5 ms·

I don't listen to his show, but as a general podcast fan this is sad. This isn't the first podcast to move away from having a free and open feed of the show, b

by slg 6y ago

I don't listen to his show, but as a general podcast fan this is sad. This isn't the first podcast to move away from having a free and open feed of the show, but it is certainly the biggest and it opens the doors for a lot more exclusivity deals in the future.

AndrewKemendo 6y ago
When was it free and open? JRE stopped live streaming his shows a year or more ago and they were on YouTube which I wouldn't consider open. They would complain pretty regularly about being demonetized because they played a short clip that Joe or a guest was commenting on. Seems like this deal gives them more ability to have fewer restrictions imo
- slg 6y ago
  When I say free and open, I mean having something like this available. [1] Anyone can listen to this, on any device, using an software they want. [1] - http://podcasts.joerogan.net/feed http://podcasts.joerogan.net/feed
paulgb 6y ago
Agreed. I don't think people appreciate how unique podcasting is as a distribution medium in that it has lasted so long as a completely open ecosystem. Nobody needs anyone's permission to write a podcasting app or launch a new podcast. Sad to see that start to change, but I'm also kind of optimistic for one reason: there's just so damned much audio content out there that it is people's attention, not audio content, that is scarce. I don't think platforms have the upper hand in audio content the way that, say, Netflix does. I think that's why platforms like Luminary haven't really taken off.
- tempestn 6y ago
  Agreed; that's what keeps me hopeful here too. Looking at my podcast player, I don't think there's any single podcast that I would download a new app for, if they tried this. So hopefully at least for the type of podcasts I listen to, this wouldn't be a winning move.
  - mopsi 6y ago
    I agree, too. I've seen several podcasts move to exclusive apps and I've not followed any of them there. With such a low entry barrier, there's so much content available that exclusive deals don't seem to have much influence, no podcast is "must have". Not available? I'll just play the next one on the list. Many will remain open and free. Fortunately, podcasts can financially sustain themselves under these conditions, it wasn't a forced move.
- downerending 6y ago
  Re permission, that's not quite true. His show is on YouTube, and his shows are allowed on there only at their pleasure. Censorship there is not unheard of, and though I've watched only a couple, his shows seem like something that could set them off.
  - xerxesaa 6y ago
    It's available as an rss feed that can be consumed by any podcast player. It's not just YouTube.
    - HankB99 6y ago
      "exclusive" From the second paragraph of the article "The show will hit Spotify September 1, and become exclusive to the platform later in the year." Doesn't this mean it will no longer be available via the RSS feed? Edit: typo
      - swiley 6y ago
        Right that's what they're lamenting. It was previously not exclusive and now it is.
      - sails 6y ago
        IMO this is the headline point here, walled gardens for podcasts is terribly sad.
- bvandewalle 6y ago
  It feels like this became the life-cycle of Internet. The same thing happened with decentralized websites and blogs.then everyone got attracted by the managed platforms and now the web is more centralized than ever.
  - jfoster 6y ago
    It pre-dates the internet. Happened with cable TV as well.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- seumars 6y ago
  >...it has lasted so long as a completely open ecosystem It's the platforms that have contributed to the podcast boom of recent years, not the "open ecosystem". Anyone can start a website and upload recorded audio, which may be the reason nobody uses RSS seriously anymore because "curated" content is the new norm. The JRE podcast has been around for ages, and it built up an audience on YouTube because that has has been the dominating media platform for more than a decade. Now Spotify is investing heavily in big names like Gimlet and now JRE, which will help it become the next dominating platform for this decade.
whalesalad 6y ago
Why is this sad? To me it illustrates that there is a lot of value in Spotify as a delivery mechanism and that the existing channels are not working. If anything it should inspire creative new solutions to the issue.
- chipperyman573 6y ago
  If this were the case, wouldn't the podcasts would choose to use spotify on their own without having to be paid for it?
  - whalesalad 6y ago
    Value exists on both sides of the equation. Spotify wants people on their platform and will pay handsomly for an exclusive deal. Joe instantly gets prominent placement inside every Spotify installation on the earth, rock solid distribution and a partner to help market his content.
    - neetdeth 6y ago
      He has rock solid distribution between YT and RSS. Anyone who has heard of podcasts has heard of JRE, it doesn’t need marketing. Joe’s reach is going to take a big hit from exclusivity. Spotify is clearly paying him enough that none of this matters. It’s the correct trade to make if he thinks JRE has passed peak growth and it’s time to focus on monetization.
- anoncake 6y ago
  To the contrary. If Spotify was valuable as a delivery mechanism, it wouldn't need exclusives. People would use it voluntarily.
  - whalesalad 6y ago
    There are tons of podcasts that are on Spotify in a non-exclusive manner.
hinkley 6y ago
I would have to ask more questions. Specifically about following the money. As a contracted podcaster on a paid platform, does that mean his management and production team spend less time on trying to court advertising dollars? Does it mean fewer conflicts of interest? Does that mean less of (well I hardly ever listen to him, but for argument's sake) my information is sold? Some of that could probably be figured out now. Some of it we will only know after Spotify has experienced financial distress a few times.
trts 6y ago
my heart sank when I learned Reply All was beginning to offer exclusive (or maybe just early publish) content to Spotify. It was tempered by the fact that the hosts actually addressed this and committed to not being exclusive to their platform. But when I read this news today I knew that the era of podcasts as an open publishing channel via RSS are done. In 5 more years a lot of people will probably have to measure the worth of content on one platform vs. another as they do with Hulu or Netflix today. The silver lining would be the ability to avoid ads as a premium subscriber, and not have to pay Google for the privilege.
- st1ck 6y ago
  I've stumbled on a bunch of good quality podcasts following freemium model, where they share a part of the content exclusively with their patrons. I'm guessing it earns them more money than ads.
anitil 6y ago
I'm still waiting for the sad day when Gimlet moves it's podcasts to exclusive status. I'm sure it's coming.
- sirmarksalot 6y ago
  I was thinking the exact same thing. I wonder if any of their higher-profile hosts will jump ship if that happens. I'll quit listening out of principle, but also because I feel like I have an alternative in Radiotopia. If Gimlet really were the only ones putting out high-production content, I'd be pretty despondent right now. As it stands, I'm angry, but I feel like I at least have an escape plan.
MarkMc 6y ago
True, but on the other hand allowing podcasters to make significantly more money will increase supply and you will have more podcasts to choose from with higher quality. Consider what would happen to the quality of books if copyright couldn't be applied them: every book would have a 'free and open feed' on the internet, but overall I don't think readers would benefit.
mxcrossb 6y ago
I’m be been listening to podcasts daily since probably at least 2007. I feel the same way. I have plenty of memories of filling up my iPod shuffle with pods and taking them wherever I wanted. I’ve got nothing against Spotify in general, but I’ve quit listening to a number of podcasts that went exclusive solely out of principle.
bvandewalle 6y ago
you make the right point. A lot of people see this as youtube censorship, but the podcast was also available in its purest form: through a RSS decentralized feed. Now it moves to a walled garden with content unavailable to the outside world.
unethical_ban 6y ago
Yep. This is like a website moving from HTTP to behind the AOL browser.

by slg 6y ago

AndrewKemendo 6y ago

When was it free and open? JRE stopped live streaming his shows a year or more ago and they were on YouTube which I wouldn't consider open. They would complain pretty regularly about being demonetized because they played a short clip that Joe or a guest was commenting on. Seems like this deal gives them more ability to have fewer restrictions imo

slg 6y ago
When I say free and open, I mean having something like this available. [1] Anyone can listen to this, on any device, using an software they want. [1] - http://podcasts.joerogan.net/feed http://podcasts.joerogan.net/feed

paulgb 6y ago

Agreed. I don't think people appreciate how unique podcasting is as a distribution medium in that it has lasted so long as a completely open ecosystem. Nobody needs anyone's permission to write a podcasting app or launch a new podcast. Sad to see that start to change, but I'm also kind of optimistic for one reason: there's just so damned much audio content out there that it is people's attention, not audio content, that is scarce. I don't think platforms have the upper hand in audio content the way that, say, Netflix does. I think that's why platforms like Luminary haven't really taken off.

tempestn 6y ago
Agreed; that's what keeps me hopeful here too. Looking at my podcast player, I don't think there's any single podcast that I would download a new app for, if they tried this. So hopefully at least for the type of podcasts I listen to, this wouldn't be a winning move.
- mopsi 6y ago
  I agree, too. I've seen several podcasts move to exclusive apps and I've not followed any of them there. With such a low entry barrier, there's so much content available that exclusive deals don't seem to have much influence, no podcast is "must have". Not available? I'll just play the next one on the list. Many will remain open and free. Fortunately, podcasts can financially sustain themselves under these conditions, it wasn't a forced move.
downerending 6y ago
Re permission, that's not quite true. His show is on YouTube, and his shows are allowed on there only at their pleasure. Censorship there is not unheard of, and though I've watched only a couple, his shows seem like something that could set them off.
- xerxesaa 6y ago
  It's available as an rss feed that can be consumed by any podcast player. It's not just YouTube.
  - HankB99 6y ago
    "exclusive" From the second paragraph of the article "The show will hit Spotify September 1, and become exclusive to the platform later in the year." Doesn't this mean it will no longer be available via the RSS feed? Edit: typo
    - swiley 6y ago
      Right that's what they're lamenting. It was previously not exclusive and now it is.
    - sails 6y ago
      IMO this is the headline point here, walled gardens for podcasts is terribly sad.
bvandewalle 6y ago
It feels like this became the life-cycle of Internet. The same thing happened with decentralized websites and blogs.then everyone got attracted by the managed platforms and now the web is more centralized than ever.
- jfoster 6y ago
  It pre-dates the internet. Happened with cable TV as well.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
seumars 6y ago
>...it has lasted so long as a completely open ecosystem It's the platforms that have contributed to the podcast boom of recent years, not the "open ecosystem". Anyone can start a website and upload recorded audio, which may be the reason nobody uses RSS seriously anymore because "curated" content is the new norm. The JRE podcast has been around for ages, and it built up an audience on YouTube because that has has been the dominating media platform for more than a decade. Now Spotify is investing heavily in big names like Gimlet and now JRE, which will help it become the next dominating platform for this decade.

whalesalad 6y ago

Why is this sad? To me it illustrates that there is a lot of value in Spotify as a delivery mechanism and that the existing channels are not working. If anything it should inspire creative new solutions to the issue.

chipperyman573 6y ago
If this were the case, wouldn't the podcasts would choose to use spotify on their own without having to be paid for it?
- whalesalad 6y ago
  Value exists on both sides of the equation. Spotify wants people on their platform and will pay handsomly for an exclusive deal. Joe instantly gets prominent placement inside every Spotify installation on the earth, rock solid distribution and a partner to help market his content.
  - neetdeth 6y ago
    He has rock solid distribution between YT and RSS. Anyone who has heard of podcasts has heard of JRE, it doesn’t need marketing. Joe’s reach is going to take a big hit from exclusivity. Spotify is clearly paying him enough that none of this matters. It’s the correct trade to make if he thinks JRE has passed peak growth and it’s time to focus on monetization.
anoncake 6y ago
To the contrary. If Spotify was valuable as a delivery mechanism, it wouldn't need exclusives. People would use it voluntarily.
- whalesalad 6y ago
  There are tons of podcasts that are on Spotify in a non-exclusive manner.

hinkley 6y ago

I would have to ask more questions. Specifically about following the money. As a contracted podcaster on a paid platform, does that mean his management and production team spend less time on trying to court advertising dollars? Does it mean fewer conflicts of interest? Does that mean less of (well I hardly ever listen to him, but for argument's sake) my information is sold? Some of that could probably be figured out now. Some of it we will only know after Spotify has experienced financial distress a few times.

trts 6y ago

my heart sank when I learned Reply All was beginning to offer exclusive (or maybe just early publish) content to Spotify. It was tempered by the fact that the hosts actually addressed this and committed to not being exclusive to their platform. But when I read this news today I knew that the era of podcasts as an open publishing channel via RSS are done. In 5 more years a lot of people will probably have to measure the worth of content on one platform vs. another as they do with Hulu or Netflix today. The silver lining would be the ability to avoid ads as a premium subscriber, and not have to pay Google for the privilege.

st1ck 6y ago
I've stumbled on a bunch of good quality podcasts following freemium model, where they share a part of the content exclusively with their patrons. I'm guessing it earns them more money than ads.

anitil 6y ago

I'm still waiting for the sad day when Gimlet moves it's podcasts to exclusive status. I'm sure it's coming.

sirmarksalot 6y ago
I was thinking the exact same thing. I wonder if any of their higher-profile hosts will jump ship if that happens. I'll quit listening out of principle, but also because I feel like I have an alternative in Radiotopia. If Gimlet really were the only ones putting out high-production content, I'd be pretty despondent right now. As it stands, I'm angry, but I feel like I at least have an escape plan.

MarkMc 6y ago

True, but on the other hand allowing podcasters to make significantly more money will increase supply and you will have more podcasts to choose from with higher quality. Consider what would happen to the quality of books if copyright couldn't be applied them: every book would have a 'free and open feed' on the internet, but overall I don't think readers would benefit.

mxcrossb 6y ago

I’m be been listening to podcasts daily since probably at least 2007. I feel the same way. I have plenty of memories of filling up my iPod shuffle with pods and taking them wherever I wanted. I’ve got nothing against Spotify in general, but I’ve quit listening to a number of podcasts that went exclusive solely out of principle.

bvandewalle 6y ago

you make the right point. A lot of people see this as youtube censorship, but the podcast was also available in its purest form: through a RSS decentralized feed. Now it moves to a walled garden with content unavailable to the outside world.

unethical_ban 6y ago

Yep. This is like a website moving from HTTP to behind the AOL browser.