
I'm Against Podcasts - quickfox
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/are-podcasts-killing-music-or-just-wasting-our-time/2019/04/17/0aa08770-5acc-11e9-842d-7d3ed7eb3957_story.html
======
smacktoward
_> Podcasts are bad because podcasts sound bad — and podcasts sound bad
because podcasters aren’t thinking hard enough about what their talk sounds
like._

But this is exactly why we should cherish podcasts! They're one of the last
vestiges of the old, weird, free Internet that we have left.

Podcasts (mostly) sound bad because the people making them are (mostly)
amateurs, which means they don't know the ins and outs of audio recording.
They just hooked up a crappy USB mic to their laptop and started podcasting.
And once they did that, there was no central corporate gatekeeper who could
turn them off and tell them to come back when they knew what they were doing.

All of which, yes, results in a lot of crappy podcasts. But consider the
alternative. Do we really _want_ to see one more wide open indie publishing
channel turn into bland, pre-digested corporate mush? Is the problem with
podcasting that it's not enough like Facebook? Because that's the alternative:
one more medium where all the weirdness has been wrung out, except for those
random bits of weirdness that happen to tickle an algorithm that makes some
corporate overseer another nickel.

Maybe that is what you want, I dunno. If so, don't worry! Now that people with
money have taken notice of podcasts, there are plenty of would-be corporate
overseers lining up to give it to you as we speak.

~~~
freddie_mercury
I don't know why you're talking about "the ins and outs of audio recording".
The author makes clear that's not what he's talking about. In the very next
sentence after your quote he writes:

>Forget the lousy microphones and the dinky interstitial stock music — the
thing that derails most podcasts is the blab.

And later on he explains _again_.

>By “sound good,” I meant that I wanted podcasts to sound considered.

Anyway, I think this is just a matter of taste. I imagine the author also
hates talk radio/sports radio. You know those 2-hour shows about the
Philadelphia sports or whatever?

Much of podcasting is essentially the modern take on that. Of course, it isn't
"considered". Of course it has "blab". That's kind of the whole point -- it is
filling in a connection/emotional gap that people aren't getting in their day
to day lives.

~~~
bunderbunder
I, too, dislike the "eavesdropping on other people's tipsy pub conversation"
genre of podcasts. I generally don't love the professionalized "least common
denominator of an NPR listening audience's tastes, delivered in carefully
rehearsed NPR voice" podcasts, either.

My solution is to not bother with those podcasts. There are so many others
that I find to be more worthy of my time. Admittedly, it's probably a small
fraction of all podcasts, but it still amounts to more than I could possibly
find the time to listen to.

~~~
ianai
When do people take in their podcasts? I’m thinking it’s during he work
commute or at work?

~~~
michaelbuckbee
I did a bit of a study of this as I was involved with a podcasting related
startup at one point.

It's really varied:

\- Most podcast consumption is via smartphone

\- A big chunk of that is on iOS (because default Podcast app placement is
inconsistent across Android flavors)

\- Heaviest consumption during commutes

\- Significant consumption during the workday: white collar people listening
in the background - often from their desktop/web while or blue collar in place
of radio and music

\- You also have people doing things like playing video games and listening to
podcasts regularly.

~~~
ghaff
I guess I've never really understood the background sound thing. It's not like
I need silence; I have no trouble working in a coffeeshop for example. But I
mostly don't even turn on music as background much less something like a
podcast. And, when traveling with people, one thing that always drove me crazy
was the person whose initial reflex on walking into a room was to turn on the
TV as background.

~~~
dspillett
_> I guess I've never really understood the background sound thing._

I sometimes find complete or near complete silence off-puttingly artificial.
It puts me in mind of an exam room. Any sound that does happen (including my
typing) seems oddly exaggerated and therefore a little distracting.

If I'm properly concentrating I don't notice, so often I'll put on something
short for background noise as I start a period of trying to get something done
and don't replace it when it finishes as the need has passed.

------
nickelcitymario
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.

~~~
leftyted
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
> 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
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
> 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
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
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.

------
jetrink
I think this whole piece is a pretty bizarre exercise.

> I consider [podcasts] an enemy of music. [...] With all of the world’s
> unheard songs beckoning us with their endless mystery, why would anyone
> choose to waste their precious listening hours on a podcast?

This isn't just comparing apples and oranges, it's arguing that apples are the
enemy of oranges. "With so many delicious oranges uneaten, why should anyone
waste their time consuming a mealy, flavorless apple?" At least apples and
oranges are both types of fruit. I don't think there is anything to be learned
by debating the relative worth of two different types of media. He has his
reasons for disliking podcasts, but they sound very personal. If he is annoyed
by how podcast hosts talk, for example, that is simply how he experiences it.
Others will have a completely different perception.

~~~
Talanes
The commenters over there are falling into the same trap hard. So many
variations of "Why would I listen to this when I could just read the
information quicker?" Who are these people who cannot fathom that people may
want to listen to something mildly informative while they are otherwise unable
to focus on reading? Or just have an easier time absorbing information audibly
rather than visually? Or even that someone would listen to something because
hearing another human voice provides a value beyond pure information?

Really though, I just wonder how valuable these people think their time really
is? I assume their "I need to be absorbing optimal information at all times"
shtick is supposed to come across as smart, but it just comes across as a
little slow.

~~~
Tor3
It's not about valuable time, it's about the low bandwidth. That's why I also,
in general, don't watch Youtube videos that try to explain theoretical
concepts. It's like watching paint dry, when I could just read it in a small
fraction of the time if the material is available in written form. At least
Youtube videos are useful where the visual is important, e.g. repair
instructions. Podcasts don't even have that. The only time (in my particular
situation) where podcasts could be an alternative is when I'm driving my car,
but my commute is very short, so in practice there's never a time where I
would want to listen to a podcast. How each of us feel about bandwidth is, of
course, completely individual.

~~~
manigandham
You can speed up videos. 3x is easy and efficient.

~~~
Tor3
I forgot to add that in addition to the bandwidth issue, it's also about the
sequential nature of podcasts and videos. I like to move back and forth when
I'm learning something. E.g. an explanation that I want to re-read after
reading something more, for a better understanding. So for me it's the slow
input _and_ the sequential nature of audio and video that I don't like, for
the most part. With some execptions, of course.

------
alimhaq
It's pretty clear what's happening here: the author prefers music to podcasts,
and then tries his best to make some sort of argument to justify this. His
arguments are at best nonsensical and at worst completely contradictory.

I was considering writing out a response to each of his points but it's
honestly not worth my time. A lot of what the author says is a blatant slap in
the face to podcasters that spend so many hours tinkering with their work.
Quotes like "By sound good, I meant that I wanted podcasts to sound
considered." and "...podcasters aren’t thinking hard enough about what their
talk sounds like" are ridiculous if you know any serious or notable podcaster
in person.

One reason why this might be happening [to the author] is because the author
wants podcasts to be more like music, but the reality is that even though
music and podcasts are competing for the same resource (ears) their goals are
mostly different. The primary differentiating factor is that podcasts almost
always aim to convey some concrete information to the listener, and this
constraint will always limit the ways the information can be transmitted to
the listener (as opposed to music, which is more free-form in nature and isn't
necessarily subjected to any restrictions).

~~~
dmix
His half explained defence of music being less listened to was pretty strange.

Who cares if people listen to less music? Most people were listening to
recycled top 40 trash on radio before podcasts became accessible in cars and
on smartphones. I’d personally rather people learn stuff or hear about
interesting topics while they drive than hear the same song for the 30th time.

A lot of crap passes for podcasts but so does modern journalism where the
click baity headlines are the only interesting part of the story.

~~~
daveFNbuck
> Who cares if people listen to less music?

The writer here is a pop music critic, so his paycheck comes from people
listening to and being interested in music.

------
jordanpg
What an edgy, contrarian critique.

Watch as the author translates his criticisms of some podcasts that he doesn't
like into a global criticism of all podcasts.

I wonder if this guy still insists on listening _exclusively_ to LPs and
lossless audio formats.

Here are some things about podcasts that I love:

* some podcasts are true gems -- extremely high quality content

* free

* no ads or ads are trivial to avoid

* blather that I (and apparently the author) don't like can be trivially skipped

* rule 34 for podcasts: someone is making podcasts about everything

Did I mention occasionally extremely high quality, free, and no ads?

~~~
inapis
Can you point me to some high quality podcasts? Most I have listened to have
so much fluff and unnecessary banter that I subconsciously tune out.

I have been trying to get on the podcast bandwagon but having a hard time
finding something to like.

~~~
chaoticmass
noagendashow.com

~~~
black6
And congressionaldish.com

------
prions
This was the best quote of the article for me:

 _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 ubiquitous NPR Voice/Sound is really what turns me off from
podcasts/audiobooks/etc. While I love NPR, their sound is absolutely grating
to listen to. Too HD, rife with extremely loud and detailed plosives and
sibilants. I don't want to listen to the speaker suck the spit back down their
throats in excruciating detail after every sentence.

NPR's sound quality is _too detailed_. It's like if you watched a video of
someone talking and could see the aftermath of a popped zit smack in the
middle of your screen.

~~~
SyneRyder
That's fascinating, because the NPR sound is just a close-mic'd Neumann U87
microphone with the bass roll-off engaged:

[https://current.org/2015/06/a-top-audio-engineer-explains-
np...](https://current.org/2015/06/a-top-audio-engineer-explains-nprs-
signature-sound/)

The U87 is a classic mic first made in 1967 and used on everything. Lots of
famous pop song vocals are still recorded with a U87 to this day. And they're
expensive, they cost $3200 new at Sweetwater.

The U87 is a Condenser microphone, while the RE20 mentioned in the article is
a Dynamic - I wonder if maybe you don't like the sound of condensers mics in
general. They typically have a crisper high-end that catch a lot of detail.

~~~
midgetjones
I imagine if you listened to the vocal stem it would sound as extreme. It's
just masked by other noise or gated/sliced out most of the time. Some people
make a feature of those noises; Muse is an obvious example and they certainly
divide people.

------
Canadauni
I was never really into podcasts until I started my current job and commuting
regularly. After a while I noticed that listening to music was beginning to
fuel my frustration with other drivers and I'd get to work already stressed
out. I started listening to talk radio and podcasts and that has really
improved my feelings on the road and my state of mind walking into the office.

I honestly don't think it has really impacted my music listening either. I'll
toss something on at work and listen while I work through a problem or while
reading. The type of music I listen has shifted to fit my purposes but it is
still there and I don't see it going away either.

~~~
kuzimoto
I too have a commute, and find podcasts a nice way to stay current with news,
learn something new, or hear about new stuff in areas that are interesting to
you.

I can't really listen to podcasts while working since I can't really focus on
the the talking while thinking about what I'm doing, so music is perfect. It
can help keep me focused and gives me plenty of time for exploring new music.

The author's stance on Podcasts is just so odd. That you somehow can't enjoy
both? Seems like he has an axe to grind or something.

------
mikece
The single word that comes to mind when reading this: "Waaaaaaah!!!"

I listen to podcasts because I learn from them or am entertained by specific
people with insights and expertise I appreciate. The whole bit about
eavesdropping on a conversation is the essence of what makes a good podcast:
it's a conversation that if you caught a part of it in real life you would
stop and stand at the edge to listen and learn more. And the __best __podcasts
involve listener feedback, sometimes in real-time.

Perhaps the ultimate irony of the assertion that podcasting is killing music
is that podcasting was INVENTED by an MTV VJ and former disk jockey, Adam
Curry, and that the ORIGINAL podcast -- The Daily Source Code -- was heavily
focused on music and ultimately shut down because RIAA lawyers leveled a
massive legal threat at Adam even after he had purchased online music
licensing to cover his podcast.

What podcasting does is decentralize the exchange of information: it destroys
the ability of a powerful few to be the gatekeepers of information or "pick
the hits." That's why "they" hate it and why it will only increase as a medium
over time.

~~~
mprev
Adam Curry came up with the name but people were embedding media in RSS feeds
before that.

~~~
ghaff
Actually, Ben Hammersley seems to have come up with the name. Adam Curry and
Dave Winer are usually credited with the concept but it certainly wouldn't
surprise me if you had embedded media in RSS earlier.

------
DoubleGlazing
Wow, talk about gatekeeping.

I think podcasts are wonderful, a form of media that has very low barriers to
entry and where the smaller players can compete with the big boys on a
relatively level playing field.

So what if a lot of podcasts are crap? If the podcaster enjoys it and someone
listens then good for them.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that.

~~~
iuguy
Literal gatekeeping - I just get a paywall when I click on the link.

Aaand nothing of value was lost.

~~~
52-6F-62
I'm sure even podcasters like to be paid for their work—whether you agree with
what they're saying or not.

I hear a large number of podcasters slide their commercials and sponsors in as
if they're not being sponsored at all—and there are no communications
regulations focusing on subversive use of advertisements in those contexts.

There is space for the good in the podcast world, but I wouldn't assume it's
superior be default. Fool's errand, IMO.

~~~
iuguy
I'm referring solely to the link to the Washington Post article. No article
comes up, just a paywall.

------
asaph
Podcasts are talk radio on demand. If you're against podcasts, you're against
talk radio. Or at the very least, you're against making talk radio more
convenient and accessible.

~~~
smacktoward
I feel like podcasts are similar to, but not exactly the same as, talk radio.
Most talk radio formats are built around listeners calling in, for instance,
which can provide a degree of spontaneity that isn't possible in a prerecorded
format like a podcast.

(Which gives me an excuse to link to the classic _Mr. Show_ sketch, "Pre-Taped
Call-In Show":
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhVbLJvYP8s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhVbLJvYP8s))

That being said, I do think the appeal of podcasts is pretty close to what
people find appealing about talk radio: people like to hear other people talk.

~~~
learc83
I always hated it when listeners called in on talk radio. They very rarely had
anything insightful to day, and even if they did, they general weren't able to
convey it clearly.

~~~
frosted-flakes
I always inwardly cringe when they start going off topic and the host keeps
trying to rein them in. But when it's someone who knows how to present
themselves on radio, it's good.

There's this one show on CBC where listeners call in to a plant expert about
their gardening problems, and he identifies them and suggests solutions on the
spot. You get a wide variety of people who call in, but since the roles are
reversed—callers are asking questions, not answering them—they tend to be much
more to the point and willing to give up the floor. Despite not caring one
whit about plants and gardening, I really enjoy this show.

If the expert doesn't know the answer, sometimes another listener will call in
to save the day. One of my favourite ones is when a lady's tree saplings were
starting to die after they got a new well drilled, and after a bunch of
questions the plant expert was stumped. Well, a well driller called in a few
minutes later and said it was almost certainly the oil coating used on the
pipes to prevent rust during storage (totally safe for consumption, but
apparently harmful to trees), and the solution was to wait until the oil wore
off after a few months.

It sounds boring, but the plant expert is one of those old men who just have a
way with words, and the CBC host is really good with prompting both the expert
and caller with more questions or anecdotes.

~~~
zimpenfish
"Gardener's Question Time" on the BBC is the same kind of soothing listening

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gardeners%27_Question_Time](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gardeners%27_Question_Time)

------
thebigspacefuck
>With all of the world’s unheard songs beckoning us with their endless
mystery, why would anyone choose to waste their precious listening hours on a
podcast?

Yoy could replace podcast with pretty much anything. I don't like listening to
music all of the time or doing any one thing all of the time for that matter.
I get bored and I just don't enjoy it as much anymore. And really, I love
music. I used to want a job like Radio DJ where I could listen to music all
day and I love coding because I mostly get to do that. But, I don't want to
listen to all the music ever created because a lot of it just isn't for me and
the mystery stops feeling endless after a while. My listening hours aren't
precious to me if I listen on the commute, 8+ hours at work, and at home when
I'm doing chores. Every single day. I wish those hours were more precious
sometimes. I'd love for music to feel as meaningful to me as it did when I was
a teenager when I only had a few CDs and new music was a big purchase or
something given to me by a friend. But now it's like I'm drowning in too many
options and I'm just shuffling through different playlists trying to find
something that sounds interesting. So I listen to Audiobooks or Podcasts or
just my own head radio if I can. It's not wasted time at all because it helps
me enjoy music more in the long run.

This really is a terrible article and it seems like an immature opinion to
have. I'm surprised to see it in the Washington Post.

~~~
c0vfefe
I would think a way to recapture the meaning and mystique of music listening
is not necessarily to throttle your listening time, but rather to more
intentionally explore different genres & curate your own taste. The kind of
aimless browsing you describe can happen at any duration of listening per
week, if we allow it.

------
duxup
This article reads like a wordy extension of the author's "Twitter fit". I
feel like I read a lot of "I tweeted something" articles these days.

Ironic that the one tidbit about how it "sounds" (but not actually talking
about sounds) is about people wanting to be heard, and the foundation of this
is "I tweeted something one day".

~~~
erikig
I don't mind the tweet follow-up articles at all - in fact I'd hope that
writers with a platform would use said platform to expound on their twitter
musings more often. Twitter is perfect for taking the temperature on an issue.

That said - I felt that this article was a bit of a waste of the initial
interest the tweet garnered.

~~~
duxup
I feel like Twitter is a terrible medium to take temperature of anything.

The medium is the message and Twitter only serves to push a very inane sort of
message / response.

------
vlunkr
It’s weird that this article is upvoted but every commenter agrees that it’s
worthless. Every point he makes falls flat, and it feels like pointless
contrarianism. It’s fine if you don’t like podcasts, guy.

------
Causality1
>Why does an experience so inherently intimate feel so alienating to me?

Because you're an obsessive extravert who's unable to enjoy a conversation
you're not part of.

>so instead of treating podcasts as a convenient way to feel smarter

Author says that and then proceeds to do that the whole article. Every single
podcast he tried was some hoity-toity artsy interview cast. I listen to
podcasts to be entertained. I listen to people play Dungeons and Dragons, or
narrate short stories, or improv comedy, or publish their own audio book.

>I’m anxious about music ceding all of that time and turf to the rise of “big
podcast,

Good god, what a fucking douchecanoe this guy is.

~~~
pensatoio
Douchecanoe. You nailed it. Nothing like a pointless rant that tries to pin
your extremely personal experience on the masses. Thanks WP.

------
PorterDuff
I like the idea of podcasts because of the amateur angle, not so much since
it's basically just another version of talk radio. I don't doubt there is some
loss in social contact if you use a recording to fill-in for conversation, but
there's something a little off-putting about music too.

It worries me sometimes that (given my age) 'More Than a Feeling' or 'Hold On
Loosely' are so etched into my brain...and I'm a jazz listener/musician. Why
is that? They live next to old commercial jingles and show the amount of
programming that can go on in the 'independent' mind.

To finish up my old man rant, it's funny how modern people need constant noise
and a steady supply of sweet beverages to avoid unease. Maybe there's a book
here on the curative value of quiet walks and drinking plain water, it
wouldn't be very long though.

~~~
52-6F-62
> _Maybe there 's a book here on the curative value of quiet walks and
> drinking plain water, it wouldn't be very long though._

I like the sound of that one. You should put it together.

Leave some blank pages for breathing room. Some nice binding, fine paper
selection, and care in type choices.

Are we collaborating now?

~~~
PorterDuff
Only the finest handmade paper will be used.

~~~
PorterDuff
But first, a smartphone app to manage the water consumption and walking times.

------
theshadowknows
This is just an ad for a book. He wraps it inside an inflammatory opinion
piece. But it’s really just an ad. Why isn’t that obvious to people?

~~~
basetop
Thank you. I wish newspapers would stop this deceptive practice or openly mark
the "article" as an ad. It's far worse than clickbait titles to me since I can
immediately spot the clickbait, but you won't realize the article is an ad
until you've read the damn thing.

~~~
gourou
> “Ways of Hearing.” It’s a podcast — recently transposed into a book

> I’ve been pushing “Ways of Hearing” on my loved ones

All podcasts are bad, but a book about a podcast is okay because I can sell
it.

------
teilo
Summary: Bad boring and podcasts with low production value are bad and boring
and have low production value.

------
mikeash
Podcasts are radio on demand. They offer all the variety that radio does, or
did, and more. They can offer the quality of a good commercial radio show, or
the quality of a rotting potato, or anything in between. It’s up to you to
find something you like. There’s so much out there that there is probably
something you’ll like.

So many of these comments talk as though “podcast” implies news or commentary
and that’s it. Did I stumble into an alternate universe? I know those exist
(news and commentary podcasts exist, that is), but there’s so much more. The
closest I get are news-related comedy shows like Wait Wait or the BBC’s Now
Show. I’m always on the lookout for the next episode of Welcome to Night Vale,
and on the rare occasions that there’s a new Hardcore History, it’s a real
treat. If I run out of something new, I love to listen to an episode or two of
the old Dragnet radio series and get immersed in 1950’s Los Angeles.

Podcasts are inferior to text or video? That’s like saying that cheese is
inferior to the Central Limit Theorem. The comparison doesn’t even make sense.

I basically can’t listen to podcasts without something physical to do. If I’m
idle and trying to listen, I’ll start reading something at the same time and
miss half the show. But while I’m out for a walk or doing yard work or cooking
or on a long drive? They’re the best! Text or video aren’t sensible there. The
only competition would be radio (or, ugh, my own thoughts), where the
comparison is just like the comparison between live TV and video on demand.

------
ryguytilidie
Huh, its funny because I always thought I hated podcasts because of the
typical NPR sound. I love a ton of low budget podcasts now and feel like its a
lot more normal/organic to listen to people on lower budget mics than the NPR
style mic/sound production.

------
iambateman
It seems the author doesn't like bad podcasts.

If you came to the comments to see if there was anything of substance about
the article, don't worry, you're free to move on. ;)

------
doe88
Listening a big chunk of my free time to various podcasts, I reluctantly come
to the conclusion that the biggest enemy of podcasts is _thinking_ and
_introspection_. Where before I had moments in my day where I let my mind
freely wander and think to the issues I'm currently working on or others, now
I rarely have these moments anymore as I listen to podcasts more. I wish I
reverted a bit, but it's difficult, listening podcasts has become a kind of
addiction I guess.

~~~
floren
I've commented about it before--I was listening to podcasts way too much and
it destroyed my creativity. I've cut down to 3 shows, which comes out to about
3-4 hours of content a week, and I try to save it for washing dishes, cooking
dinner, or driving. My suggestion: trim the fat, pick a couple podcasts you
really enjoy and unsubscribe from the rest, then resist the urge to hit 'play'
as you're getting dressed in the morning.

------
jccalhoun
I wonder how he feels about NPR or BBC? I listen to a lot of podcasts but they
are almost all round-table style shows. I very occasionally catch This
American Life on NPR but I have very little interest in listening to all the
scripted shows that seem to be imitating it and I have zero interest in true
crime.

------
laurieg
The difference between an edited and an un-edited conversation is night and
day. Editing takes out all the stumbles, half-sentences, unfinished ideas etc.

The reason it's not more common? Recording a 2 hour podcast takes 2 hours.
Recording and editing a 2 hour podcast takes closer to 10.

------
jonnycomputer
Why is this taking up space on the Washington Post? Doesn't this belong on a
personal blog or on twitter? Or better yet in private diary? My response is as
follows: I'm against self-indulgent, curmudgeonly writing like this intended
for public consumption being given the patina of approval by respectable
publications like the Washington Post.

------
bovermyer
I don't like podcasts. The reason I don't like podcasts, though, is the same
reason I don't like talk radio or television. If I want to listen to people, I
will talk to people myself.

This is not an indictment of podcasts. Rather, it is a personal opinion. And I
think the author of this article is confusing his opinion for a general truth.

~~~
smt88
I agree about unedited podcasts where people just talk to each other, but
there are excellent podcasts that are closer to documentaries or audio books
(Hardcore History, for example). They're pre-written, heavily edited, and
performed well.

~~~
bovermyer
And that's just fine, except I don't have any interest in sitting and
listening to such things. Other people are totally welcome to enjoy them; I
just spend my free time on other things.

~~~
grotsnot
Generally, you don't just sit and listen. You do it while doing something else
that is non-audio, like commuting or exercising or cleaning or cooking or...

~~~
bovermyer
I don't multitask. I follow the philosophy of committing the entirety of my
attention to one task at a time.

------
jcims
Since we’re on the topic of podcasts and the article at hand has been
pilloried to my satisfaction, I have an unrelated question for other podcast
listeners.

Have you ever listened to the same podcast twice and experienced strong, even
intrusive visual recollections of what you were doing the first time you
listened to it? I find it particularly true from when I’m walking or driving
while listening, but my memory is usually terrible and to have these
photographic experiences is alien and awesome at the same time.

~~~
Starwatcher2001
Yes, especially when driving. Sometimes it feels like I should be reaching for
gear stick at the same time as I previously did. It does feel bizarre.

------
LargeWu
Counterpoint: Podcasts can have an immediacy about them that the written word
can't compete with.

I'm not talking about the long-form "Serial"-type or magazine "This American
Life" style podcasts. Those are very scripted and rehearsed. Rather, I'm
talking about a lot of the topical shows I listen to.

Having a few people with chemistry discussing their topic, where they can riff
and improvise and be themselves, can be incredibly interesting in the way the
written word can't.

------
akulbe
> Podcasts are bad because podcasts sound bad — and podcasts sound bad because
> podcasters aren’t thinking hard enough about what their talk sounds like.

Isn't this how _most_ people get good at things... by doing them badly a bunch
of times, and gradually improving?

------
ben7799
Such a weird article, more of a waste of words than any podcast I've listened
to in a long time.

The mainstream journalists/media have raced to the bottom in a clickbait orgy.
Podcasts are one of the only areas where you still have deep in depth coverage
of areas the mainstream has too short of an attention for.

Also funny he thinks it's bad for music. I listen to a lot of music podcasts.
Mainstream/Pop music is in a horrible place, a lot of these podcasts help keep
real musicianship alive. Lots and lots of knowledge transfer.

I play guitar, to use the guitar example if a famous guitarist goes on a
podcast you're going to hear a very very different level of content compared
to if the Washington Post interviews the guitarist. The podcast guy probably
plays guitar and the audience is guitarists so the interviewer can ask
intelligent questions and the musician doesn't have to dumb down everything
they say to the point it all comes off as magic.

This article is the same kind of thing as someone lamenting we should go back
to a 1950s music system where there are a few big companies that are able to
play gatekeeper on everything.. so we end up with everyone stuck listening to
the same stuff.

------
jpm_sd
I love listening to goofy podcasts that are just a few friends shooting the
shit. Middling-to-low production value is part of the charm. One of my recent
favorites is The Greatest Generation [0], which is about Star Trek, mostly.

[https://art19.com/shows/the-greatest-generation](https://art19.com/shows/the-
greatest-generation)

~~~
bluedino
It's not technically a podcast, but I enjoy listening to James Rolfe and
friends (The Angry video Game Nerd) discuss old movies on his youtube channel
(cinemassacre)

------
macawfish
After skimming through the comments, I refuse to click this link as a matter
of principle.

~~~
erikig
As soon as I noticed that this particular post had more comments than upvotes
I couldn't wait to jump in and read both the article and the comments.

------
neonate
[https://outline.com/KjkgBC](https://outline.com/KjkgBC)

------
pard68
With so many wonderful, unread books beckoning, why waste your time reading
rags from WP, NYT, etc.?

------
mark_l_watson
Strange article, at least for me. A little of what the author says resonates
with me but most is a hard ‘no’.

Killing music? Well maybe some people listen to too much music. The author
likes highly polished written material (so do I; I have written several books
and I am a voracious reader - I am just finishing the very good 66 hour audio
book Jerusalem) but there is also a nice human connection hearing someone’s
voice and spontaneous interactive dialog.

I listen to the podcast Exponential View (and sometime the MIT AGI class
interviews by Lex Firdman) while I am at the gym. I am not a huge fan of going
to the gym but keeping up with new tech and the social changes caused by tech
while I work out makes the experience better.

------
Kye
The author needs to find better podcasts. He acknowledges this, but still
remains dismissive of podcasts. The Knowledge Project and Exponent replaced
every self-help babbler and tech blogger for me. My Brother, My Brother and Me
and The Dollop are better entertainment than most of the best TV shows and
movies.

It's interesting that this is the opposite of one of the more convincing
podcast takes I've seen. I forget who it was, but they argued that podcasts
and video were a return to the visual and verbal storytelling and information
sharing that pervaded before the relatively limited--in some ways--written
word took over. That might have been an Exponent episode...

~~~
DamnInteresting
Just a heads up that The Dollop unapologetically built their huge, lucrative
following via naked plagiarism.

I have my own history podcast (with a much smaller audience than The Dollop),
and a few years back I discovered that they were re-reading lengthy segments
of my original podcast scripts word-for-word on their podcast without
permission or attribution. When I called them out they claimed this is "Fair
Use", and that non-fiction cannot be copyrighted. It really knocked the wind
out of my sails, and it bothers me to this day, so I can't see them
recommended like this without adding this important asterisk.

My open letter to them from 2015, with audio evidence:
[https://www.damninteresting.com/a-special-note-to-the-
writer...](https://www.damninteresting.com/a-special-note-to-the-writers-at-
the-dollop/)

Sorry for the bummer. MBMBaM is great though.

~~~
Kye
It looks like their defense is that they make it clear they're reading what
someone else wrote and making jokes. That _wasn 't_ clear, but I do understand
where they're coming from. I listen for the jokes, not the history. They
should be more upfront about their sources.

It's similar to MBMBaM reading Yahoo Answers questions word for word while
being silly about it. Except they _do_ make the source clear. I do agree with
them that it fits under fair use since it usually protects parody and
commentary. They list all their sources now, so it's moot.

I was much more moved by hearing that Lore basically reads off wikis. They
don't add anything. That's why I switched to Myths and Legends.

~~~
DamnInteresting
Well, if they had been reading one single article they found online, and just
reading it aloud and making jokes about it, I might accept (though still be
annoyed by) the "oops we forgot to attribute" defense. But if you look at what
The Dollop _actually_ did, they took 5-6 paragraphs from one article, 7-8
paragraphs from another article, a few solitary paragraphs from others, and
just glued it all together and never said a word about where the text came
from. Cribbing segments from various places like that, and "forgetting" to
attribute, that is classic, flagrant plagiarism.

Like you say, MBMBaM credits their source. They're also using 1-2 sentences
from a public forum, not a dozen paragraphs from a competing podcast.

~~~
Kye
I don't now what The Dollop was like four years ago when this happened. What I
do know is they list all their sources now, and I can't find any issue with
the ratio of quoted material to original.

You obviously put a lot of work into your project. It's not to my taste, but
there's a place for a plain telling of history. It's unfortunate The Dollop's
early missteps still affect you all these years later. I know what it's like
to get hung up on something for long enough that everyone else thinks you
should have moved on.

------
astura
Someone call the wambulance.

The entertainment police are out in full swing telling people they are being
entertained "wrong."

Look, I really don't care for listening to music, it's just not entertaining
to me. I can't explain the reasons why, just not my thing, music just doesn't
tickle my fancy so I never listen to it. I also really don't care for live
theater or art museums. However, I don't go writing wordy and overwrought op-
eds or blog posts saying how I'm 'against' those things, because I different
people understand people enjoy different things than me.

I read the first several paragraphs and skimmed the rest because its truly
insufferable.

------
village-idiot
.... so don’t listen to them? I don’t understand why someone’s personal media
preferences require an editorial.

I’m pretty meh on TV, but you don’t see me writing a few hundred words on it
because I understand that nobody gives a shit about my media preferences.

~~~
dls2016
Of course a jean-wearing, podcast-listening, village-idiot wouldn't understand
the Washington Post's high-brow takes.

[http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2009/04...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2009/04/15/AR2009041502861.html)

~~~
49531
This is such a wonderful piece. Thank you for sharing.

~~~
dls2016
The best part is that 1/3 of it is simply quotes from a WSJ piece published a
few weeks prior.

------
Reedx
You can learn a lot from podcasts and they have the power to turn a commute
into productive time.

An odd thing to be against (although indeed, it's hard to listen to ones with
poor audio quality).

Maybe the author just needs to discover some like Hardcore History...

------
MisterBastahrd
This is a pop music critic, of all things. The quality of pop music from a
culture and complexity standpoint has fallen through the floorboards like a
chunk of radioactive debris and is digging to depths unknown.

People are listening to podcasts because they want to be entertained and
informed. You aren't gonna get that by listening to the mumble rapper from
Degrassi High. If pop music suffers from podcasts, then maybe podcasts aren't
the problem... and if the best you can do is complain about the timbre in
someone's voice or the quality of the studio, then you've lost the argument.

------
humbleMouse
This may be the dumbest thing to ever make it to the front page. What a
pointless thing to complain about. Podcasts are not for everyone, but to be
"against" them is so dumb I dont even know where to start.

------
pmontra
Podcasts vs music seems a matter of personal preferences.

I skimmed through this post in a few minutes. It would have been a much longer
time if it were a podcast. I don't have that much time to invest on a single
subject so I'm not into podcasts. I rarely watch technical videos for the same
reason. I definitely prefer text: same content at my own pace.

However I don't commute anymore. When I did I listened to news and random
music if driving or I read a book if I was on a subway train (much better than
driving.) I could have listened to podcasts or audio books back then.

------
Wissmania
old man yells at cloud

~~~
m463
wait until he comes across an "i hate podcasts" podcast and then he'll be
hooked.

------
hartator
> With all of the world’s unheard songs beckoning us with their endless
> mystery, why would anyone choose to waste their precious listening hours on
> a podcast?

Maybe some people don’t like music as much.

------
randycupertino
I'm always surprised at the popularity of podcasts vs audiobooks. Seems
podcasts have made the jump to "gen pop" but audiobooks, despite the
increasing popularity of audible, still tend to be niche.

I'm biased because I'm an audiobook hound, but I'd take an audiobook over a
podcast any day. Far superior production quality, better content, a beginning,
middle and an end, professional narrators, researched analysis and not just
random people spouting off opinions.

~~~
MisterBastahrd
It's easier to write a story than it is to write a book. But most topics
aren't book worthy, so stories it is.

------
sbuttgereit
Pop music critic comes out against podcasts, in part because they aren't well
produced.

Yet, what's really killing pop music, at least in part, is that so much of it,
to my ears, is now an exercise in production techniques than it is about the
music being produced. Ultimately, that "sounding right" is also simply an
extension of fashion statement. True, that fashion in pop music has been more
important than the actual music for a long time, but over the decades the
music part of this has been diminishing in importance.

And frankly, it's pretty boring stuff out there these days mostly because of
that emphasis on production values over the content. Everything is so
homogeneous; yeah, old guy talking here, but I'm not exactly locked into a
generation or genre in what I do choose to listen to, either...

I'm not a big podcast fan, either, though there are a couple I listen to if I
have drive time. Still, much of that world, and some YouTube efforts, just
seem so much more genuine to me.

Anyway, I think a pop music critic should likely be thinking about what's
wrong with pop music that makes podcasts appealing by comparison rather than
having sour grapes about a format that clearly is comparatively more
desirable, regardless of what faults it may or may not have.

------
DiseasedBadger
He missed a trick to christen "Big Pod". Most music is garbage anyways.

More importantly, pods are not about "sound". They're about "social".

Podcasts are rent-a-friends.

------
Darkstryder
I hate podcasts too. Or to put it more lightly, at the very least they are
completely alien to me.

In my opinion the elephant in the room when talking about informational
podcasts or video is... text.

As a medium, text is just _so much more efficient_ (at least for me) that I
can't begin to imagine why one would want to listen to a piece of content
instead of reading it. I scan-read 20 articles faster than I could hear (or
watch) a single one of them if they were presented in audio or video. And
doing so I still have my ears available (for coworkers at work, for example).

Video can be interesting in a few specific cases : music production is a hobby
of mine, and video can be interesting (but not always) as you can
simultaneously watch somebody doing something while hearing how it affects the
sound.

But most podcasts (and youtube videos) do not exploit the unique properties of
audio or video enough to justify the tremendous requirements they ask on my
attention span.

In my opinion audio and video emphasize entertainment over information, but
most of them are not that entertaining (compared to an actual entertainment
media), and not that much informational (compared to a text article).

I think newspapers made a tremendous mistake with the pivot to video and the
pivot to podcasts. Vive le texte !

~~~
wlesieutre
Can you read 20 articles while driving a car or walking to the store or
cleaning your house? I find they're a great way to double-up with activities
where I'd otherwise be bored out of my mind, and I can take the opportunity to
learn about something, or at the very least not be bored.

TV might be more entertaining, but I've never heard anyone argue "Why would
you sit down and watch the new Game of Thrones episode, you should listen to a
podcast instead!" Being an audio-only medium makes them a lot more amenable to
consuming while you do something else. They're only competing with music and
audiobooks in that respect.

It's not like I get home from work and think "You know what I want to do this
evening? Sit in a chair and listen to podcasts for an hour."

~~~
Darkstryder
I do these kind of activities, but mostly divided in 5 to 15mn chunks.
(Notably, my commute to work is a mere 10mn walk and I have a toddler child at
home requiring frequent attention)

I would have trouble dividing a 40mn podcast into five listens divided over 3
days.

For those kind of double-up, I find listening music vastly more enjoyable, but
that's just my opinion. Lately I actually prefer not doubling-up and just
listen to the silence and letting my mind wander. It feels good too !

~~~
wlesieutre
There's short form podcasts that work in 10-20 minute segments too, _The
Memory Palace_ is one that I'm subscribed to.

But I totally agree it's nice to not multitask and just let your mind wander
sometimes.

------
DamnInteresting
I used to be quite fond of many podcasts, but my love has been recently
waning, mostly owing to two obnoxious trends: 1) Re-runs, which make no sense
in the podcast realm; and 2) podcasts airing episodes from other shows on the
same podcast network. Both practices are increasingly common, and they rapidly
fill my feed with content I don't care to listen to. It's hard to housekeep
since I mostly listen while driving.

~~~
ghaff
>podcasts airing episodes from other shows on the same podcast network

I get your point but it's also allowed me to discover podcasts I probably
wouldn't have otherwise learned about. And my general experience is that, if
the cross-post is on a favorite podcast, it's probably worth at least a trial
run.

I mostly pre-curate a playlist before getting in the car. There are very few
podcasts where I listen to all or even most episodes. I do wish there was a
better voice interface of some sort so that I could better interact while
driving.

~~~
DamnInteresting
Yeah, I understand their intention, but personally I am seldom intrigued by
the alternate offering. Consequently, to my ears, each such crossover becomes
a very long advertisement, and these crossovers have been popping up a lot as
podcast networks continue to grow. If the preview were in the form of a short
excerpt, enough to give me a sense of the other show's vibe, I would call that
a livable compromise, but I can't abide having entire episodes foisted on me.

But maybe I am an outlier, and if so, I will just be unhappy about it all by
myself.

~~~
ghaff
Fair enough. It's certainly more about mutual back scratching than it is
audience service.

I'm probably less affected because I pretty much choose individual episodes to
watch anyway rather than just listen to everything on a given podcast. I don't
commute so I don't spend a huge amount of time in my car and therefore don't
listen to a huge number of podcasts overall. (I rarely listen at home.)

------
soneca
I just read someone saying that he _doesn 't like_ podcasts but using the word
_" against"_ to shock friends and attract clicks.

------
doctorRetro
Abbreviated: "I hate this medium because of my strawman reasons."

------
p0nce
I know a few podcasters and one thing they seem not well prepared for is the
extreme difficulty of voice recording and processing. In particular sibilance
control and dynamics are just really difficult. Having a good vocal sound
takes a lot of experience. I can't really blame them, as quality of content is
probably most important.

------
pnathan
TFA arguments seem ... ill informed. "Not a replacement for music?" Uh, ok.
Entertainment is more important than information? sure bro....

I don't care for podcasts either.

(1) Most are too infomation-lite and too long. I can read far far far faster
than someone can speak.

(2) Most adopt sort of a morning-show breezy chat back and forth, which drags
the information content down.

I listen to one-two podcasts regularly, depending on mood. One is a 10-12
minute religious homily by a scholar; the other is a hour-long run by a
criminal justice lawyer commenting on legal issues regarding the police and
society. Both are information sources I can't get elsewhere easily.

I think of podcasts as talk radio.

FWIW, historically there were radio dramas - works of fiction created for
radio. I am sure there are similar podcasts which are tons of fun for people.

------
KillSwitch195
This is by far the most immature accusation of all accusations i have heard
from people on podcasts. He lost me when he said "Most podcasts are
conversations for people to eavesdrop on — recorded talk that precludes real-
life talk about real life with zombie talk about podcasts". This is like
saying "Chemistry is just mixing chemicals on conical flasks and lighting up
bunsen burners". This is oversimplyfying the existence of podcasts. What about
social media ? Does it not preclude from real life connectivity. What about
videos ? does it not preclude from real life experience ? What about any form
of art ? Does it not preclude us from observing the art of nature. You can
basically say this argument to anything. Its an empty argument.

------
gridlockd
This guy seems to have one of these "bullshit jobs" that David Graeber wrote
about.

------
joe5150
I don't understand the headline. the word "or" implies the object of podcasts
is to kill music? I don't think those are the only options.

I listen to two or three podcasts on a regular basis that admittedly don't
have top-notch production values, but also don't have "dinky interstitial
stock music" or whatever vague "tone" this guy is admonishing. if he's only
listening to badly-produced podcasts that use gimmicks that annoy him, that's
basically a personal problem in my opinion. he should try listening to
something that isn't just trying to sound like the radio.

------
inflatableDodo
>I consider them an enemy of music

Presumably something like 'Lost in The Stacks'
[http://lostinthestacks.libsyn.com/](http://lostinthestacks.libsyn.com/) with
it's amazingly revolutionary mix of, get this, some talking and then some
music, would blow his tiny little mind. Current episode, 'As Your Attorney I
Advise You Again to Drive at Top Speed' \-
[http://traffic.libsyn.com/lostinthestacks/LITS_Episode_420.m...](http://traffic.libsyn.com/lostinthestacks/LITS_Episode_420.mp3)

------
supremerumham
The writer is against podcasts, I wonder why...

------
crazygringo
Weird article.

I personally can't listen to podcasts for another reason though: I find them
so frustratingly slow. E.g. when I read the New Yorker, I can read 5x faster,
and more importantly skip over sections I'm less interested in. (So even
listening at 2x speed still doesn't fix it, and you just can't "scan" a
podcast the way your eyes can scan a page.)

When I listen to a podcast, I feel so _stuck_ at the pace of the spoken word.

A big part of it is also probably that I commute by subway so it's easy to
read... maybe if I commuted by car I'd appreciate that a slow podcast is
better than nothing at all.

~~~
PascLeRasc
Do you have this problem with speaking to people in real life too? Podcasts
aren't meant to be an information dump, it's about the interactions between
the hosts.

~~~
crazygringo
Huh. I mean, all the podcasts my friends recommend me always seem to be
information-dump type ones, whether on politics or design or whatever. Kind of
like audio New Yorker articles or mini-documentaries. I listed to the first
few hours of Serial and it sure felt like a documentary to me too -- I didn't
notice any interaction between the hosts. So I'd just prefer to read.

But to answer your question, no. But maybe that's the difference -- I'd rather
"interact" with my friends directly where it's a 2-way street, that just
listen to hosts interact with each other. But I guess if I were feeling
lonely/bored that could make a lot more sense to put on a podcast, if I
couldn't put on a TV show (e.g. because driving)...

------
8bithero
I'm really confused by the author's arguments

> With all of the world’s unheard songs beckoning us with their endless
> mystery, why would anyone choose to waste their precious listening hours on
> a podcast?

Why is he trying to compare music to podcasts? Because they're auditory? By
that same token, it could be argued why anyone would choose to waste their
precious listening hours on music with all of the world's unheard audio books
beckoning us with their endless mystery and wells of knowledge and
information.

------
overthemoon
I'm not so knee-jerk negative about the take industrial complex but boy, this
seems like they needed some filler. I dislike the civilizing influence of the
"well-produced" podcasts like stuff from NPR. It's not that they're bad
(necessarily, but some of them are polished bullshit) it's that they're NOT
weird and kind of bad.

EDIT: Ironically, the ones he holds up as standards (S-Town, Pod Save America)
are the ones I generally detest.

------
rubyn00bie
As someone this resonates with and after reading some of the comments...

I don't think he means they literally have poor sound quality because of a bad
microphone. I think he means they sound sterile and without life, they are
somehow lifeless. That the majority of Podcasts sound the same, the same
monotone narrator, the same perfectly pitched voices delivering lines, etc...
I dunno how to describe it but it's why I don't listen to podcasts.

------
hiccuphippo
What are some good podcasts to listen to? I listen to StarTalk with Neil
DeGrasse Tyson and loved the (short, just 12 episodes) End Of The World with
Josh Clark.

~~~
pkamb
IMO the best podcasts are organic and conversational between interesting
hosts, not "produced" segment shows like many of the big names. Here's a
suggestion:

Omnibus! With Ken Jennings and John Roderick

[https://www.omnibusproject.com/](https://www.omnibusproject.com/)

------
nextlevelwizard
Author seems very pretencious. Suggesting that podcasts are waste of time
based on handful of examples and then suggesting that (to paraphrase): "there
are countless songs you could listen to" as if most music wasn't complete
waste of time.

Then he goes for the sound quality and voices which just seems "hipstery" to
me considering the few podcasts that I actively listen to have no hisses or
cracks.

Over all completely pointless fluff piece

------
Lowkeyloki
I mostly agree with the author. Maybe not on the specifics, but I've yet to
find a podcast that I don't mind listening to. I've enjoyed a little bit of
MBMBaM and Ear Biscuits, but they're so long! After a certain amount of time,
I just zone out and I can't listen anymore. It just becomes noise.

But just wait until the author learns about AM radio! People apparently
actually listen to it.

------
JaimeThompson
I just discovered The Mountain Goats via the weather segment of the latest
Welcome to Night Vale so it is possible to discover music via podcasts.

------
Talanes
The Podcast v. Music angle is particularly weird given how many podcasts are
about music. As someone whose not particularly plugged in to any music scene
and mostly unaware of what's popular, podcasts are one of the top ways I
discover any new music to begin with. If I was purely listening to music, it
would just be all of the music I already know and have.

------
LordHumungous
Local hipster hates something popular, more at 11.

------
tempodox
Like so much other crap on the web it owes its existence to the fact that
dilettants are inflicting their fumblings on a global audience. Either you
ignore the whole bunch or you have to invest energy into filtering the good
from the bad. Either way, whining that the new forms of entertainment aren't
like the old ones won't achieve anything.

------
glerk
> With all of the world’s unheard songs beckoning us with their endless
> mystery, why would anyone choose to waste their precious listening hours on
> a podcast?

A better question is why would anyone listen to podcasts when there are
millions of audiobooks out there? Why spend any listening time on endless
rambling and ads, when I could learn something worthwhile?

~~~
philwelch
I’d rather read books with my eyes. I find it irrationally enraging to be read
to when I can read a book myself.

~~~
glerk
I used to feel the same way, but I ended up adapting to the new medium.
Reading is great, but sometimes listening is more convenient (commuting for
example)

------
scarface74
I disagree that most podcasts sound bad. Even outside of the NPR/Gimlet style
professional podcasts, most of the ones I listen to like ATP and Daring
Fireball take their editing seriously. They have all of the speakers record
their own side, and they have a backup recording of the audio conversation.

Then they align the two recordings to prevent cross talk.

------
grigjd3
I don't get it. This guy can feel free to not listen to podcasts. It's not
killing music by any stretch of the imagination. I still find plenty of bars
and restaurants that annoy me with having a local band play that I don't
really want to listen to. There really is nothing forcing you to identify and
listen to podcasts.

------
del_operator
Do the popular podcast styles eventually feel like a transform that muddles
the truth of the experiences? I could see how it could cause some anxiety when
actual experience isn’t condensed into truthy bits. I think that’s something
I’d see more in writing, but haven’t personally expected from podcasts.

------
anon284271
I pressed paused on podcasts because for every great one (first season of
Serial) there were dozens of lousy ones.

Even the highly regarded podcasts are often surprisingly ineloquent. Take
Maron's. Great guests, but I almost feel myself getting dumber listening to
him fumble and pause.

------
drngdds
Calling podcasts Objectively Bad is very silly, but it's weird how people talk
about them as though they're this original innovation of the 21st century (the
most exciting and significant one, even!) when they are literally just pre-
recorded radio shows.

------
twoller
They're also another avenue for those who want to feel the comfort of having a
social experience without having to put forth any effort.

The amateur aspect of them helps a listener feel as if it's an inclusive
conversation they could be a part of.

------
Soarez
What's this called? When an article criticizes something in order to promote
it?

~~~
arafalov
Streisand effect is one of the variations.

------
BrissyCoder
Chris Richards go on CumTown.

------
yoz-y
I'd like some way of tracking authors over various media with a browser
extension and then be able to 'ban' them. Reading drivel like this is the
actual waste of time.

------
manigandham
This article was a far bigger waste of time than any podcast.

------
ru999gol
jason scott was recently talking in his podcast about this sort of thing:
[https://textfiles.libsyn.com/the-podcasting-
episode](https://textfiles.libsyn.com/the-podcasting-episode)

To be honest, as someone who listens to podcasts for 14+ years now, I always
found it completely hilarious when the dead tree media talks about podcasts.

------
exabrial
I wish the avg podcast was 10-15m in length so I could listen I my commute,
not an hour, which seems to be the accepted norm.

~~~
ghaff
Not 10-15m but quite a few are sub 30 minutes, e.g. 99 Percent Invisible to
give one example I listen to. Personally, I find 20 to 30 minutes about ideal
a lot of the time. Too much shorter and I have to queue multiple podcasts
together and too much longer is just a bit long, especially if it's not a
produced podcast with multiple segments. An hour is usually too much for a
single 1:1 interview IMO.

------
brodouevencode
Keep in mind the author is a pop music critic, so of course he's against
anything that could impact his income.

------
techrich
Ironic that the Washington post are complaining about alternative media! Its
almost like they have revenue issues!

------
Jorge1o1
What motive could a Washington Post journalist possibly have for trashing
podcasts?

^_^

------
deagle50
The author's tears are delicious. You reap what you sow.

------
failrate
Alternative title: I've only listened to bad podcasts.

------
diehunde
That was a funny rant

------
ha1zum
What a whole lot of nothing

------
dajohnson89
I'm against paywalled articles, so let's call it even

------
garbonicc
TL;DR: get off this guy's lawn

------
tw1010
I'm Against Paywalls.

------
dominotw
lol..wtf

