And I've never heard of this customer data debate. I learned something
But it makes sense... you'd want to know
who is listening to your podcasts. Apple knows this information (if you're using one of Apple's solutions) and I can see how this data could be beneficial to podcasters.
And yet... podcasting is HUGE even without this data.
For sure, podcasters wouldn't mind any data Apple has, but for *MOST* podcasters, this hasn't been an issue. Your last statement sums it up well! Podcasts are doing JUST FINE without it.
Don't podcasters already have a good general idea of their audience? ... They've already figured it out. Would more granular listener data be helpful? Sure. It couldn't hurt. But podcasting seems to have done well without it.
Exactly! It's the huge-audience folks, who came from traditional radio, who want similar metrics like they have from surveys of their supposed audiences. That's what they are used to, as inaccurate as it might be. Podcasting is a different medium.
...that happens to have more cash on hand than the U.S. Treasury and a valuation that exceeds the largest oil company. Sure sounds like a failing enterprise.
I don't think anyone is arguing they are currently in financial trouble. We're arguing about what will EVENTUALLY happen to them if they continue down, what we see as, a messed up path. Do you happen to remember the Apple of the mid-90s?
What does has to do with Eddy Cue, is Eddy a designer?
He's ultimately responsible for iCloud, iApps, iTunes, etc. While he didn't design them, when he noticed they were messed up, he should have put a stop to things. I'm sure Ive had something to do with it too, as well as Federighi.
With years of free podcasts, I'll be damned if I will pay for the content. If Apple introduces iAds or something, that would be cool, but as a 'consumer,' I will not pay for content like this, nor will most people. ... The bigger beef is how much the Podcast App SUCKS SUCKS SUCKS.
I think there are many podcasts worth paying for or supporting (and I encourage it!), but I think you're right. If, somehow, someone could convert podcasting to a subscription model, that would mostly kill it off.
Yes, Apple has a LOT of work to do on the Podcast App... and the iTunes store, especially search.
iTunes 11 (I believe) introduced a new "feature" that automatically and invisibly unsubscribed me from Podcasts I didn't listen to as often. There was also no easy way to find out which ones have been unsubscribed and to resubscribe manually. I periodically had to spot check my feed for lapsed subscriptions.
That must be what my wife complains about, as she still syncs iTunes to a nano. Since I directly subscribe with my iPod touch, I don't have that issue (it just stops downloading after so many unplayed episodes, which makes sense).
You folks seem to be missing the big picture. There are ads in PodCasts - but for the Podcasters to sell ads, they need to know who is listening.
The big picture is if a Podcaster knows that they get 20,000 downloads of teens vs 20,000 downloads from seniors, it will make a HUGE difference in who advertises and how much they pay.
Right now the advertising is totally scattershot and therefore inefficient for everyone. If Podcasters had data they could target ads, make more money, make more podcasts - and the impact on the listeners would be, well, more and higher quality podcasts.
No, it's failing to understand modern advertising. What's scattershot, is just broadcasting interruptive ads blindly at a supposed target audience, based on some small sample size surveys. A smart advertiser would find podcasts who they *know* cater to their target audience, which results in a much higher conversion.
But, I'm curious how you think such data could be collected by Apple? So, lets say someone plays a podcast, how does Apple know any of this stuff? (For example, when I play an episode of my favorite podcast, Apple doesn't even know, let alone have any data about it/me. On the other hand, the podcast host, who hosts that audio file, does!)
As I noted already, the above is incorrect. Some podcasts do offer an ad-free version (as well as bonus content) for paying subscribers. It's a bit more complicated than just pressing a "Buy" button in an app, but podcasters who want to can offer the option.
Oh yes, there are ways to do it. I mean, to do it in general for the platform (like it appears these 'top podcasters' want). IMO, that would ruin the platform (if it were even possible). For Apple to do this, they'd have to start being the host, and talking people into putting their podcasts on their platform only. I know I won't be doing that. So, then you'd have traditional-podcasters (still free, or ad supported, etc.) and Apple Podcasters.
This cracks me up about Apple. They claim to fame about Podcasts, but they crippled the ability to make them in GarageBand a few versions ago, including cutting support on OS X Server. ... Hopefully they will bring back support in GarageBand and server.
Hmm, afaik, you can still make podcasts with GarageBand, you just have to export to iTunes for the proper MP3 encoding. But, there are lots of other apps that work as well. As for OS X Server, that's a dead product.
But, unless you're planning on just having a small podcast to a small group of listeners, you're *much* better off hosting it on Blubrry or Libsyn anyway.
I think that podcasts are exactly what iAd should be used for. Keep them free for subscribers, but Apple should offer to host/distribute them (with Apple-supplied ads) for the podcast producers. ...This option would allow amateurs to easily monetize podcasts, or at least not lose money on hosting fees.
The only way Apple could do this, is if they controlled it all end-to-end (hosting, directory/subscription, player), like YouTube. That isn't how podcasting works at all. Yes, I suppose they could start offering it as a new service. IMO, this would be bad for podcasting, though.
Why not just morph podcasts into a youtube model?
That's not how podcasts work, so they could offer such a service, but they have no control over podcasting as a whole.
... but the better one's simply are marketing for other revenue streams or employ radio style adverts (that everyone jumps forward past). Lovely industry isn't it?
That's a good point. Unless someone makes podcasts live-streaming w/o skip-ahead controls, traditional ad-blocks are kind of useless (and not as effective as the podcast host just recommending something). No doubt, this is probably what this panel of 'leading podcasters' want though, as that's what they are used to at NPR.
I disagree, content like podcasts or music is inherently unsearchable. No title, description, keyword or else is going to help you to separate the wheat from the chaff...
I'm not talking about finding quality... I'm talking about FINDING AT ALL! The search is currently so bad that you can know what you're looking for, or have good keywords, and STILL not find something that you KNOW is there. It's a very, very dumb search... nothing like Google's search, or even maybe AltaVista from the 90s, for that matter.
Well I think podcasts are about to get way worse generally completely infected with ads. ... So my hope is Apple reacts quickly and makes a decent patronage model.
Neither Google or Apple have the ability to do this to the current podcasting community. It will only be IF the community gives in to pressures or incentives, and falls into that trap.
Apple knows the whole chain. What data they choose to encrypt or delete for privacy concerns is another matter.
Well, only *IF* one is using the Apple Podcast app or streaming directly via iTunes software, AND those apps are collecting such data. Then, the apps would have to send it back to Apple (probably getting user permission). The problem is that this only applies to a (currently) sizeable chunk of podcast plays. People listening directly from a website, using other podcast apps, etc. wouldn't be included in that data. And, unless Apple gets their act together, that chunk is shrinking each month (assuming a sizeable percentage of users opted into sending back such data, which I doubt).
The only way Apple could provide much meaningful data, is if they hosted the audio files. That's why current podcast hosts have much better data than Apple.
