4 ms·

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 Dyl

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.

nickelcitymario 7y ago
> the popular stuff seems milquetoast Isn't that true of any medium? I don't know who the Velvet Underground of podcasts would be. I wouldn't have recognized VU when they were getting started either. I suspect this is the sort of thing that's easier to recognize when looking back. I certainly didn't understand punk the way I do now back when I was a punk rocker. All I knew was I could play a little bass (badly) with some friends who played guitar and drums (badly) and sing (badly) and we had a blast doing it. Yet today, looking back, I see so many top-notch musicians who credit punk for the work they've been able to produce. Of course, this may be my way of passing the buck. "Wait and see" is an easy way for me to dismiss your argument, and I apologize for that. It could be that in 10-20 years we'll look back at podcasting and say, "Meh, that didn't really amount to anything." But I suspect that won't be the case. (As for my 2 cents on who's killing it at podcasting... I'm personally a fan of the Cracked podcast. It's always entertaining and educational to boot.)
- leftyted 7y ago
  You've convinced me that "I'm Against Podcasts" is a stupid statement. I think you're absolutely on-point for saying that, 10-20 years from now, we'll look back on podcasts that are widely acknowledged as classic. At the same time, I think criticisms by this author are mostly valid and probably helpful (inasmuch as they push people to innovate and take risks with the medium). The criticisms are just overly broad and they ought to be aimed more clearly at specific trends within in the medium rather than the medium itself.
  - nickelcitymario 7y ago
    Like I said, "This article is fantastic" :-) The author isn't wrong, in that you can't really be wrong about a subjective opinion. The man dislikes podcasts, and that's a-ok. I just happen to love them for all the same reasons he hates them. He's right that far too many podcasts sound like Ira Glass wannabes. He's right that the production quality isn't very high most of the time. There's plenty of garbage. But the fact that podcasting allows garbage to exist? That's pure gold.
  - ghaff 7y ago
    And TBH I'm not at all sure every podcast needs to be innovating and taking risks. There are lots of podcasts out there that are just interviews with interesting people or a bi-weekly panel-type discussion with sometimes guests in some topic area. Sure, some are good, some not so good but even the best aren't really breaking new ground; they're just interesting.

nickelcitymario 7y ago

> the popular stuff seems milquetoast Isn't that true of any medium? I don't know who the Velvet Underground of podcasts would be. I wouldn't have recognized VU when they were getting started either. I suspect this is the sort of thing that's easier to recognize when looking back. I certainly didn't understand punk the way I do now back when I was a punk rocker. All I knew was I could play a little bass (badly) with some friends who played guitar and drums (badly) and sing (badly) and we had a blast doing it. Yet today, looking back, I see so many top-notch musicians who credit punk for the work they've been able to produce. Of course, this may be my way of passing the buck. "Wait and see" is an easy way for me to dismiss your argument, and I apologize for that. It could be that in 10-20 years we'll look back at podcasting and say, "Meh, that didn't really amount to anything." But I suspect that won't be the case. (As for my 2 cents on who's killing it at podcasting... I'm personally a fan of the Cracked podcast. It's always entertaining and educational to boot.)

leftyted 7y ago
You've convinced me that "I'm Against Podcasts" is a stupid statement. I think you're absolutely on-point for saying that, 10-20 years from now, we'll look back on podcasts that are widely acknowledged as classic. At the same time, I think criticisms by this author are mostly valid and probably helpful (inasmuch as they push people to innovate and take risks with the medium). The criticisms are just overly broad and they ought to be aimed more clearly at specific trends within in the medium rather than the medium itself.
- nickelcitymario 7y ago
  Like I said, "This article is fantastic" :-) The author isn't wrong, in that you can't really be wrong about a subjective opinion. The man dislikes podcasts, and that's a-ok. I just happen to love them for all the same reasons he hates them. He's right that far too many podcasts sound like Ira Glass wannabes. He's right that the production quality isn't very high most of the time. There's plenty of garbage. But the fact that podcasting allows garbage to exist? That's pure gold.
- ghaff 7y ago
  And TBH I'm not at all sure every podcast needs to be innovating and taking risks. There are lots of podcasts out there that are just interviews with interesting people or a bi-weekly panel-type discussion with sometimes guests in some topic area. Sure, some are good, some not so good but even the best aren't really breaking new ground; they're just interesting.