2 ms·

It is often said that time is a circle. This seems like a return to more corporate-style media, because it's hard to make money when you're constantly discussin

It is often said that time is a circle. This seems like a return to more corporate-style media, because it's hard to make money when you're constantly discussing edgy or controversial topics. When Joe Rogan sold out to Spotify, he claimed to retain full editorial freedom, but he ended up removing tons of episodes and the tone of his podcast definitely started to shift. All endless entertainment mediums start to become plagued by similar problems, when people start running out of ideas and they've explored all the topics in which they're knowledgeable. In TV-land it was common to have people on as guests to promote their work, and podcasts innovated by allowing those guests to have more time to discuss their ideas.

jerf 3y ago
To me, the question to keep an eye out on is not whether huge podcasts end up in the same attraction basin as conventional mass media, but whether it remains possible for someone to practically run a 1000-subscriber podcast, and similarly, whether or not the lower rungs of the ladder remain or if they end up pulled up. There is certainly no technical reason why it should be hard to run a podcast, and I don't expect the largest podcasting hosts to do anything but push the largest podcasts, but as long as the low end remains an interesting, bubbling froth of anyone who has a modestly interesting opinion about anything and they're still available for anyone to find if they try, I'm not too worried.