7 ms·

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 pu

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 never made it big, but almost everyone who went to one of their concerts or bought one of their albums started a band of their own. (The same was later said of The Pixies.) Sure, there's a lot of garbage. But it's real. It's raw. It's people finding their voice. I couldn't be happier to see the elites complaining about podcasts. Just add it to the pile of people complaining about punk, YouTube, ebook self-publishing, blogging, and all the other ways we're free to express ourselves today.

rgrieselhuber 8y ago
Exactly. The same goes for news and political commentary. We are in a golden age of media creation and we have the tools to seek out the truth in many areas and spread the messages we think are worthy of spreading. Whether an audience exists is up to the savvy of the podcast maker themselves. It is not uncommon to see independent YouTube streamers on a laptop with live audiences that put corporate media to shame.
- mistermann 8y ago
  Totally agree, I find it fascinating to compare how the media tells us things are in other countries and cultures vs how YouTubers show us they are.
  - rgrieselhuber 8y ago
    Great way to put it.
leftyted 8y ago
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 performative in a different way, and you hear it on most round-table podcasts — a tone that people use at parties when they want to be heard by people that they aren’t necessarily talking to. And it’s pretty much one or the other. Be podcasted to in a cozy, overly considered way, or be podcasted at in a hastier, less-considered way. There's something phoney about podcasts. I see most podcasts as similiar to TED talks or books by Malcolm Gladwell. These things are the opposite of Punk, which feels real, even when it's shitty. That doesn't mean there can't be good podcasts or that there aren't any, but the dominant format seems pretty lifeless to me.
- nickelcitymario 8y ago
  > Lou Reed made it pretty big though. Not compared to the influence he had on other musicians. The general music loving public is not THAT familiar with him. He was a musician's musician. (Also an asshole and abuser of women, which has nothing to do with this discussion, but I can't praise him without mentioning this.) > There's something phoney about podcasts. I see most podcasts as similar to TED talks or books by Malcolm Gladwell. Ironically, Malcolm's podcast "Broken Records" has an episode where Rick Rubin discusses this, in a way. He said something to the effect that all musicians start out copying their favorite musicians, until they find their own sound. I think this is the same for podcasts. Most podcasters are new to the form, so they haven't had the time to find their voice yet. They're still figuring it out. Ira Glass himself speaks to this point: “Nobody tells this to people who are beginners, I wish someone told me. All of us who do creative work, we get into it because we have good taste. But there is this gap. For the first couple years you make stuff, it’s just not that good. It’s trying to be good, it has potential, but it’s not. But your taste, the thing that got you into the game, is still killer. And your taste is why your work disappoints you. A lot of people never get past this phase, they quit. Most people I know who do interesting, creative work went through years of this. We know our work doesn’t have this special thing that we want it to have. We all go through this. And if you are just starting out or you are still in this phase, you gotta know its normal and the most important thing you can do is do a lot of work. Put yourself on a deadline so that every week you will finish one story. It is only by going through a volume of work that you will close that gap, and your work will be as good as your ambitions. And I took longer to figure out how to do this than anyone I’ve ever met. It’s gonna take awhile. It’s normal to take awhile. You’ve just gotta fight your way through.”
  - leftyted 8y ago
    Sure, The Velvet Underground's influence on pop music exceeded their popularity, but they were relatively successful, just not compared to The Beatles or to Dylan (who influenced Lou Reed and The Beatles). But who is The Velvet Underground of podcasts? Who is the punk of podcasts? It's not Ira Glass. I'm not saying you're wrong to celebrate the "democratization of long form audio" but the popular stuff seems milquetoast to me. And that's what's being criticized here, though maybe a bit too broadly.
coldtea 8y ago
>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 they pass for "serious" by people conditioned to seek those traits.
- Gravityloss 8y ago
  Some print media podcast productions are super amateurish production wise. You can hear it's two persons in a tiny conference room with no sound proofing (so it's really echoey) and a third person phoning in so you can barely hear what they are saying. No editing whatsoever. Maybe recorded with a cell phone? They should get a summer trainee who has been in a band, or even watch a youtube video on how to do podcasts. It should be easy to set up a normal microphone and put some foam rubber on the wall. And please, do get all the people in the same room! But the content can actually be good - ie some enthusiastic reporters actually know widely about their subject and can discuss it in an interesting way. Vi Hart of youtube fame was invited to a journalist conference and was saying just the same - that we need good quality journalism and content should be front and center - and stop with the gimmicks and forced video features.
  - ghaff 8y ago
    >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.
    - Gravityloss 8y ago
neurobashing 8y ago
punk also gave you a way to connect with the artist. you saw DK at a shitty club in the bad part of town, and Jello was 3 feet from you, and he'd talk to you after the show. (Instead of going to see Zeppelin at a giant stadium) With podcasts, a lot of them are Extremely Online and so interacting with the host is easy. They'll talk with you on Twitter or Reddit or here.
overthemoon 8y ago
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.
tmaly 8y ago
For me, it beats having to listen to top 40 music interlaced with commercials. Yes, podcasts have their own commercials, but you can always forward past them. There is some really interesting stuff out there, and podcasts are just another great learning format for people.

rgrieselhuber 8y ago

Exactly. The same goes for news and political commentary. We are in a golden age of media creation and we have the tools to seek out the truth in many areas and spread the messages we think are worthy of spreading. Whether an audience exists is up to the savvy of the podcast maker themselves. It is not uncommon to see independent YouTube streamers on a laptop with live audiences that put corporate media to shame.

mistermann 8y ago
Totally agree, I find it fascinating to compare how the media tells us things are in other countries and cultures vs how YouTubers show us they are.
- rgrieselhuber 8y ago
  Great way to put it.

leftyted 8y ago

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 performative in a different way, and you hear it on most round-table podcasts — a tone that people use at parties when they want to be heard by people that they aren’t necessarily talking to. And it’s pretty much one or the other. Be podcasted to in a cozy, overly considered way, or be podcasted at in a hastier, less-considered way. There's something phoney about podcasts. I see most podcasts as similiar to TED talks or books by Malcolm Gladwell. These things are the opposite of Punk, which feels real, even when it's shitty. That doesn't mean there can't be good podcasts or that there aren't any, but the dominant format seems pretty lifeless to me.

nickelcitymario 8y ago
> Lou Reed made it pretty big though. Not compared to the influence he had on other musicians. The general music loving public is not THAT familiar with him. He was a musician's musician. (Also an asshole and abuser of women, which has nothing to do with this discussion, but I can't praise him without mentioning this.) > There's something phoney about podcasts. I see most podcasts as similar to TED talks or books by Malcolm Gladwell. Ironically, Malcolm's podcast "Broken Records" has an episode where Rick Rubin discusses this, in a way. He said something to the effect that all musicians start out copying their favorite musicians, until they find their own sound. I think this is the same for podcasts. Most podcasters are new to the form, so they haven't had the time to find their voice yet. They're still figuring it out. Ira Glass himself speaks to this point: “Nobody tells this to people who are beginners, I wish someone told me. All of us who do creative work, we get into it because we have good taste. But there is this gap. For the first couple years you make stuff, it’s just not that good. It’s trying to be good, it has potential, but it’s not. But your taste, the thing that got you into the game, is still killer. And your taste is why your work disappoints you. A lot of people never get past this phase, they quit. Most people I know who do interesting, creative work went through years of this. We know our work doesn’t have this special thing that we want it to have. We all go through this. And if you are just starting out or you are still in this phase, you gotta know its normal and the most important thing you can do is do a lot of work. Put yourself on a deadline so that every week you will finish one story. It is only by going through a volume of work that you will close that gap, and your work will be as good as your ambitions. And I took longer to figure out how to do this than anyone I’ve ever met. It’s gonna take awhile. It’s normal to take awhile. You’ve just gotta fight your way through.”
- leftyted 8y ago
  Sure, The Velvet Underground's influence on pop music exceeded their popularity, but they were relatively successful, just not compared to The Beatles or to Dylan (who influenced Lou Reed and The Beatles). But who is The Velvet Underground of podcasts? Who is the punk of podcasts? It's not Ira Glass. I'm not saying you're wrong to celebrate the "democratization of long form audio" but the popular stuff seems milquetoast to me. And that's what's being criticized here, though maybe a bit too broadly.

coldtea 8y ago

>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 they pass for "serious" by people conditioned to seek those traits.

Gravityloss 8y ago
Some print media podcast productions are super amateurish production wise. You can hear it's two persons in a tiny conference room with no sound proofing (so it's really echoey) and a third person phoning in so you can barely hear what they are saying. No editing whatsoever. Maybe recorded with a cell phone? They should get a summer trainee who has been in a band, or even watch a youtube video on how to do podcasts. It should be easy to set up a normal microphone and put some foam rubber on the wall. And please, do get all the people in the same room! But the content can actually be good - ie some enthusiastic reporters actually know widely about their subject and can discuss it in an interesting way. Vi Hart of youtube fame was invited to a journalist conference and was saying just the same - that we need good quality journalism and content should be front and center - and stop with the gimmicks and forced video features.
- ghaff 8y ago
  >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.
  - Gravityloss 8y ago

neurobashing 8y ago

punk also gave you a way to connect with the artist. you saw DK at a shitty club in the bad part of town, and Jello was 3 feet from you, and he'd talk to you after the show. (Instead of going to see Zeppelin at a giant stadium) With podcasts, a lot of them are Extremely Online and so interacting with the host is easy. They'll talk with you on Twitter or Reddit or here.

overthemoon 8y ago

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.

tmaly 8y ago

For me, it beats having to listen to top 40 music interlaced with commercials. Yes, podcasts have their own commercials, but you can always forward past them. There is some really interesting stuff out there, and podcasts are just another great learning format for people.