5 ms·

That's not possible. Joe Rogan doesn't have a podcast. Call it what it is. Rogan's show ceased being a podcast when it moved to Spotify. If you can't listen

by cxr 3y ago

That's not possible. Joe Rogan doesn't have a podcast. Call it what it is. Rogan's show ceased being a podcast when it moved to Spotify. If you can't listen to it on a (1st gen) iPod, then it's not a podcast. Call it what it is; don't muddle the terms. "Podcast" is not a genre label or a program format.

stevenae 3y ago
This is the headline of the article, by Variety, the preeminent entertainment industry outlet.
- booi 3y ago
  This. Also, why such a strong reaction to the word "podcast"? imho it's a pretty loose term for "audio show" which it most certainly falls under.
  - senkora 3y ago
    A “podcast” is an audio show that is syndicated through RSS in a way that works with any podcast app. It’s an open vs closed ecosystem thing. (I’m not sure how I personally feel about this definition but it is definitely a common one)
    - cxr 3y ago
      That definition is wrong. RSS is not a prerequisite for podcasts.
      - skyyler 3y ago
        Your technical definition is losing popularity to the colloquial use of "podcast" which is a form of audio-first media. Younger people already consume "podcasts" that come with optional video streams. H3 is a very popular one.
        cxr 3y ago
        You're making my point: "podcast" means nothing when it means everything.
        skyyler 3y ago
        Just because it's different from your personal definition doesn't mean it's meaningless.
        cxr 3y ago
        That's not a response to what I wrote.
      - senkora 3y ago
        I did some research to confirm my understanding and I did not find any way to do syndication across all podcast apps that did not use RSS. Wikipedia cites this source which says that podcasting developed originally out of a script that an individual wrote to import audio content from an RSS feed into iTunes: https://blubrry.com/manual/about-podcasting/history-of-podcasting-new/technical-history-of-podcasting/ https://blubrry.com/manual/about-podcasting/history-of-podca... This source even says “If your hosting provider won’t offer an RSS feed, you should find a new host because they clearly don’t have much experience with podcasts”: https://castos.com/podcast-syndication/ https://castos.com/podcast-syndication/
        cxr 3y ago
        > I did some research to confirm my understanding and I did not find any way to do syndication across all podcast apps that did not use RSS. K. And? > This source even says “If your hosting provider won’t offer an RSS feed, you should find a new host because they clearly don’t have much experience with podcasts” So?
        cxr 3y ago
        > I did some research to confirm my understanding and I did not find any way to do syndication across all podcast apps that did not use RSS. K. And? > This source even says “If your hosting provider won’t offer an RSS feed, you should find a new host because they clearly don’t have much experience with podcasts” True statement. So?
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    Sure, It is pedantic quibble, but there is also a valuable message as well. Something real is lost when the meanings of words are cooped and changed. There are clear winners and losers.
  - cxr 3y ago
    > This. "This" what? What point is the parent commenter trying to make? Appeal to authority? (I genuinely don't understand how their comment is meant to be interpreted. Appeal to authority is the best I can come up with. I asked directly, in another comment, but neither they nor anyone else responded. So what is it supposed to mean?)
- cxr 3y ago
  > This is the headline of the article, by Variety, the preeminent entertainment industry outlet. So? What are you saying?
sparky_z 3y ago
This has real "Netflix shouldn't be eligible for Emmys, it's not a television show if it's not broadcast over the air or on cable" energy.
- endofreach 3y ago
  Well in that case, JRE might just win best radio show awards as well, right?
  - Kirby64 3y ago
    Awards panels are free to segment as much as they want. If JRE was actually broadcast on the radio, sure, but it’s not obviously… so it wouldn’t be eligible by normal definitions. It’s why NPR stuff is generally both a podcast and a radio program: it’s aired on the radio, and released in podcast format.
- colpabar 3y ago
  My mind went to that old guy on 60 minutes claiming smartphones weren't "phones" because they didn't look like the old phones he was used to. Who cares? I also can't help but think the comment was mocking the way some HN comments completely ignore the subject of an article to instead argue semantics, but who knows.
  - cxr 3y ago
    > guy on 60 minutes claiming smartphones weren't "phones" because they didn't look like the old phones he was used to Sure. They're exactly the same argument, except that they're totally different. (Andy Rooney is wrong, anyway, if that's really his position. Smartphones are still phones. He's not making a good semantic argument.) > Who cares? Anyone who wants to listen to a podcast and then finds out they can't because it's not really a podcast—that people are just throwing the word "podcast" around like it means "audio, uh... interview? on a phone? or a laptop, too, I guess?".
    - ajhurliman 3y ago
Jerrrry 3y ago
[flagged]
lucisferre 3y ago
Here have a Kleenex ...err... I mean tissue.
- cxr 3y ago
  That's not the same argument. Even if we're being generous, you're making the inverse argument. Except not, because "it's only a podcast if you use an iPod to listen to it" is not my argument. My argument is it's only a podcast if you can listen to it on an iPod—i.e. something you'd do because that's how you like to listen to things. A piece of audio that you can only listen to if someone installs a proprietary app on a limited set of devices and taps the play button is definitely not a podcast. A podcast that only has a single episode that was distributed as a FLAC copied to CD-R and never uploaded to the Web or anywhere else on the Internet and that only one person has ever listened to and when they did listen to it, it was using Amarok on a 2004 desktop from Gateway can absolutely call itself a podcast.
  - latexr 3y ago
    The definitions I found don’t say anything about the proprietary nature of the app, but do mention it has to be downloadable via the internet. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38521593 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38521593
    - cxr 3y ago
      Huh? Spotify is proprietary. Not sure why you'd expect a dictionary to say that or why you'd want it to.
      - latexr 3y ago
        > Not sure why you'd expect a dictionary to say that or why you'd want it to. Because you wrote: > A piece of audio that you can only listen to if someone installs a proprietary app on a limited set of devices and taps the play button is definitely not a podcast. So it seems that not being proprietary is an important part of your definition of podcast.
gainda 3y ago
every modern dictionary disagrees with you
- cxr 3y ago
  Don't care. They're wrong.
tqkxzugoaupvwqr 3y ago
Do podcasts that could be played on iPods but started publishing in a newer audio format cease to be podcasts? The iPod has been discontinued. Should the term podcast be discontinued?
- cxr 3y ago
  > Do podcasts that could be played on iPods but started publishing in a newer audio format cease to be podcasts? No. You can still play play it on an iPod if you save it in an alternative format the the iPod can play or if you install custom software. The term "podcast" should be discontinued only if it stops meaning anything because e.g. people insist it means something that's the exact opposite of what it should mean. The word "algorithm" is approaching this level. We're going to have to come up with a new word because journalists ruined it.
astrodust 3y ago
Keep yelling at those clouds!
latexr 3y ago
> Call it what it is You wrote that twice, but it’s not clear to me what you’re advocating everyone should call it. > show Is “show” the suggestion? That’s quite broad as there are TV shows, broadway shows, dog shows… Is the argument that it’s a non-podcast talk show? > ceased being a podcast I dislike the trend of podcasts being exclusive to certain apps too, but neither Wikipedia nor the three dictionaries it sources its definition from say that a podcast has to be open. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcast
- cxr 3y ago
  Thanks for being the one person disagreeing so far that does so in a way that's actually engaging. I disagree that "show" being too broad is relevant. How specific is "podcast" in the way that people are advocating for? It's so unspecific at this point that it doesn't mean anything. (It perhaps shouldn't even be called a "show", anyway. It's not a show. It's audio. If someone wanted to make that argument, I'd actually take their argument seriously.) (It can't mean the thing that many techies say podcasts are, i.e. that it has to be delivered over RSS, because podcasts predate the use of RSS for podcasts—so it would preclude all sorts of podcasts that e.g. wrapped up before RSS for podcasts became common or that just never decided to go the RSS route for whatever reason. It can't mean the thing that dictionary writers say it means because they all insist it has to involve the Internet. Both the Internet and RSS are good ideas for a podcast, but they're not strictly required.) I'm not under any particular pressure to come up with an alternative. I can say, "it's not a podcast" the same as I can say, "it's not a goose". Call it a "streaming audio show" for all I care. NB: this comment was written before the edit about Wikipedia and dictionaries, which I don't care to address here, but it's a paradoxical argument and a less serious one.
  - pcdoodle 3y ago
    I agree with you 100%. Podcast is an XML feed period.
    - cxr 3y ago
      You might think we agree, but we don't. See elsewhere. Neither "XML" (nor "RSS") belong in any definition of "podcast" (unless it's to say something like "[...] often delivered via RSS", but at that point you're not really talking about the defining characteristic of it if it's optional).
lebean 3y ago
This gave me nostalgia for 2004.

by cxr 3y ago

stevenae 3y ago

This is the headline of the article, by Variety, the preeminent entertainment industry outlet.

booi 3y ago
This. Also, why such a strong reaction to the word "podcast"? imho it's a pretty loose term for "audio show" which it most certainly falls under.
- senkora 3y ago
  A “podcast” is an audio show that is syndicated through RSS in a way that works with any podcast app. It’s an open vs closed ecosystem thing. (I’m not sure how I personally feel about this definition but it is definitely a common one)
  - cxr 3y ago
    That definition is wrong. RSS is not a prerequisite for podcasts.
    - skyyler 3y ago
      Your technical definition is losing popularity to the colloquial use of "podcast" which is a form of audio-first media. Younger people already consume "podcasts" that come with optional video streams. H3 is a very popular one.
      - cxr 3y ago
        You're making my point: "podcast" means nothing when it means everything.
        skyyler 3y ago
        Just because it's different from your personal definition doesn't mean it's meaningless.
        cxr 3y ago
        That's not a response to what I wrote.
    - senkora 3y ago
      I did some research to confirm my understanding and I did not find any way to do syndication across all podcast apps that did not use RSS. Wikipedia cites this source which says that podcasting developed originally out of a script that an individual wrote to import audio content from an RSS feed into iTunes: https://blubrry.com/manual/about-podcasting/history-of-podcasting-new/technical-history-of-podcasting/ https://blubrry.com/manual/about-podcasting/history-of-podca... This source even says “If your hosting provider won’t offer an RSS feed, you should find a new host because they clearly don’t have much experience with podcasts”: https://castos.com/podcast-syndication/ https://castos.com/podcast-syndication/
      - cxr 3y ago
        > I did some research to confirm my understanding and I did not find any way to do syndication across all podcast apps that did not use RSS. K. And? > This source even says “If your hosting provider won’t offer an RSS feed, you should find a new host because they clearly don’t have much experience with podcasts” So?
      - cxr 3y ago
        > I did some research to confirm my understanding and I did not find any way to do syndication across all podcast apps that did not use RSS. K. And? > This source even says “If your hosting provider won’t offer an RSS feed, you should find a new host because they clearly don’t have much experience with podcasts” True statement. So?
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  Sure, It is pedantic quibble, but there is also a valuable message as well. Something real is lost when the meanings of words are cooped and changed. There are clear winners and losers.
- cxr 3y ago
  > This. "This" what? What point is the parent commenter trying to make? Appeal to authority? (I genuinely don't understand how their comment is meant to be interpreted. Appeal to authority is the best I can come up with. I asked directly, in another comment, but neither they nor anyone else responded. So what is it supposed to mean?)
cxr 3y ago
> This is the headline of the article, by Variety, the preeminent entertainment industry outlet. So? What are you saying?

sparky_z 3y ago

This has real "Netflix shouldn't be eligible for Emmys, it's not a television show if it's not broadcast over the air or on cable" energy.

endofreach 3y ago
Well in that case, JRE might just win best radio show awards as well, right?
- Kirby64 3y ago
  Awards panels are free to segment as much as they want. If JRE was actually broadcast on the radio, sure, but it’s not obviously… so it wouldn’t be eligible by normal definitions. It’s why NPR stuff is generally both a podcast and a radio program: it’s aired on the radio, and released in podcast format.
colpabar 3y ago
My mind went to that old guy on 60 minutes claiming smartphones weren't "phones" because they didn't look like the old phones he was used to. Who cares? I also can't help but think the comment was mocking the way some HN comments completely ignore the subject of an article to instead argue semantics, but who knows.
- cxr 3y ago
  > guy on 60 minutes claiming smartphones weren't "phones" because they didn't look like the old phones he was used to Sure. They're exactly the same argument, except that they're totally different. (Andy Rooney is wrong, anyway, if that's really his position. Smartphones are still phones. He's not making a good semantic argument.) > Who cares? Anyone who wants to listen to a podcast and then finds out they can't because it's not really a podcast—that people are just throwing the word "podcast" around like it means "audio, uh... interview? on a phone? or a laptop, too, I guess?".
  - ajhurliman 3y ago

Jerrrry 3y ago

[flagged]

lucisferre 3y ago

Here have a Kleenex ...err... I mean tissue.

cxr 3y ago
That's not the same argument. Even if we're being generous, you're making the inverse argument. Except not, because "it's only a podcast if you use an iPod to listen to it" is not my argument. My argument is it's only a podcast if you can listen to it on an iPod—i.e. something you'd do because that's how you like to listen to things. A piece of audio that you can only listen to if someone installs a proprietary app on a limited set of devices and taps the play button is definitely not a podcast. A podcast that only has a single episode that was distributed as a FLAC copied to CD-R and never uploaded to the Web or anywhere else on the Internet and that only one person has ever listened to and when they did listen to it, it was using Amarok on a 2004 desktop from Gateway can absolutely call itself a podcast.
- latexr 3y ago
  The definitions I found don’t say anything about the proprietary nature of the app, but do mention it has to be downloadable via the internet. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38521593 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38521593
  - cxr 3y ago
    Huh? Spotify is proprietary. Not sure why you'd expect a dictionary to say that or why you'd want it to.
    - latexr 3y ago
      > Not sure why you'd expect a dictionary to say that or why you'd want it to. Because you wrote: > A piece of audio that you can only listen to if someone installs a proprietary app on a limited set of devices and taps the play button is definitely not a podcast. So it seems that not being proprietary is an important part of your definition of podcast.

gainda 3y ago

every modern dictionary disagrees with you

cxr 3y ago
Don't care. They're wrong.

tqkxzugoaupvwqr 3y ago

Do podcasts that could be played on iPods but started publishing in a newer audio format cease to be podcasts? The iPod has been discontinued. Should the term podcast be discontinued?

cxr 3y ago
> Do podcasts that could be played on iPods but started publishing in a newer audio format cease to be podcasts? No. You can still play play it on an iPod if you save it in an alternative format the the iPod can play or if you install custom software. The term "podcast" should be discontinued only if it stops meaning anything because e.g. people insist it means something that's the exact opposite of what it should mean. The word "algorithm" is approaching this level. We're going to have to come up with a new word because journalists ruined it.

astrodust 3y ago

Keep yelling at those clouds!

latexr 3y ago

> Call it what it is You wrote that twice, but it’s not clear to me what you’re advocating everyone should call it. > show Is “show” the suggestion? That’s quite broad as there are TV shows, broadway shows, dog shows… Is the argument that it’s a non-podcast talk show? > ceased being a podcast I dislike the trend of podcasts being exclusive to certain apps too, but neither Wikipedia nor the three dictionaries it sources its definition from say that a podcast has to be open. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcast

cxr 3y ago
Thanks for being the one person disagreeing so far that does so in a way that's actually engaging. I disagree that "show" being too broad is relevant. How specific is "podcast" in the way that people are advocating for? It's so unspecific at this point that it doesn't mean anything. (It perhaps shouldn't even be called a "show", anyway. It's not a show. It's audio. If someone wanted to make that argument, I'd actually take their argument seriously.) (It can't mean the thing that many techies say podcasts are, i.e. that it has to be delivered over RSS, because podcasts predate the use of RSS for podcasts—so it would preclude all sorts of podcasts that e.g. wrapped up before RSS for podcasts became common or that just never decided to go the RSS route for whatever reason. It can't mean the thing that dictionary writers say it means because they all insist it has to involve the Internet. Both the Internet and RSS are good ideas for a podcast, but they're not strictly required.) I'm not under any particular pressure to come up with an alternative. I can say, "it's not a podcast" the same as I can say, "it's not a goose". Call it a "streaming audio show" for all I care. NB: this comment was written before the edit about Wikipedia and dictionaries, which I don't care to address here, but it's a paradoxical argument and a less serious one.
- pcdoodle 3y ago
  I agree with you 100%. Podcast is an XML feed period.
  - cxr 3y ago
    You might think we agree, but we don't. See elsewhere. Neither "XML" (nor "RSS") belong in any definition of "podcast" (unless it's to say something like "[...] often delivered via RSS", but at that point you're not really talking about the defining characteristic of it if it's optional).

lebean 3y ago

This gave me nostalgia for 2004.