects, or their business. Tim Ferriss is one of those people. Other people create podcasts as their primary way to make a living. It doesn't make sense to put your podcasts behind a paywall if you are in the first group because the primary metric you care about is total listeners. However if you are in the second group a paywall might make sense since you probably don't care much about total listeners or conversion rates. The metric you care about is money and it doesn't take more than a couple thousand listeners before you can pull in a livable wage from listener supported podcasts. Just check out some of the numbers for podcasts on Patreon [1].

[1] - https://graphtreon.com/patreon-creators/podcasts

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#62

Post by masklinn »

glenvdb wrote: post #59

I've been thinking for a while that the podcasting business is ripe for disruption in terms for revenue models. From my understanding, podcast creators have to track down and get potential sponsors to sign on (if you're lucky and already have a big audience maybe they come to you). Then you splice in the audio of their ad into your podcast. Whereas I've thought that an easier model for everyone would be to have an ad…

> I've been thinking for a while that the podcasting business is ripe for disruption in terms for revenue models.

Don't worry, your widely known ideas for making podcasts bad have already been considered and implemented.

> Perhaps I'm not aware and these models have been tried already?

Yes. The former is DI / DAI through podcasting platforms (rather than the more artisanal and self-hosed podcasts, whether it's baked-in or DI). The latter is subscription platforms like Acast Access, Spotify (which bought several podcasting studios like Gimlet and Parcast) or Luminary, or "premium podcasts" features (with either subs or one-off buys).

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#63

Post by dest »

glenvdb wrote: post #59

I've been thinking for a while that the podcasting business is ripe for disruption in terms for revenue models. From my understanding, podcast creators have to track down and get potential sponsors to sign on (if you're lucky and already have a big audience maybe they come to you). Then you splice in the audio of their ad into your podcast. Whereas I've thought that an easier model for everyone would be to have an ad…

Dynamic ad injection is done by several actors, including https://www.adswizz.com/

Example of podcast subscription to listen ad-free https://www.stitcher.com/premium For radio shows https://tunein.com/premium/

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#64

Post by Consultant32452 »

Townley wrote: post #14
domenicd wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who only vaguely remembers NPR from their childhood, my primary association of NPR is with their podcasts. And those things are full of ads. So I initially found this post very confusing. I guess in the past there might have been something called NPR which did not have ads?

This wasn't the case as recently as a few years ago. I used to listen to the podcast version of Wait Wait Don't Tell Me exclusively, and remember musical interludes that immediately went right back to the show. One time I was driving in the car at just the right time and heard Wait Wait Don't Tell Me on the radio for the first time (as opposed to in podcast form) and was startled that there were ads. Now of course th…

I wonder if the ads are put in there by the local distributor. In my area NPR radio station has no ads except when they run a campaign asking for donations.

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#65

Post by colordrops »

viburnum wrote: post #16
xref wrote: post #10

If you want a contrary take on NPR and particularly how their political coverage is awful, Erik Loomis, a professor of union labor history and about as far left as you can get, has a number of articles on how NPR fails the national discussion http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2019/07/our-worthless-me...

I think the main problem with NPR news is they always play dumb. If somebody tells them "2+2=5," they just repeat it, if even it's been proven a lie, even if they've been saying the same lie for 30 years. It's not objectivity, it's just enabling liars.

Yes. Recently they've been corrolating the deaths from bootleg THC cartridges with the banning of flavored nicotine vapes, which is nonsensical but they've parroted it multiple days in a row. There's clearly a propaganda campaign against vaping by big tobacco, with anti-vaping ads everywhere, Trump speaking about it, etc. they are playing along.

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#66

Post by masonic »

makotech222 wrote: post #29
e1ven wrote: post #4

I love NPR. I'm glad they're doing well, and hope they will continue to make quality programs. But one of the major advantages which has set them apart for me is that they aren't as advertising dependent as so many of their alternatives. Avoiding ads makes it easier for them to be independent, and able to report without fear of corporations withdrawing their support. It's also just much more pleasant to listen to. I…

NPR is corporate propaganda for people who think their above the type of propaganda you see on FOX news. I use to listen religiously for about 3 years, until the 2016 election. The way they talked about the democratic primary, it was very very obvious they were biased towards favoring Hillary. They were telling outright lies about Bernie and his policies. Haven't listened to them since, but I've seen stories about ho…

It goes back much further than that. They took a distinct left turn after the 1994 election.

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#67

Post by Dylan16807 »

pembrook wrote: post #28
e1ven wrote: post #4

I love NPR. I'm glad they're doing well, and hope they will continue to make quality programs. But one of the major advantages which has set them apart for me is that they aren't as advertising dependent as so many of their alternatives. Avoiding ads makes it easier for them to be independent, and able to report without fear of corporations withdrawing their support. It's also just much more pleasant to listen to. I…

> I try to avoid advertising as much as possible, and it's sad that they are one more place it's invading. It's unfortunate that internet people have been falsely conditioned to believe the people who create the media we consume shouldn't be paid. Oh, but you will gladly pay for quality, ad-free content, you say? Unfortunately, based on the numbers I've seen at media companies I've freelanced for, this only works out…

> It turns out, a vast majority of people who complain about ads will not put their money where their mouth is.

Not quite.

If the baseline is that ads can provide enough revenue, and you're specifically paying to remove the ads, then that's a much smaller number. He has what, two ad slots, repeated at start and end? If that's $30 CPM at two per week, that's 26 cents a month.

The minimum subscription was $9.95 a month.

As somewhat of a tangent, I would like a way to pay $5 a month in a single spot and have it be apportioned to all the podcasts I listened to in that time, but that doesn't really exist as a service. Even though that's much more money than my listens are worth in ad revenue.

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#68

Post by boomboomsubban »

pembrook wrote: post #51
nitrogen wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I try to avoid advertising as much as possible, and it's sad that they are one more place it's invading. It's unfortunate that internet people have been falsely conditioned to believe the people who create the media we consume shouldn't be paid. Wow. I am actually amazed at the disingenuousness of that twisted interpretation of what you quoted. People will pay for what they value. The value of media has been utterl…

Show me a single study proving that "ads" are the reason consumers won't pay for journalism anymore and I will 100% change my opinion.

The entire point of ads is to lower the price and increase circulation. It's not a consumer driven decision.

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#69

Post by nitrogen »

pembrook wrote: post #51
nitrogen wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I try to avoid advertising as much as possible, and it's sad that they are one more place it's invading. It's unfortunate that internet people have been falsely conditioned to believe the people who create the media we consume shouldn't be paid. Wow. I am actually amazed at the disingenuousness of that twisted interpretation of what you quoted. People will pay for what they value. The value of media has been utterl…

Show me a single study proving that "ads" are the reason consumers won't pay for journalism anymore and I will 100% change my opinion.

Why is this something that needs a "study"? You can make corporate-funded user research come to any conclusion you want. It's obvious on the face of it that the more you rely on ads the more ads control the content and eventually become the content. No company funded by ads is going to publish a study saying people don't like ads.

Re: Podcast sponsorship revenue continues to fuel NPR’s financial growth

#70

Post by buboard »

nitrogen wrote: post #34
pembrook wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I try to avoid advertising as much as possible, and it's sad that they are one more place it's invading. It's unfortunate that internet people have been falsely conditioned to believe the people who create the media we consume shouldn't be paid. Oh, but you will gladly pay for quality, ad-free content, you say? Unfortunately, based on the numbers I've seen at media companies I've freelanced for, this only works out…

> I try to avoid advertising as much as possible, and it's sad that they are one more place it's invading. It's unfortunate that internet people have been falsely conditioned to believe the people who create the media we consume shouldn't be paid. Wow. I am actually amazed at the disingenuousness of that twisted interpretation of what you quoted. People will pay for what they value. The value of media has been utterl…

> People will pay for what they value. The value of media has been utterly destroyed by ads

... because people won't pay for media. is it because they don't value them?

Post reply on HN