November 27, 2024 • 31 mins
Podcasting has emerged as a formidable competitor to mainstream media, capturing the attention of audiences seeking more authentic and in-depth conversations. This is not about politics, but the marketing around it.
This episode explores how the rise of podcasts has shifted political discourse, allowing politicians to engage with voters in a more relatable manner, free from the constraints of traditional media sound bites.
We share examples from recent elections where candidates turned to popular podcasts to connect with audiences, highlighting the growing recognition of the medium's influence.
The discussion also touches on the importance of critical thinking and the diversity of perspectives available through podcasts, contrasting them with the often sensationalized narratives of mainstream media. Join us as we examine the evolving landscape of media consumption and the implications for both creators and listeners.
Your Hosts
Find Dave at schoolofpodcasting.com
Find Daniel at theaudacitytopodcast.com
Takeaways:
- Podcasting is becoming a legitimate platform for political discourse, challenging mainstream media narratives.
- Both politicians and audiences are seeking more authentic and relaxed conversations through podcasts.
- Long-form podcast discussions allow for a deeper understanding of political issues beyond sound bites.
- The rise of podcasting reflects a shift in how people consume political information and media.
- Podcasts provide a platform for engaging conversations that traditional media often lacks.
- The casual nature of podcasts enables politicians to connect with audiences in a more relatable way.
Mentioned in This Episode
- The Audacity to Podcast
- School of Podcasting
- congressionaldish.com
- Elon Musk conversation with journalist
Support The Show
Daniel
Podgagement - Boost Your Audience Engagement
Social Subscribe and Follow Plugin
Dave
New Podcast Apps
Listen to this podcast on any of the fine value-enabled app at www.newpodcastapps.com
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:00):
Podcasting goes to Washington.
This is the future ofpodcasting, where we ponder what
awaits the podcasters of today.
From the school of podcasting,here's Dave Jackson.
And from the Audacity topodcast, here's Daniel J.
Lewis.
Daniel, future of podcasting.
Episode 53, podcasting goes to Washington.
(00:24):
Or does it?
So what are we talking about today?
Throw the sirens, becausewe're hitting politics, but not like
on a partisan way.
But certainly everyone's beentalking about this lately, calling
it even the podcastingelection, which I wish I registered
that domain first, but afriend of mine got it, so I'm okay
(00:45):
with.
Doggone it.
Yeah, hate that.
But this was, regardless ofwhere you are on the political spectrum,
far left, far right, far in,far out.
This was indeed the electionwhere podcasting took center stage
in many ways.
And that, I think, was reallyexciting and opens a whole new potential
(01:10):
and a new audience to theworld of podcasts and to the potential.
And it's got traditionalmainstream media, I think, a little
afraid, and they should beafraid, but I think it's exciting,
too.
I need to go back and find it.
But a couple years ago, I didan episode, and I said, I think podcasting
can beat mainstream media attheir own game.
(01:32):
And this election, I was kindof like, ooh, I should have picked
a lottery number that day.
I was pretty spot on on that.
And I know on the no Agendashow, Adam played a clip, and it
was some news team trying tofigure out what happened.
And we're not here to gloat,and we're not here to cry in our
beer either.
Again, we're trying to keepthis nonpartisan.
But it was interesting becausethey were kind of saying, look, we
(01:56):
told everybody all the factsthat we had, and it was, they did
this and they did this, andwhy didn't they follow our advice
and vote the way we wanted?
There's a great documentarycalled the Social Dilemma, and it
talks about how if all youhear is blue or if all you hear is
red, when you finally seesomebody who has a difference opinion
(02:17):
than yours, you're like, howcan you even think that?
And so this was just a greatexample of them going, how did we
lose?
Like, I don't get it, you know?
So it was really interestingto hear.
And to me, I didn't watch theCall Her Daddy episode.
I want to go back and watch itnow, because that was the one that
Harris chose to go to.
(02:37):
And Trump went to a couple.
Really.
Well, let's be a little moreaccurate here.
Harris didn't go to.
Oh, that's true.
They rebuilt the studio forHarris to do there.
Well, it's also, it'simportant because I heard that wasn't
cheap to build.
And it shows how much it wasimportant, which it's kind of odd.
(02:59):
Like it was important enoughthat they build a studio for it in
the expense of that, but notimportant enough to travel.
I'm guessing there weresecurity concerns or some other publicity
or something like that thatwas beyond their realm.
And so they thought maybe it'sjust best if we just do this all
here.
So that aside, it does showthat it was clearly important to
(03:23):
them, to both sides, thatTrump did go to Joe Rogan and then
Harris did basically build herown podcast studio.
Hey, maybe she should use itfor other things.
But she built the studio tomatch the call her daddy.
And it shows that both of themrecognize the value in the podcast
(03:43):
conversations.
Yeah, the other thing Inoticed, and this wasn't a podcast,
there's a guy named PhilipDeFranco who's a pretty popular YouTuber
and he does a news show and hewas at the Democratic convention
and he was interviewing some senator.
And I think the senator wasactually kind of happy to not be
(04:04):
able to just speak in sound bites.
Like he was acting.
They were having an in depthconversation on policies and the
effective policies and whythis would work and maybe this wouldn't
work.
So it was this in depth stuff.
And you could kind of tellwhoever they were interviewing was
like, oh, well, this is refreshing.
I don't have to talk in 10second sound bites.
I am of the mind of, hey, justgive the Americans and the rest of
(04:28):
the world, give them the factsand let us make up our own minds.
That's how I wish it worked.
It's instead of everybodylike, well, you should think this
and this is horrible, or thisis great in that whole nine yards.
So I kind of like it when youhave these longer discussions.
And the other thing, everybodythinks Joe Rogan is a Republican.
And I remember when heinterviewed Bernie Sanders and I
(04:51):
was not at the time, I thoughtBernie was this crazy socialist kind
of guy.
And I heard him on Joe Roganand I was like, I think I'm going
to vote for this guy.
I love the fact that Berniewas like, oh yeah, presidential debates
are a complete waste of time.
It's whoever has the bestsound bite wins.
He goes, but you're not reallylearning anything about their policies
(05:11):
and blah, blah.
And he just said a bunch of stuff.
And I was like, wow, thisguy's totally transparent.
And then he dropped out of the.
Out of the race, unfortunately.
But I don't think that Joe's a Republican.
I think Joe is Joe, and he'sgoing to go with whatever policy.
I always say when the guy youvote for is going to vote the way
you would vote if you couldvote in Congress or whatever, that's
the guy you pick or the woman.
(05:33):
America is not a democracy.
It is a constitutional republic.
And republic is not forRepublican, but it is.
We elect people to represent us.
It's not everything is votedby a democracy.
We do have democraticprocesses for certain things, and
there are some democraticaspects to it, but we pick people
(05:53):
who we trust to make the kindsof decisions we would make or we
would want to be made on our behalf.
And that's very different forthe United States.
And I know a couple of othercountries and some places do it like
that.
But I think especially whenAmerica was founded, that was like
the whole concept of, hey, notaxation without representation,
down with the British and allof that is that it wasn't no taxation,
(06:17):
period.
It was, hey, if we're payingtaxes, we want to make sure we got
some representation in ourgovernment that we're paying taxes
to.
And that's our system today.
And so to hear people talklike people, not always like politicians,
I think is really appealing tothe public because of bringing it
(06:38):
back to this idea of we areelecting people to represent our
interests and to represent us.
So let's get to know theactual people and you can criticize
the politicians for, hey, theydidn't go on this podcast or that
podcast, or they only chosepodcasters who seem to be in line
with their own politics and such.
And you know what?
(06:58):
I think that could actually bea good thing in many cases, because
you look at, for example, whenHarris was on Fox news for a 20 minute
or so, it was a mess.
I think everyone pretty muchagreed it was a mess because it was
not friendly territory foreither of them.
(07:18):
No.
And seeing dad and mom argueand, guys, can you just work it out?
Can you have a conversation?
So not a lot of actualconversation took place.
And maybe there was somecertain strategy to that that Harris
had with why she went on Foxand the strategy for the questions
that Fox had for her.
But when Harris went on CallHer Daddy, where it was a podcast
(07:41):
that was in line politicallywith her, then they didn't have to
disagree.
They could talk about wherethey do agree and Harris could let
down her hair, in a sense andjust relax a little bit.
Knowing, hey, I'm with someonethat agrees with me.
We can have a more casual conversation.
We can talk back and forth.
We can build on each other.
(08:03):
We don't have to try and proveeach other wrong or get in a point
or something like that.
Same thing like when Trumpwent on Joe Rogan.
And I know they don't agree oneverything, but Rogan as just a person,
not in political aspects.
Rogan is very good.
And having conversations withpeople he disagrees with, that's.
(08:23):
I think one of his things thathas made him really successful is
how good of aconversationalist he is, that he'll
be talking to people oncompletely different sides of an
issue, maybe one episode rightafter the other.
And yet he can have a superengaging conversation and a super
respectful conversation withboth of them in both episodes.
(08:46):
So to hear the politiciansrelax a little and just be humans
and talk with friends, almostin a way or sound like they're talking
with friends and having thekind of conversation like, if you
could sit down with apolitician and talk through some
of these things, this is whatyour conversation might look like.
I think that was fantastic forAmerica to see.
(09:09):
And it reminds me of, well,Obama was the first sitting president,
I believe, to go on a podcastas a guest.
George W.
Bush had the first podcast asa president.
But Obama went on Marc Maron'sshow WTF as a guest.
And it was a good conversationthat he had with Marc Maron, and
(09:32):
it was good to see aconversation like that.
You can't get that frommainstream media because mainstream
media has the clock.
They have the advertisers.
They are limited in how muchtime they have to edit things down.
There are certain things thatjust cannot be said on broadcast
television, but that can besaid in podcasts.
(09:55):
The part of the Trumpinterview I liked is when Joe brought
up the whole, I lost the election.
And so Trump kind of went intohis typical jargon, and Joe's like,
hold on, give me an example ofone of these things that you're saying
happened.
Like, you know, and kind ofvery politely just kind of pushed
back on him, and he started togive some stuff.
(10:15):
And I was like, oh, well,that's interesting.
Why hasn't that been talked about?
So I thought that was interesting.
And just talking about dialogues.
I'm not a huge fan of BillMaher, but he'll have somebody on
and want to hear.
So I saw that Bill Maher washaving Ben Shapiro.
So Bill Maher is pretty farleft and an atheist talking to Ben
Shapiro, who's really right.
(10:37):
And Jewish.
And I'm like, well, this isgoing to be interesting.
And I love the whole thingbecause at some point, they were
actually kind of poking fun attheir differences without saying,
oh, well, you're an idiot.
And there were times when Iforget what the one topic was.
And Bill said, we're not evengoing to talk about this because
that's going to lead us nowhere.
Because he knew, look, Ben'snot going to convince me to his opinion,
(11:01):
and I'm not going to changehis mind either, so what's the point?
And they just talked about thethings they kind of agreed on.
And Bill had his opinion onthe whole Israel situation right
now.
And it was just reallyinteresting to hear people go, well,
I see your point of view, but.
And then they would give adifferent one, and they just had
this dialogue.
And I was like, wow, Iremember when people used to do this.
(11:23):
An actual dialogue.
So that's another thing.
I think we're podcasting Wins.
And the other one is.
And I'll give Jen Briney, shedoesn't do this a lot, but Jen Briney
from congressionaldish.com andshe basically reads the bills that
go through.
She talks a lot about whatCongress is doing.
And I remember I listened toan episode and she did her little
opening.
She said, hey, I want to start off.
I have to retract somethingfrom what I said in my last episode.
(11:46):
And that.
And it wasn't even.
I was like, she messed up andsaid somebody was from North Carolina
when they were from SouthCarolina or something, whatever it
was, but something that theaudience was like, hey, that's not
right.
And so she retracted it.
And I was like, I can'tremember the last time I've heard
anybody.
Whether it's, you know, newson tv, a newspaper, or nothing, nobody
ever says, hey, we were wrong.
(12:07):
We got that one wrong.
And if they did.
Because if you think about thethings that people were saying was
the truth at the beginning ofthe pandemic.
And we found out much laterthat, yeah, they were way off base
on that, but yet we neverheard any network say, yeah, we got
that one wrong.
We were kind of in a rush toget the facts and kind of missed
(12:28):
that one.
And I think that's another onewhere I think podcasters.
Because as much as we are thehost and we're the head of the show
or whatever, I think most ofus feel like we're in a partnership
with the audience.
Yeah.
And we're leading the discussion.
But it is that It's adiscussion where I think mainstream
media is just like, oh, well,we're here to tell you the facts
(12:49):
as we see them.
And we're not reallyinterested in what you have to say.
I don't know.
And it's that as we see them,that is a very heavy, big thing that
a lot of people don't realize,and you touched on this earlier,
too, that a lot of time we'rereally arguing about interpretations.
We're not actually arguingabout facts.
(13:11):
An illustration that I love touse for this because I'm very familiar
with this industry in thisfield is the field of creation versus
evolution.
Most people think thatcreationists have their little evidences
and evolutionists have theirlittle evidences, and the two never
cross over.
But people don't realize, no,they're actually arguing over the
(13:33):
same evidences.
Creationists argue that rocklayers are evidence of creation and
a global flood.
Evolutionists argue that rocklayers are evidence of.
Of millions of years of evolution.
Creationists argue thatfossils are evidence of creation.
Evolutionists argue fossilsare evidence of evolution.
So they're really arguing overthe same facts, but different interpretations
(13:57):
of them.
And those differentinterpretations come from our starting
points, our belief systemsabout the world, our worldview, a
whole bunch of stuff like that.
It can just come down to assimple as, do you believe that XYZ
is good or bad?
If yes, then you are going totreat that fact very differently
(14:17):
and interpret a certain factvery differently than something else.
If you say that, hey, peoplewho have pineapple on pizza, since
pineapple on pizza is evil,therefore anyone who likes pineapple
on pizza is the devil.
Well, you're just beingconsistent with your starting point,
your belief system.
It is not a fact that peoplewho eat pineapple on pizza are the
(14:40):
devil.
That's an interpretation,starting from your starting point,
your worldview.
And other people will think,no, this is fine.
I love pineapple on pizza andI know that I'm not the devil.
So, no, you're wrong and I'm right.
You're just arguing over interpretations.
But when you can have aconversation about things more, and
(15:00):
not so much focusing on apresentation, but the discussion,
that's when you can get thosemultiple sides of the same issue.
Or like some people havedescribed blind people feeling an
elephant and describingdifferent parts.
You know, I feel a big floppy thing.
I must be touching a big treewith a giant leaf.
(15:23):
And someone else says, I feelsomething that's.
It's the stump of a tree.
And someone else says, I thinkI feel a snake here.
And it's got this giant mouthon the end of it sucking up peanuts
from the ground.
And they're describing thesame thing, but from different perspectives.
Podcasting gives theopportunity for people to sit down,
be casual and conversational,and let their hair down, so to speak,
(15:49):
and just talk through thesethings and be challenged.
Like Joe Rogan.
Challenging.
Well, hey, wait a minute, whatare you talking about there?
Give me some specificexamples, that kind of thing.
I wish reporters would do thatmore often.
And maybe some of that isbecause they just don't have the
time to ask that stuff.
(16:10):
Or maybe some of thosequestions had to be edited out for
the sake of time.
Sometimes I also think it'sthe whole echo chamber thing or their
biases that they don't thinkof those certain questions and such.
And that's where you have tolook at both sides and alternative
media and such to be able tofind someone who is asking those
questions of those people.
It's great to see the gentlepushing and the challenging and the,
(16:36):
hey, do you really mean itthat way?
Or, hey, you know what?
The way you said that just sounded.
Do you realize how that sounded?
That sounded like this.
Is that the way you meant it?
And someone could say, well,no, that's not the way I meant it.
I meant it this way.
But I can see how you mightunderstand it that way.
So you can really start tounderstand people on a human level.
And that's what's so greatabout podcasting, is that I think
(16:59):
it makes that humanrelatability so much more accessible
to more people.
I thought it was interesting.
I went to Twitter, but Iwasn't logged in.
And it's a completelydifferent experience if you're not
logged in.
Oh, yeah.
And as you might imagine, oneof the top tweets was from Elon,
but he had been.
He was talking to somebody onthe BBC, and they said, well, you
(17:22):
know, since you've boughtthis, hate speech has been on the
rise on X.
And Elon said, okay, but canyou give me an example of the hate
speech?
And he said, well, there wasthis one guy voicing an opinion.
It was basically, he didn'tlike the opinion.
And there was another one thathe voiced.
And he goes.
He goes, but that's not hate speech.
You hate his opinion, but it'snot hate speech.
(17:42):
Can you give me an example ofhate speech?
And it was interestingwatching this guy because he didn't
have one.
So for me, I was like, that'san interesting argument.
I was like, I might have touse that Strategy in the future,
just go, can you give me anexample of one?
So that's kind of interestingto me.
I think we could get morelisteners, viewers to podcasts that
(18:02):
are hearing about what's aCall me Daddy.
What are they talking about?
And like, oh, I'm going tohave to go check this out.
So anytime you get a big gueston your show, that might lead somebody
to.
To listen, I think that's a bonus.
And so I'll be interested tosee if we keep some of those new
listeners.
And on the other hand, thismight inspire some people to actually
(18:22):
start a podcast and do it seriously.
And you talked about reporters.
Do you have an I team?
I know you're in Cincinnati,I'm in Akron.
We have the I team, specialinvestor Carl Somebody, and he investigated
the local guy and he's corruptand blah, blah, blah.
And I'm like, oh, wow, look,somebody's doing some reporting.
(18:43):
I remember when, you know, ifyou think about it, all the, you
know, our top story tonightwas handed to me by some guy who
got it from a big company whogave it to all the other big companies,
you know, all the media things.
There's really not a lot ofreporting except for Carl and the
I team.
If you've been treated badlyby a company, call Carl and the I
(19:03):
team and they'll come andinvestigate and tell that guy to
give you your money back.
But there's really not a lotof investigating.
Although I have heardmainstream media quote Twitter as
a source.
You know, a man on Twittersaid this or that.
But one of the things I thinkas podcasters we should do is a always
cite our sources and then beopen to the other side, like any
(19:25):
time.
It's fairly well known.
I'm not a fan of Spotify, andif I really do go on a rant about
why, I will just say, well,because they've done this in the
past.
They've done this in the past.
I don't like the way theyhandle this, and I don't like the
way they handle that.
If you really need a freemedia host, go see Red Circle.
But I always kind of quote wine.
I'm always waiting for somebody.
I always try to create an environment.
(19:47):
If somebody goes, hey, I'm onSpotify for whatever they're calling
it this week.
And I think this and this, andI'm always willing to listen.
And I think that's.
I think podcasters are muchmore open to having some sort of
dialogue because, again, wewant to set up the buffet of knowledge
and Let our audience figureout what's the truth, and we're going
to present the truth as we see it.
(20:08):
But I think we are much moreopen to going, oh, I never thought
of that particular angle.
And if someone wanted to setup that buffet for their own audience,
Dave, where should they go?
That would be the school ofpodcasting.com and, you know, if
I wanted a way to interact andbuild engagement with my audience
(20:29):
and maybe grow the connection there.
If only there was a tool for that.
Daniel, do you know of anytools that might boost.
Yeah, that would be Pod GaugeCalm think podcast engagement, podgagement.com
with now rankings and charttracking features included.
Check it out over at Pod gauge.
(20:50):
Com.
This was not a dynamicallyinserted ad.
Yes, organic.
The other thing I thought wasfunny was apparently nobody cares
what celebrities say.
And in some cases, we're kindof ignoring the mainstream media
and looking towards podcasts.
Why do you think that, youknow, mainstream is kind of losing
(21:12):
their hold?
Well, I think some of it isthe echo chamber effect, where people
who follow or are big fans ofcertain celebrities are probably
already going to lean acertain way or define celebrity however
you want.
Whether it's a mediapersonality, actor, actress, or television
(21:32):
star, musician, anything likethat, they're probably already leaning
a certain way.
I would love to think thatthere's some critical thinking on
some of the audience's part.
There are many jokes to bemade about stuff like Taylor Swift,
who has made her career ofwriting music, about her bad choices
in men, should be trustedabout her choice in politicians.
(21:55):
Or we could say so, and so isan actor.
They get paid to act genuineabout certain things.
So can we really believewhatever they're saying away from
the camera?
Is it truly their own opinion?
It's hard to really say.
I would love to think thatpeople are thinking more critically
about some of that stuff.
I don't know if they are.
(22:16):
But I think it's also gottento the point that some people maybe
are just no longer looking atit as just, what does someone else
say?
But more, what do I thinkabout what that politician is saying?
What have I heard?
What is my own experience?
And yes, still a lot of thatis highly subjective.
(22:37):
It can be subjective based onyour upbringing, your belief system,
now where you live, even,like, you look at the map of the
counties that went majorityfor Trump versus majority for Harris,
and it's very predictablealmost every year which side is going
to go red and which side isblue and such.
But these kinds of things canbe challenged by what we have in
(22:59):
the podcasting world thatwhile podcasting is still relatively
free of censorship and thinkof not only just in censorship of
political ideas, but alsocorporate censorship or even just,
we could call it moralcensorship, which, like you think
about what is allowed on television.
Well, a lot of stuff is moral censorship.
(23:21):
There are certain words youcan't say on broadcast television
or radio.
There are certain things youcannot show in broadcast television
or radio or can't talk about,regardless of the morality of it.
But some of it is just like,is it appropriate for children or
is this appropriate to bebroadcasting out to the world, stuff
like that?
Well, in podcasting, as we'veseen Edison research show multiple
(23:43):
times, is people tend to selfselect and therefore choose their
own kind of censorship, orlack thereof if they want to.
And that's what's so greatabout podcasting, is that if you
want a comedy podcast thatnever has bad words, is never sexually
explicit, there are cleancomedy podcasts out there and some
(24:05):
really good ones out there.
If you want the raunchiestkind of podcast you want, you can
get.
There are podcasts out therefor that.
If you want far left politicalopinions or far right far in, far
out, you can get podcasts inwhichever direction you want.
It can be good to consume,even from multiple sides, if you
(24:27):
can stomach it.
You know, don't cause yourselfstress or a hernia.
But it can be good to hearsome of these things, especially
when there is some of thatcrossover, like when you said Bill
Maher and Ben Shapiro, who arelike polar opposites, when they could
sit down and have a conversation.
One of the things that.
That just shows, since I knownothing about the conversation that
(24:49):
took place, but that shows acertain level of maturity for both
of those people that they werewilling to have that conversation
knowing how polar opposite theother person was and how the conversation
could go in front of their audiences.
Basically that's Bill wassitting there and Ben walks in and
he goes, I really can'tbelieve you're here.
(25:11):
And they both are just like,let's see what happens.
You know, like, nobody's goingto punch anybody.
So we're okay.
Yeah, so it was really interesting.
I was trying to think earlier,like, when did I stop watching?
Because I used to wake up,make my breakfast and sit in front
of the TV and watch the news.
And I haven't done that in a very.
(25:31):
It's one of those times whenyou think it's like two years and
it's probably more like six.
And it dawned on me there wasone where it just seemed like at
least once a week, like it'sgoing to happen.
It will happen very soon if ithasn't happened already.
Where a major story will bethe Starbucks holiday cup and what's
on it and what it says.
(25:51):
Does it say Merry Christmas?
Does it say holiday?
Is it red?
Is it?
It doesn't matter, because inthe end, I think the general public
now realizes, hey, that's an ad.
Like, quit trying to tell usthat's news.
That's an ad.
And the other one was, Iremember once on the Cleveland channel,
the main anchor guy in themorning was marrying somebody, like
(26:16):
they had a wedding.
And I'm like, wait, you'remaking the news now?
And then it was so obvious.
It's like, oh, yes, her dresswas from Debbie's Bridal on 5th and
12th, and then the flowers.
And it was just this giantlist of sponsors.
And I was like, are you goingto tell me there's nothing going
on somewhere that we shouldn'tbe knowing about?
But half the thing was like,here's the weather and the traffic
(26:39):
and here's Wayne marryingDebbie and Bill or whatever.
And I was like, okay, I thinkI'm done.
This is ridiculous.
And you look at the mediaconsumption habits of those different
platforms and even just thenature of the distribution, like
broadcast television andradio, you tune in and you get whatever
they're giving you at thatmoment, and you're at their mercy
(27:00):
for whatever song they play,whatever news they tell.
And people will come and go inthe middle of a broadcast.
And so that's why they have toreset so much.
That's why they have toreintroduce their guests so much
and why they have to recap andwhy they have to keep things short.
That doesn't happen with podcasts.
Well, it can, because peoplecan pause an episode and go do something
(27:23):
and maybe pause for days andcome back, but even if they do that,
they still have a lot ofcontext simply by pressing that play
button.
They probably see the COVIDart, they probably see the title
of the podcast, they probablysee the title of the episode, maybe
a little bit more informationabout that and maybe even just recognizing
(27:46):
the voice, hearing the voiceagain, because it seems people recognize
podcaster voices better thanTV news personalities.
A lot of that leads to thesemental cues that help you jump right
back in where you left off mentally.
You can have the long formconversations and you can follow
the long form conversations.
Often because of the nature ofpodcasting and even non podcast platforms
(28:12):
like YouTube and I will callit A non podcast platform because
I like being controversiallike that, even stuff like that.
People don't just jump in inthe middle, they are choosing to
listen.
They have many visual cues ofthe context.
And also speaking aboutcontext, much of the context is focused
(28:32):
on only that one thing.
Because many of the times thepeople making that content know I've
got lots of time to shareeverything I want to cover.
I don't have to be talkingabout this one thing.
While all of these things, thelower thirds are telling you 20 other
news stories and then we'vegot upper thirds telling you 20 other
news stories.
And then when we've got stocktickers on the left side and news
(28:54):
tickers, crypto tickers on theright side and the weather forecast
on the bottom left, and thenyou've got the sports news on the
right and all of this stufflike coming at you at the same time.
But in a podcast.
It's like one stream ofthought, my friend.
Yeah, I remember I've onlybeen on TV once.
It was on a local NBC stationon, you know, the shows they show
(29:16):
on Sunday morning thatnobody's watching because nobody's
up early.
And it was GoldenOpportunities was the name of the
show.
And it was, Dave was on in hissuit to explain for seniors what
is a podcast and how do you listen.
And it was a four minutesegment and you know, they called
and talked to me and then theycalled me again.
(29:37):
Okay, you're going to be onthe show.
Here are the questions you'regoing to ask and make sure your answers
are no longer than threeminutes total and have them ready
and blah, blah, blah.
And it was so, it really wasalmost like a play.
Scene one, Dave is introducedand then asked this question.
And then, and it was like, itwas fun and it was neat and there
was a lot of adrenaline flowing.
(29:57):
But in the end I was like,this is really not a conversation.
This is, and I assume everyTonight show appearance when they're
like, so heard you went onvacation to Vermont last week.
You know, well, you know, it'sjust this.
And then you have the funlittle story and then it's roll the
clip and let's talk about themovie and that whole nine yards.
So I think again, that issomething that if I'm doing an interview,
(30:18):
I'll let them know why Ibrought them on and I'll give them
the idea of the topics.
But I don't like to give themthe question unless it's something
like what's your favorite book?
Where they really want to takea second to think about it.
So I think that's another onewhere podcasting is just.
If it's edited, because we'reall going to go places where we go
that didn't work.
(30:38):
But if it's edited but yetstill has that kind of.
I think you said it earlier,it's calm.
You know what I mean?
It's just a conversation.
There's no real.
It's relaxed, and we're justhaving a conversation, and what comes
out comes out, and in the end,you go, oh, I didn't know that.
So I think we're going to beatthem at their own game.
Unless they figure out thatnobody's listening anymore and they
(31:01):
should probably change by now.
Or when they figure out how touse Google Notebook lm.
Kyle and Sheila, strap in andtake a deep dive into whatever it
is.
Yeah, that's always fun.
Well, Daniel, I don't think wegot any boost to Graham, so thanks
to everyone who's beenstreaming to the show.
We do deeply appreciate that,and I think that's going to do it
(31:23):
for episode 53 of the Futureof podcasting.
Thanks so much for listening.
Keep boosting, Keep podcastingand have a happy Thanksgiving.
Podcasting goes to Washington.
This is the future ofpodcasting, where we ponder what
awaits the podcasters of today.
From the school of podcasting,here's Dave Jackson.
And from the Audacity topodcast, here's Daniel J.
Lewis.
Daniel, future of podcasting.
Episode 53, podcasting goes to Washington.
(00:24):
Or does it?
So what are we talking about today?
Throw the sirens, becausewe're hitting politics, but not like
on a partisan way.
But certainly everyone's beentalking about this lately, calling
it even the podcastingelection, which I wish I registered
that domain first, but afriend of mine got it, so I'm okay
(00:45):
with.
Doggone it.
Yeah, hate that.
But this was, regardless ofwhere you are on the political spectrum,
far left, far right, far in,far out.
This was indeed the electionwhere podcasting took center stage
in many ways.
And that, I think, was reallyexciting and opens a whole new potential
(01:10):
and a new audience to theworld of podcasts and to the potential.
And it's got traditionalmainstream media, I think, a little
afraid, and they should beafraid, but I think it's exciting,
too.
I need to go back and find it.
But a couple years ago, I didan episode, and I said, I think podcasting
can beat mainstream media attheir own game.
(01:32):
And this election, I was kindof like, ooh, I should have picked
a lottery number that day.
I was pretty spot on on that.
And I know on the no Agendashow, Adam played a clip, and it
was some news team trying tofigure out what happened.
And we're not here to gloat,and we're not here to cry in our
beer either.
Again, we're trying to keepthis nonpartisan.
But it was interesting becausethey were kind of saying, look, we
(01:56):
told everybody all the factsthat we had, and it was, they did
this and they did this, andwhy didn't they follow our advice
and vote the way we wanted?
There's a great documentarycalled the Social Dilemma, and it
talks about how if all youhear is blue or if all you hear is
red, when you finally seesomebody who has a difference opinion
(02:17):
than yours, you're like, howcan you even think that?
And so this was just a greatexample of them going, how did we
lose?
Like, I don't get it, you know?
So it was really interestingto hear.
And to me, I didn't watch theCall Her Daddy episode.
I want to go back and watch itnow, because that was the one that
Harris chose to go to.
(02:37):
And Trump went to a couple.
Really.
Well, let's be a little moreaccurate here.
Harris didn't go to.
Oh, that's true.
They rebuilt the studio forHarris to do there.
Well, it's also, it'simportant because I heard that wasn't
cheap to build.
And it shows how much it wasimportant, which it's kind of odd.
(02:59):
Like it was important enoughthat they build a studio for it in
the expense of that, but notimportant enough to travel.
I'm guessing there weresecurity concerns or some other publicity
or something like that thatwas beyond their realm.
And so they thought maybe it'sjust best if we just do this all
here.
So that aside, it does showthat it was clearly important to
(03:23):
them, to both sides, thatTrump did go to Joe Rogan and then
Harris did basically build herown podcast studio.
Hey, maybe she should use itfor other things.
But she built the studio tomatch the call her daddy.
And it shows that both of themrecognize the value in the podcast
(03:43):
conversations.
Yeah, the other thing Inoticed, and this wasn't a podcast,
there's a guy named PhilipDeFranco who's a pretty popular YouTuber
and he does a news show and hewas at the Democratic convention
and he was interviewing some senator.
And I think the senator wasactually kind of happy to not be
(04:04):
able to just speak in sound bites.
Like he was acting.
They were having an in depthconversation on policies and the
effective policies and whythis would work and maybe this wouldn't
work.
So it was this in depth stuff.
And you could kind of tellwhoever they were interviewing was
like, oh, well, this is refreshing.
I don't have to talk in 10second sound bites.
I am of the mind of, hey, justgive the Americans and the rest of
(04:28):
the world, give them the factsand let us make up our own minds.
That's how I wish it worked.
It's instead of everybodylike, well, you should think this
and this is horrible, or thisis great in that whole nine yards.
So I kind of like it when youhave these longer discussions.
And the other thing, everybodythinks Joe Rogan is a Republican.
And I remember when heinterviewed Bernie Sanders and I
(04:51):
was not at the time, I thoughtBernie was this crazy socialist kind
of guy.
And I heard him on Joe Roganand I was like, I think I'm going
to vote for this guy.
I love the fact that Berniewas like, oh yeah, presidential debates
are a complete waste of time.
It's whoever has the bestsound bite wins.
He goes, but you're not reallylearning anything about their policies
(05:11):
and blah, blah.
And he just said a bunch of stuff.
And I was like, wow, thisguy's totally transparent.
And then he dropped out of the.
Out of the race, unfortunately.
But I don't think that Joe's a Republican.
I think Joe is Joe, and he'sgoing to go with whatever policy.
I always say when the guy youvote for is going to vote the way
you would vote if you couldvote in Congress or whatever, that's
the guy you pick or the woman.
(05:33):
America is not a democracy.
It is a constitutional republic.
And republic is not forRepublican, but it is.
We elect people to represent us.
It's not everything is votedby a democracy.
We do have democraticprocesses for certain things, and
there are some democraticaspects to it, but we pick people
(05:53):
who we trust to make the kindsof decisions we would make or we
would want to be made on our behalf.
And that's very different forthe United States.
And I know a couple of othercountries and some places do it like
that.
But I think especially whenAmerica was founded, that was like
the whole concept of, hey, notaxation without representation,
down with the British and allof that is that it wasn't no taxation,
(06:17):
period.
It was, hey, if we're payingtaxes, we want to make sure we got
some representation in ourgovernment that we're paying taxes
to.
And that's our system today.
And so to hear people talklike people, not always like politicians,
I think is really appealing tothe public because of bringing it
(06:38):
back to this idea of we areelecting people to represent our
interests and to represent us.
So let's get to know theactual people and you can criticize
the politicians for, hey, theydidn't go on this podcast or that
podcast, or they only chosepodcasters who seem to be in line
with their own politics and such.
And you know what?
(06:58):
I think that could actually bea good thing in many cases, because
you look at, for example, whenHarris was on Fox news for a 20 minute
or so, it was a mess.
I think everyone pretty muchagreed it was a mess because it was
not friendly territory foreither of them.
(07:18):
No.
And seeing dad and mom argueand, guys, can you just work it out?
Can you have a conversation?
So not a lot of actualconversation took place.
And maybe there was somecertain strategy to that that Harris
had with why she went on Foxand the strategy for the questions
that Fox had for her.
But when Harris went on CallHer Daddy, where it was a podcast
(07:41):
that was in line politicallywith her, then they didn't have to
disagree.
They could talk about wherethey do agree and Harris could let
down her hair, in a sense andjust relax a little bit.
Knowing, hey, I'm with someonethat agrees with me.
We can have a more casual conversation.
We can talk back and forth.
We can build on each other.
(08:03):
We don't have to try and proveeach other wrong or get in a point
or something like that.
Same thing like when Trumpwent on Joe Rogan.
And I know they don't agree oneverything, but Rogan as just a person,
not in political aspects.
Rogan is very good.
And having conversations withpeople he disagrees with, that's.
(08:23):
I think one of his things thathas made him really successful is
how good of aconversationalist he is, that he'll
be talking to people oncompletely different sides of an
issue, maybe one episode rightafter the other.
And yet he can have a superengaging conversation and a super
respectful conversation withboth of them in both episodes.
(08:46):
So to hear the politiciansrelax a little and just be humans
and talk with friends, almostin a way or sound like they're talking
with friends and having thekind of conversation like, if you
could sit down with apolitician and talk through some
of these things, this is whatyour conversation might look like.
I think that was fantastic forAmerica to see.
(09:09):
And it reminds me of, well,Obama was the first sitting president,
I believe, to go on a podcastas a guest.
George W.
Bush had the first podcast asa president.
But Obama went on Marc Maron'sshow WTF as a guest.
And it was a good conversationthat he had with Marc Maron, and
(09:32):
it was good to see aconversation like that.
You can't get that frommainstream media because mainstream
media has the clock.
They have the advertisers.
They are limited in how muchtime they have to edit things down.
There are certain things thatjust cannot be said on broadcast
television, but that can besaid in podcasts.
(09:55):
The part of the Trumpinterview I liked is when Joe brought
up the whole, I lost the election.
And so Trump kind of went intohis typical jargon, and Joe's like,
hold on, give me an example ofone of these things that you're saying
happened.
Like, you know, and kind ofvery politely just kind of pushed
back on him, and he started togive some stuff.
(10:15):
And I was like, oh, well,that's interesting.
Why hasn't that been talked about?
So I thought that was interesting.
And just talking about dialogues.
I'm not a huge fan of BillMaher, but he'll have somebody on
and want to hear.
So I saw that Bill Maher washaving Ben Shapiro.
So Bill Maher is pretty farleft and an atheist talking to Ben
Shapiro, who's really right.
(10:37):
And Jewish.
And I'm like, well, this isgoing to be interesting.
And I love the whole thingbecause at some point, they were
actually kind of poking fun attheir differences without saying,
oh, well, you're an idiot.
And there were times when Iforget what the one topic was.
And Bill said, we're not evengoing to talk about this because
that's going to lead us nowhere.
Because he knew, look, Ben'snot going to convince me to his opinion,
(11:01):
and I'm not going to changehis mind either, so what's the point?
And they just talked about thethings they kind of agreed on.
And Bill had his opinion onthe whole Israel situation right
now.
And it was just reallyinteresting to hear people go, well,
I see your point of view, but.
And then they would give adifferent one, and they just had
this dialogue.
And I was like, wow, Iremember when people used to do this.
(11:23):
An actual dialogue.
So that's another thing.
I think we're podcasting Wins.
And the other one is.
And I'll give Jen Briney, shedoesn't do this a lot, but Jen Briney
from congressionaldish.com andshe basically reads the bills that
go through.
She talks a lot about whatCongress is doing.
And I remember I listened toan episode and she did her little
opening.
She said, hey, I want to start off.
I have to retract somethingfrom what I said in my last episode.
(11:46):
And that.
And it wasn't even.
I was like, she messed up andsaid somebody was from North Carolina
when they were from SouthCarolina or something, whatever it
was, but something that theaudience was like, hey, that's not
right.
And so she retracted it.
And I was like, I can'tremember the last time I've heard
anybody.
Whether it's, you know, newson tv, a newspaper, or nothing, nobody
ever says, hey, we were wrong.
(12:07):
We got that one wrong.
And if they did.
Because if you think about thethings that people were saying was
the truth at the beginning ofthe pandemic.
And we found out much laterthat, yeah, they were way off base
on that, but yet we neverheard any network say, yeah, we got
that one wrong.
We were kind of in a rush toget the facts and kind of missed
(12:28):
that one.
And I think that's another onewhere I think podcasters.
Because as much as we are thehost and we're the head of the show
or whatever, I think most ofus feel like we're in a partnership
with the audience.
Yeah.
And we're leading the discussion.
But it is that It's adiscussion where I think mainstream
media is just like, oh, well,we're here to tell you the facts
(12:49):
as we see them.
And we're not reallyinterested in what you have to say.
I don't know.
And it's that as we see them,that is a very heavy, big thing that
a lot of people don't realize,and you touched on this earlier,
too, that a lot of time we'rereally arguing about interpretations.
We're not actually arguingabout facts.
(13:11):
An illustration that I love touse for this because I'm very familiar
with this industry in thisfield is the field of creation versus
evolution.
Most people think thatcreationists have their little evidences
and evolutionists have theirlittle evidences, and the two never
cross over.
But people don't realize, no,they're actually arguing over the
(13:33):
same evidences.
Creationists argue that rocklayers are evidence of creation and
a global flood.
Evolutionists argue that rocklayers are evidence of.
Of millions of years of evolution.
Creationists argue thatfossils are evidence of creation.
Evolutionists argue fossilsare evidence of evolution.
So they're really arguing overthe same facts, but different interpretations
(13:57):
of them.
And those differentinterpretations come from our starting
points, our belief systemsabout the world, our worldview, a
whole bunch of stuff like that.
It can just come down to assimple as, do you believe that XYZ
is good or bad?
If yes, then you are going totreat that fact very differently
(14:17):
and interpret a certain factvery differently than something else.
If you say that, hey, peoplewho have pineapple on pizza, since
pineapple on pizza is evil,therefore anyone who likes pineapple
on pizza is the devil.
Well, you're just beingconsistent with your starting point,
your belief system.
It is not a fact that peoplewho eat pineapple on pizza are the
(14:40):
devil.
That's an interpretation,starting from your starting point,
your worldview.
And other people will think,no, this is fine.
I love pineapple on pizza andI know that I'm not the devil.
So, no, you're wrong and I'm right.
You're just arguing over interpretations.
But when you can have aconversation about things more, and
(15:00):
not so much focusing on apresentation, but the discussion,
that's when you can get thosemultiple sides of the same issue.
Or like some people havedescribed blind people feeling an
elephant and describingdifferent parts.
You know, I feel a big floppy thing.
I must be touching a big treewith a giant leaf.
(15:23):
And someone else says, I feelsomething that's.
It's the stump of a tree.
And someone else says, I thinkI feel a snake here.
And it's got this giant mouthon the end of it sucking up peanuts
from the ground.
And they're describing thesame thing, but from different perspectives.
Podcasting gives theopportunity for people to sit down,
be casual and conversational,and let their hair down, so to speak,
(15:49):
and just talk through thesethings and be challenged.
Like Joe Rogan.
Challenging.
Well, hey, wait a minute, whatare you talking about there?
Give me some specificexamples, that kind of thing.
I wish reporters would do thatmore often.
And maybe some of that isbecause they just don't have the
time to ask that stuff.
(16:10):
Or maybe some of thosequestions had to be edited out for
the sake of time.
Sometimes I also think it'sthe whole echo chamber thing or their
biases that they don't thinkof those certain questions and such.
And that's where you have tolook at both sides and alternative
media and such to be able tofind someone who is asking those
questions of those people.
It's great to see the gentlepushing and the challenging and the,
(16:36):
hey, do you really mean itthat way?
Or, hey, you know what?
The way you said that just sounded.
Do you realize how that sounded?
That sounded like this.
Is that the way you meant it?
And someone could say, well,no, that's not the way I meant it.
I meant it this way.
But I can see how you mightunderstand it that way.
So you can really start tounderstand people on a human level.
And that's what's so greatabout podcasting, is that I think
(16:59):
it makes that humanrelatability so much more accessible
to more people.
I thought it was interesting.
I went to Twitter, but Iwasn't logged in.
And it's a completelydifferent experience if you're not
logged in.
Oh, yeah.
And as you might imagine, oneof the top tweets was from Elon,
but he had been.
He was talking to somebody onthe BBC, and they said, well, you
(17:22):
know, since you've boughtthis, hate speech has been on the
rise on X.
And Elon said, okay, but canyou give me an example of the hate
speech?
And he said, well, there wasthis one guy voicing an opinion.
It was basically, he didn'tlike the opinion.
And there was another one thathe voiced.
And he goes.
He goes, but that's not hate speech.
You hate his opinion, but it'snot hate speech.
(17:42):
Can you give me an example ofhate speech?
And it was interestingwatching this guy because he didn't
have one.
So for me, I was like, that'san interesting argument.
I was like, I might have touse that Strategy in the future,
just go, can you give me anexample of one?
So that's kind of interestingto me.
I think we could get morelisteners, viewers to podcasts that
(18:02):
are hearing about what's aCall me Daddy.
What are they talking about?
And like, oh, I'm going tohave to go check this out.
So anytime you get a big gueston your show, that might lead somebody
to.
To listen, I think that's a bonus.
And so I'll be interested tosee if we keep some of those new
listeners.
And on the other hand, thismight inspire some people to actually
(18:22):
start a podcast and do it seriously.
And you talked about reporters.
Do you have an I team?
I know you're in Cincinnati,I'm in Akron.
We have the I team, specialinvestor Carl Somebody, and he investigated
the local guy and he's corruptand blah, blah, blah.
And I'm like, oh, wow, look,somebody's doing some reporting.
(18:43):
I remember when, you know, ifyou think about it, all the, you
know, our top story tonightwas handed to me by some guy who
got it from a big company whogave it to all the other big companies,
you know, all the media things.
There's really not a lot ofreporting except for Carl and the
I team.
If you've been treated badlyby a company, call Carl and the I
(19:03):
team and they'll come andinvestigate and tell that guy to
give you your money back.
But there's really not a lotof investigating.
Although I have heardmainstream media quote Twitter as
a source.
You know, a man on Twittersaid this or that.
But one of the things I thinkas podcasters we should do is a always
cite our sources and then beopen to the other side, like any
(19:25):
time.
It's fairly well known.
I'm not a fan of Spotify, andif I really do go on a rant about
why, I will just say, well,because they've done this in the
past.
They've done this in the past.
I don't like the way theyhandle this, and I don't like the
way they handle that.
If you really need a freemedia host, go see Red Circle.
But I always kind of quote wine.
I'm always waiting for somebody.
I always try to create an environment.
(19:47):
If somebody goes, hey, I'm onSpotify for whatever they're calling
it this week.
And I think this and this, andI'm always willing to listen.
And I think that's.
I think podcasters are muchmore open to having some sort of
dialogue because, again, wewant to set up the buffet of knowledge
and Let our audience figureout what's the truth, and we're going
to present the truth as we see it.
(20:08):
But I think we are much moreopen to going, oh, I never thought
of that particular angle.
And if someone wanted to setup that buffet for their own audience,
Dave, where should they go?
That would be the school ofpodcasting.com and, you know, if
I wanted a way to interact andbuild engagement with my audience
(20:29):
and maybe grow the connection there.
If only there was a tool for that.
Daniel, do you know of anytools that might boost.
Yeah, that would be Pod GaugeCalm think podcast engagement, podgagement.com
with now rankings and charttracking features included.
Check it out over at Pod gauge.
(20:50):
Com.
This was not a dynamicallyinserted ad.
Yes, organic.
The other thing I thought wasfunny was apparently nobody cares
what celebrities say.
And in some cases, we're kindof ignoring the mainstream media
and looking towards podcasts.
Why do you think that, youknow, mainstream is kind of losing
(21:12):
their hold?
Well, I think some of it isthe echo chamber effect, where people
who follow or are big fans ofcertain celebrities are probably
already going to lean acertain way or define celebrity however
you want.
Whether it's a mediapersonality, actor, actress, or television
(21:32):
star, musician, anything likethat, they're probably already leaning
a certain way.
I would love to think thatthere's some critical thinking on
some of the audience's part.
There are many jokes to bemade about stuff like Taylor Swift,
who has made her career ofwriting music, about her bad choices
in men, should be trustedabout her choice in politicians.
(21:55):
Or we could say so, and so isan actor.
They get paid to act genuineabout certain things.
So can we really believewhatever they're saying away from
the camera?
Is it truly their own opinion?
It's hard to really say.
I would love to think thatpeople are thinking more critically
about some of that stuff.
I don't know if they are.
(22:16):
But I think it's also gottento the point that some people maybe
are just no longer looking atit as just, what does someone else
say?
But more, what do I thinkabout what that politician is saying?
What have I heard?
What is my own experience?
And yes, still a lot of thatis highly subjective.
(22:37):
It can be subjective based onyour upbringing, your belief system,
now where you live, even,like, you look at the map of the
counties that went majorityfor Trump versus majority for Harris,
and it's very predictablealmost every year which side is going
to go red and which side isblue and such.
But these kinds of things canbe challenged by what we have in
(22:59):
the podcasting world thatwhile podcasting is still relatively
free of censorship and thinkof not only just in censorship of
political ideas, but alsocorporate censorship or even just,
we could call it moralcensorship, which, like you think
about what is allowed on television.
Well, a lot of stuff is moral censorship.
(23:21):
There are certain words youcan't say on broadcast television
or radio.
There are certain things youcannot show in broadcast television
or radio or can't talk about,regardless of the morality of it.
But some of it is just like,is it appropriate for children or
is this appropriate to bebroadcasting out to the world, stuff
like that?
Well, in podcasting, as we'veseen Edison research show multiple
(23:43):
times, is people tend to selfselect and therefore choose their
own kind of censorship, orlack thereof if they want to.
And that's what's so greatabout podcasting, is that if you
want a comedy podcast thatnever has bad words, is never sexually
explicit, there are cleancomedy podcasts out there and some
(24:05):
really good ones out there.
If you want the raunchiestkind of podcast you want, you can
get.
There are podcasts out therefor that.
If you want far left politicalopinions or far right far in, far
out, you can get podcasts inwhichever direction you want.
It can be good to consume,even from multiple sides, if you
(24:27):
can stomach it.
You know, don't cause yourselfstress or a hernia.
But it can be good to hearsome of these things, especially
when there is some of thatcrossover, like when you said Bill
Maher and Ben Shapiro, who arelike polar opposites, when they could
sit down and have a conversation.
One of the things that.
That just shows, since I knownothing about the conversation that
(24:49):
took place, but that shows acertain level of maturity for both
of those people that they werewilling to have that conversation
knowing how polar opposite theother person was and how the conversation
could go in front of their audiences.
Basically that's Bill wassitting there and Ben walks in and
he goes, I really can'tbelieve you're here.
(25:11):
And they both are just like,let's see what happens.
You know, like, nobody's goingto punch anybody.
So we're okay.
Yeah, so it was really interesting.
I was trying to think earlier,like, when did I stop watching?
Because I used to wake up,make my breakfast and sit in front
of the TV and watch the news.
And I haven't done that in a very.
(25:31):
It's one of those times whenyou think it's like two years and
it's probably more like six.
And it dawned on me there wasone where it just seemed like at
least once a week, like it'sgoing to happen.
It will happen very soon if ithasn't happened already.
Where a major story will bethe Starbucks holiday cup and what's
on it and what it says.
(25:51):
Does it say Merry Christmas?
Does it say holiday?
Is it red?
Is it?
It doesn't matter, because inthe end, I think the general public
now realizes, hey, that's an ad.
Like, quit trying to tell usthat's news.
That's an ad.
And the other one was, Iremember once on the Cleveland channel,
the main anchor guy in themorning was marrying somebody, like
(26:16):
they had a wedding.
And I'm like, wait, you'remaking the news now?
And then it was so obvious.
It's like, oh, yes, her dresswas from Debbie's Bridal on 5th and
12th, and then the flowers.
And it was just this giantlist of sponsors.
And I was like, are you goingto tell me there's nothing going
on somewhere that we shouldn'tbe knowing about?
But half the thing was like,here's the weather and the traffic
(26:39):
and here's Wayne marryingDebbie and Bill or whatever.
And I was like, okay, I thinkI'm done.
This is ridiculous.
And you look at the mediaconsumption habits of those different
platforms and even just thenature of the distribution, like
broadcast television andradio, you tune in and you get whatever
they're giving you at thatmoment, and you're at their mercy
(27:00):
for whatever song they play,whatever news they tell.
And people will come and go inthe middle of a broadcast.
And so that's why they have toreset so much.
That's why they have toreintroduce their guests so much
and why they have to recap andwhy they have to keep things short.
That doesn't happen with podcasts.
Well, it can, because peoplecan pause an episode and go do something
(27:23):
and maybe pause for days andcome back, but even if they do that,
they still have a lot ofcontext simply by pressing that play
button.
They probably see the COVIDart, they probably see the title
of the podcast, they probablysee the title of the episode, maybe
a little bit more informationabout that and maybe even just recognizing
(27:46):
the voice, hearing the voiceagain, because it seems people recognize
podcaster voices better thanTV news personalities.
A lot of that leads to thesemental cues that help you jump right
back in where you left off mentally.
You can have the long formconversations and you can follow
the long form conversations.
Often because of the nature ofpodcasting and even non podcast platforms
(28:12):
like YouTube and I will callit A non podcast platform because
I like being controversiallike that, even stuff like that.
People don't just jump in inthe middle, they are choosing to
listen.
They have many visual cues ofthe context.
And also speaking aboutcontext, much of the context is focused
(28:32):
on only that one thing.
Because many of the times thepeople making that content know I've
got lots of time to shareeverything I want to cover.
I don't have to be talkingabout this one thing.
While all of these things, thelower thirds are telling you 20 other
news stories and then we'vegot upper thirds telling you 20 other
news stories.
And then when we've got stocktickers on the left side and news
(28:54):
tickers, crypto tickers on theright side and the weather forecast
on the bottom left, and thenyou've got the sports news on the
right and all of this stufflike coming at you at the same time.
But in a podcast.
It's like one stream ofthought, my friend.
Yeah, I remember I've onlybeen on TV once.
It was on a local NBC stationon, you know, the shows they show
(29:16):
on Sunday morning thatnobody's watching because nobody's
up early.
And it was GoldenOpportunities was the name of the
show.
And it was, Dave was on in hissuit to explain for seniors what
is a podcast and how do you listen.
And it was a four minutesegment and you know, they called
and talked to me and then theycalled me again.
(29:37):
Okay, you're going to be onthe show.
Here are the questions you'regoing to ask and make sure your answers
are no longer than threeminutes total and have them ready
and blah, blah, blah.
And it was so, it really wasalmost like a play.
Scene one, Dave is introducedand then asked this question.
And then, and it was like, itwas fun and it was neat and there
was a lot of adrenaline flowing.
(29:57):
But in the end I was like,this is really not a conversation.
This is, and I assume everyTonight show appearance when they're
like, so heard you went onvacation to Vermont last week.
You know, well, you know, it'sjust this.
And then you have the funlittle story and then it's roll the
clip and let's talk about themovie and that whole nine yards.
So I think again, that issomething that if I'm doing an interview,
(30:18):
I'll let them know why Ibrought them on and I'll give them
the idea of the topics.
But I don't like to give themthe question unless it's something
like what's your favorite book?
Where they really want to takea second to think about it.
So I think that's another onewhere podcasting is just.
If it's edited, because we'reall going to go places where we go
that didn't work.
(30:38):
But if it's edited but yetstill has that kind of.
I think you said it earlier,it's calm.
You know what I mean?
It's just a conversation.
There's no real.
It's relaxed, and we're justhaving a conversation, and what comes
out comes out, and in the end,you go, oh, I didn't know that.
So I think we're going to beatthem at their own game.
Unless they figure out thatnobody's listening anymore and they
(31:01):
should probably change by now.
Or when they figure out how touse Google Notebook lm.
Kyle and Sheila, strap in andtake a deep dive into whatever it
is.
Yeah, that's always fun.
Well, Daniel, I don't think wegot any boost to Graham, so thanks
to everyone who's beenstreaming to the show.
We do deeply appreciate that,and I think that's going to do it
(31:23):
for episode 53 of the Futureof podcasting.
Thanks so much for listening.
Keep boosting, Keep podcastingand have a happy Thanksgiving.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!