WEBVTT - The Now & Next in Podcasting 0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:03.800 I'm off my game today. No, you're not. People are 0:00:03.800 --> 0:00:05.640 going to have to start making better content. I think 0:00:05.640 --> 0:00:07.160 we're gonna be talking about this for a long time. 0:00:07.240 --> 0:00:10.200 When you program for everyone, you program for no one. 0:00:10.240 --> 0:00:12.319 I think it's that we're purpose driven platform, like we're 0:00:12.320 --> 0:00:15.600 trying to get to substance. How was that? Are you 0:00:15.680 --> 0:00:19.200 happy with that? This is marketing therapy right now? It 0:00:19.480 --> 0:00:29.760 really is? What's up? I'm Laura Currency and I'm Alexa Kristen. 0:00:29.840 --> 0:00:34.159 Welcome back to Atlantia. Today we are talking to Nick Qua, 0:00:34.400 --> 0:00:37.599 none other than Nick Qua, the guy who was probably 0:00:37.680 --> 0:00:40.000 one of the first kind of signal in the noise 0:00:40.920 --> 0:00:46.960 signals for podcasting UM. And we met Nick a few 0:00:47.040 --> 0:00:49.760 years ago when we did g Podcast Theater and then 0:00:49.800 --> 0:00:52.360 when we started Atlantia, and he's just got a really 0:00:53.080 --> 0:00:55.720 clear perspective, not just on podcasting, but I also think 0:00:55.760 --> 0:00:58.600 about what's gonna happen in the future of the media space, 0:00:59.080 --> 0:01:03.520 maybe um in in light of or in addition to 0:01:03.960 --> 0:01:07.800 audio totally. Yeah, I think the decoupling of those two things. 0:01:07.840 --> 0:01:09.520 And I know something we've talked quite a bit about 0:01:09.640 --> 0:01:13.200 is that, you know, many brands and advertisers and creators 0:01:13.240 --> 0:01:15.720 are saying you know, what's my approach to podcasting. It's 0:01:15.760 --> 0:01:19.119 not necessarily about what is your approach to podcasting, it's 0:01:19.160 --> 0:01:21.440 what's your approach to audio? Um, and how do you 0:01:21.480 --> 0:01:25.039 think about podcasting as a mechanism to deliver a narrative 0:01:25.280 --> 0:01:27.240 within that. Earlier in the week, Nick and I got 0:01:27.240 --> 0:01:28.920 to sit on a panel with The New York Times 0:01:29.000 --> 0:01:31.399 during for Advertising Week, and we're going to talk about 0:01:31.440 --> 0:01:34.240 on the show, UM, has it hit the point of maturation? 0:01:34.319 --> 0:01:37.200 Are we in a mainstream phase of podcasting? Really interesting? 0:01:37.240 --> 0:01:39.720 What is mainstream? Right? What is mainstream? And to get 0:01:39.800 --> 0:01:41.959 next take on that? But I still think we're we're 0:01:42.080 --> 0:01:44.280 very early days and we have a lot to learn 0:01:44.360 --> 0:01:48.160 about how to leverage this channel to create conversation and 0:01:48.200 --> 0:01:51.720 engage with consumers. So if you don't subscribe to Nick's 0:01:51.840 --> 0:01:55.840 Hot Pod newsletter, you should because I always found UM 0:01:55.880 --> 0:01:58.800 when I started researching what was happening in the audio 0:01:58.960 --> 0:02:02.320 space like three or four years ago, he was this 0:02:03.000 --> 0:02:04.680 you know, he had a community and he had he 0:02:04.800 --> 0:02:07.880 was this voice UM that kind of cut through all 0:02:08.000 --> 0:02:12.160 the um mystical ship of what was happening. So with that, 0:02:12.400 --> 0:02:27.079 Nick Kua, we'll be right back, and we're back in 0:02:27.120 --> 0:02:31.200 the studio with none other than Nick Qua, founder of 0:02:31.240 --> 0:02:37.640 hot Pod and contributor to Vulture. Nick, welcome, so great 0:02:37.680 --> 0:02:40.240 to have you on the show. We were just reminiscing 0:02:40.280 --> 0:02:43.360 about our first time meeting you back at the Atlantia 0:02:43.440 --> 0:02:47.079 launch party UM, which is almost two years ago now, 0:02:47.160 --> 0:02:49.799 which is incredible to think about. And obviously the space 0:02:49.840 --> 0:02:55.280 has evolved tremendously since then. But hot Pod, your podcast 0:02:55.280 --> 0:02:59.200 industry must read newsletter, has just exploded. Can you tell 0:02:59.320 --> 0:03:02.640 us about the journey you've been on, and before you 0:03:02.639 --> 0:03:07.359 get into that, really why you decided to create the newsletter. Well, 0:03:07.400 --> 0:03:09.080 I don't know if it's explode. It it's more just 0:03:09.120 --> 0:03:12.160 like grown slowly month over month, year over year, much 0:03:12.200 --> 0:03:16.000 like podcasting in general. I got into it because back 0:03:16.000 --> 0:03:19.079 in two fourteen, I was working in another news room 0:03:19.080 --> 0:03:21.560 and I had been a listener to podcasts for a 0:03:21.600 --> 0:03:24.200 long time by them, and the first season of Cyril 0:03:24.240 --> 0:03:26.160 had been sort of reaching its apex at the point 0:03:26.160 --> 0:03:28.800 I believe it was it was November. It was somewhere 0:03:29.240 --> 0:03:31.840 like it's six or seventh episode, and a good number 0:03:31.960 --> 0:03:36.440 of mainstream outlets started writing about Cyril in the podcast 0:03:36.480 --> 0:03:39.080 industry at large. But it didn't quite map with what 0:03:39.120 --> 0:03:42.600 I understood about the community. Um and it's sort of 0:03:42.640 --> 0:03:44.800 like just drove me to build a small, sort of 0:03:44.880 --> 0:03:48.080 free side project just to like get some thoughts out 0:03:48.120 --> 0:03:52.680 and essentially blog. But after a while more people started subscribing, 0:03:52.760 --> 0:03:56.200 and after a while after that, people from w n 0:03:56.320 --> 0:03:58.360 y C and a few other sort of like podcast 0:03:58.440 --> 0:04:01.560 companies New Synasty were stead of subscribing, and it just 0:04:01.680 --> 0:04:05.400 sort of never stopped publishing. Since what have you noticed 0:04:05.440 --> 0:04:08.440 over the time of writing about the industry people are 0:04:08.440 --> 0:04:12.520 are most curious about, I think people. So I've always 0:04:12.520 --> 0:04:16.320 thought about Hot Pot as a community paper. It breaks 0:04:16.360 --> 0:04:19.120 new sometimes, but it doesn't always like and I try 0:04:19.200 --> 0:04:21.680 not to do it very often until it's important. But 0:04:21.760 --> 0:04:25.280 they usually sort of design it as basically a water 0:04:25.320 --> 0:04:28.960 cooler for various people from the community to sort of 0:04:29.000 --> 0:04:31.760 look at an issue and sort of understand the lay 0:04:31.800 --> 0:04:33.920 of the land. A given week, I try to sort 0:04:33.960 --> 0:04:36.159 of put in a lot of stories about how people 0:04:36.160 --> 0:04:39.080 are thinking about the space, how people operate within this space. 0:04:39.680 --> 0:04:41.800 Of my bread and butter work has always been look 0:04:41.839 --> 0:04:43.720 at this team, this is how they're thinking about things, 0:04:43.760 --> 0:04:45.880 is what they're doing, and this is what they're worried about, 0:04:46.040 --> 0:04:48.359 but sometimes I step in to do sort of like 0:04:48.360 --> 0:04:52.120 thirty thou feet analysis into what I think is the 0:04:52.160 --> 0:04:55.479 bigger picture and trying to draw lines that readers kind 0:04:55.520 --> 0:04:59.200 otherwise drove by themselves. The world of podcasting in the 0:04:59.279 --> 0:05:03.719 last to four years has completely changed. It's kind of 0:05:04.320 --> 0:05:09.039 mainstream now in terms of at least people listening talking 0:05:09.080 --> 0:05:13.400 about it, media companies getting into it, um, journalists getting 0:05:13.400 --> 0:05:17.159 into it, etcetera. What do you think right now are 0:05:17.240 --> 0:05:22.400 the kind of biggest signals of where the industry is headed? Um. 0:05:22.400 --> 0:05:25.000 It's actually really interesting because I do wonder whether it 0:05:25.120 --> 0:05:28.279 has achieved a sort of sort of mainstream status, and 0:05:28.880 --> 0:05:30.800 I do wonder about that still a larger question of 0:05:30.839 --> 0:05:34.080 what it means to be mainstream and knows where the 0:05:34.120 --> 0:05:37.240 media goes. We sort of functioned to really like fragmented 0:05:37.320 --> 0:05:42.040 media ecosystem right now because the Internet has basically flattened everything. Um. 0:05:42.080 --> 0:05:44.680 But the thing that's been super interesting to me about 0:05:44.680 --> 0:05:47.480 the past four years is I think we're going to 0:05:47.560 --> 0:05:51.559 look back at to mid is a sort of really 0:05:51.600 --> 0:05:56.040 interesting in between period and now we're only we're about 0:05:56.120 --> 0:05:59.840 to see, you know, what scale really means and what 0:06:00.040 --> 0:06:03.040 it um sort of an industry growing into something that 0:06:03.080 --> 0:06:05.560 has a bigger architecture really means that the biggest signals 0:06:05.560 --> 0:06:08.480 to me are UM, you know, are hard Media acquiring 0:06:08.480 --> 0:06:11.640 stuff Media a couple of weeks ago. That's a significantly 0:06:12.560 --> 0:06:16.839 It's a once a massive radio giant acquiring a veteran 0:06:17.440 --> 0:06:21.040 very sort of hard at work, very functional, highly functioning 0:06:21.760 --> 0:06:25.680 podcast publishing company UM. And that to me is sort 0:06:25.720 --> 0:06:27.640 of a harbinger of things that come. I think we're 0:06:27.640 --> 0:06:29.880 going to see a lot of big legacy via companies 0:06:29.920 --> 0:06:33.359 by its win to the space and inject a lot 0:06:33.440 --> 0:06:37.200 more resources into it. And the question then would be 0:06:37.320 --> 0:06:41.040 how how do you sort of grow this thing UM 0:06:41.080 --> 0:06:43.159 in a way that hasn't been just in like in 0:06:43.200 --> 0:06:46.080 a much quicker way, right like the past four years, 0:06:46.080 --> 0:06:48.560 in the past ten years before that has largely been 0:06:48.560 --> 0:06:52.600 a story of the industry or the community organ organically 0:06:52.640 --> 0:06:56.080 trying to figure things out on its own. Now we're 0:06:56.080 --> 0:06:58.760 going to sort of see UM sort of fire from 0:06:58.760 --> 0:07:01.640 a different direction. Any in your opinion that fire from 0:07:01.640 --> 0:07:04.039 a different direction. Is it the same model that has 0:07:04.160 --> 0:07:07.760 been followed, like a more ad supported model that's been 0:07:08.400 --> 0:07:12.520 you know, the decades, you know, sixty seventy years of 0:07:12.640 --> 0:07:15.880 media or do you think that's going to change. It's 0:07:15.880 --> 0:07:18.400 one of those situations where I think advertising is not 0:07:18.400 --> 0:07:20.840 gonna go anywhere. It's it's it has been sort of 0:07:20.840 --> 0:07:23.880 the predominant business model for so many different kinds of 0:07:23.920 --> 0:07:26.840 media formats and different kinds of industries. So what we're 0:07:26.840 --> 0:07:31.160 going to probably see on that front is, um, what 0:07:31.240 --> 0:07:33.560 we've learned from ad tech over the past ten years 0:07:33.560 --> 0:07:36.840 in earth set of technology industry being an attempt to 0:07:36.840 --> 0:07:40.440 apply it to podcasting, which is largely sort of developed 0:07:40.440 --> 0:07:44.520 the really storm of reputation and value proposition around um, 0:07:44.560 --> 0:07:47.240 you know, host red ads that are you know, intimate 0:07:47.280 --> 0:07:49.880 and baked into to the medium and baked into a 0:07:49.920 --> 0:07:52.760 podcast episode. Um, we're going to see sort of all 0:07:52.800 --> 0:07:55.200 those two models clash and figure out what the new 0:07:55.840 --> 0:07:58.160 what the new sort of thing is? Yeah, what the what? 0:07:58.160 --> 0:08:00.960 What comes out from that? I don't know. I'm pretty 0:08:00.960 --> 0:08:04.360 sure that the value proposition will change as a result 0:08:04.760 --> 0:08:08.080 all the sort of messaging around podcastings intimacy and the 0:08:08.080 --> 0:08:10.720 effectiveness of its ad reads. It's going to be substantially 0:08:10.800 --> 0:08:13.080 challenged when you set of applied programmatic thinking to this. 0:08:13.560 --> 0:08:16.560 But hopefully you know the numbers will lead to a 0:08:16.600 --> 0:08:20.200 better place and hopefully that we productive outcomes. But I 0:08:20.240 --> 0:08:24.680 think it's like, how do you think podcasting has changed journalism? 0:08:24.720 --> 0:08:26.160 I mean, if you look at New York Times and 0:08:26.280 --> 0:08:29.000 you look at the Daily, I think the Daily probably 0:08:29.080 --> 0:08:31.200 got a lot more audience for the New York Times, 0:08:31.240 --> 0:08:33.880 and the New York Times was getting before the Daily. 0:08:34.280 --> 0:08:36.640 I think you can cut into this question from two directions. 0:08:36.760 --> 0:08:41.760 One UM what it offers legacy news companies and legacy 0:08:41.840 --> 0:08:45.400 journalism organizations that this opportunity to as you mentioned, reach 0:08:45.480 --> 0:08:49.040 new audiences UM and largely that comes from this dynamic 0:08:49.080 --> 0:08:51.760 in which newspaper organizations have beene for a lot of time, 0:08:51.920 --> 0:08:56.120 have often adopted like a voice of God kind of approach, 0:08:56.200 --> 0:08:59.560 and it's sort of a monolithic, faceless we are the 0:08:59.559 --> 0:09:04.440 authority on the subject style of news distribution and information dessemination. 0:09:04.480 --> 0:09:07.960 And we're in a moment in not just America but 0:09:08.000 --> 0:09:11.840 the world where trust in institutions are are challenged. And 0:09:11.880 --> 0:09:16.000 what UM Audio broadly of sort of offers is this 0:09:16.080 --> 0:09:20.439 opportunity for UM people to connect people to connect institutions, 0:09:20.440 --> 0:09:22.920 people to connective journalists, and people to sort of really 0:09:22.920 --> 0:09:27.520 form of emotional emotional bond with this side that works 0:09:27.600 --> 0:09:30.040 really hard at producing the news but has historically been 0:09:30.040 --> 0:09:32.000 sort of embattled by a sort of people who question 0:09:32.040 --> 0:09:34.319 truth and things like that, but sort of people think 0:09:34.320 --> 0:09:36.320 it from the other direction. It's it's sort of this 0:09:36.400 --> 0:09:40.840 in between place between old legacy news organizations and sort 0:09:40.840 --> 0:09:45.680 of the blogging, rapid fire news news organizations or sort 0:09:45.679 --> 0:09:48.199 of new media companies that sort of came to age 0:09:48.320 --> 0:09:50.840 in the mid to late two thousand's, places like Gawker, 0:09:50.960 --> 0:09:54.640 places like BuzzFeed, sort of sites that really built their 0:09:54.679 --> 0:09:57.560 identity around being one of the people being very voicey. 0:09:58.400 --> 0:10:00.880 I feel like the Daily and Specific has been able 0:10:00.920 --> 0:10:02.719 to sort of build a space where it feels like 0:10:02.760 --> 0:10:04.760 this in between ground, that you're talking to a real person, 0:10:05.080 --> 0:10:07.720 that this person has a voice, but this person isn't 0:10:07.960 --> 0:10:10.760 particularly like isn't irreverend, And it's still sort of able 0:10:10.760 --> 0:10:14.320 to embody authority in a really interesting way. And I 0:10:14.320 --> 0:10:17.280 think I think that's the wedge. What are your thoughts 0:10:17.320 --> 0:10:21.319 are sort of recommendations are best practices given what you've 0:10:21.360 --> 0:10:24.320 seen in this space for brands who are eager to 0:10:24.400 --> 0:10:26.920 either dip their toe or go all in, Because I 0:10:26.920 --> 0:10:30.120 think over the last two years, we've seen many different 0:10:30.120 --> 0:10:33.959 brands across many different categories go at this in different ways. 0:10:34.840 --> 0:10:38.840 Mm hmm. My recommendation would be to trust the natives 0:10:39.000 --> 0:10:43.920 of this community. The heart of this product is an emotion, 0:10:44.000 --> 0:10:46.600 and the heart of this product is like an an 0:10:46.640 --> 0:10:49.880 intimacy of relationship, and so that is what you're either 0:10:50.000 --> 0:10:52.120 trying to develop if you were to create a branded 0:10:52.120 --> 0:10:54.280 podcast of your own, but that's also what you're trying 0:10:54.320 --> 0:10:57.760 to bite into. And as anybody in the sort of 0:10:58.559 --> 0:11:00.760 healthy nurging long term really you should can tell you 0:11:00.800 --> 0:11:02.360 it's sort of like it's a lot about listening. It's 0:11:02.360 --> 0:11:07.520 a lot about being being attentive to how this community 0:11:07.559 --> 0:11:10.559 works and how this um, how this space does its job. 0:11:11.040 --> 0:11:15.200 And I think I would recommend this like listening to 0:11:15.760 --> 0:11:20.439 not just podcast publishers but um but too, but listen 0:11:20.480 --> 0:11:24.079 to what podcast audiences want. And that's that's kind of 0:11:24.200 --> 0:11:25.960 what you're renting into it the end of the day, 0:11:26.080 --> 0:11:29.560 what are your thoughts on what's happening in the programmatic 0:11:29.600 --> 0:11:34.200 space in audio in podcasting? Kind of as the maybe 0:11:34.280 --> 0:11:38.840 counter to that, yeah, I don't, I don't know. So 0:11:39.679 --> 0:11:42.880 i I'm Morather the young person and the sort of 0:11:42.880 --> 0:11:45.160 the kind of person that I really tuned out commercial 0:11:45.200 --> 0:11:48.920 radio because I find radio ads this extremely assaulting and 0:11:49.000 --> 0:11:52.920 overwhelming and just unpleasant. Um. And so that's my memory 0:11:52.920 --> 0:11:56.720 and that's sort of that's my um my relationship with 0:11:56.800 --> 0:11:59.840 the notion of programmatic, right, Like I came up of 0:12:00.040 --> 0:12:02.920 age in the Internet when sort of patter ads were 0:12:02.960 --> 0:12:06.320 like not great at its peak assault of this and 0:12:06.400 --> 0:12:08.440 so I think the question is that of can you 0:12:08.559 --> 0:12:13.040 use programmatic to scale quality and into the scene? Um? 0:12:13.080 --> 0:12:17.000 And I don't know. I think this is unproven territory. Um. 0:12:17.360 --> 0:12:20.800 There is definitely a model into into which how programmatic 0:12:20.840 --> 0:12:24.199 could work for a technology like this, But you're not 0:12:24.240 --> 0:12:28.400 scaling quantity, your scaling quality um. And so that's that's 0:12:28.440 --> 0:12:32.600 the difficulty here, and therefore it changes I think the 0:12:32.679 --> 0:12:37.679 nature of programmatic right. So right now it's about chasing 0:12:37.840 --> 0:12:40.760 eyeballs and volume. I think that you know, Laura and 0:12:40.760 --> 0:12:42.880 I have talked about a lot in the past that 0:12:42.960 --> 0:12:47.440 programmatic is the right idea executed in the wrong way. 0:12:47.679 --> 0:12:51.080 And that's in digital right add you know, banners and 0:12:51.120 --> 0:12:54.480 things like that, And I think it's possibly going to 0:12:54.520 --> 0:12:59.920 happen in audio unless unless there is some kind of 0:13:00.120 --> 0:13:06.840 genius around creating experience and letting that drive a targeted 0:13:07.640 --> 0:13:11.120 by I think what two things I think there are 0:13:11.200 --> 0:13:12.680 there are two things that might bring us to a 0:13:12.679 --> 0:13:14.800 better place of programmatic right Like. I think the first 0:13:14.800 --> 0:13:20.000 thing is if we see really strong, clear leaders building 0:13:20.040 --> 0:13:23.280 out a model that that both sort of respects the 0:13:23.320 --> 0:13:26.319 meeting's intimacy and also it is able to utilize programmatic 0:13:26.320 --> 0:13:28.360 in the right way. If somebody can figure that out 0:13:28.400 --> 0:13:30.400 and be really strong and messaging that this is how 0:13:30.400 --> 0:13:32.440 it's going to work, it will lead to like the 0:13:32.480 --> 0:13:35.560 creation of norms around how you use programmatic that could 0:13:35.600 --> 0:13:37.600 be productive. So I think I think that is something 0:13:37.600 --> 0:13:39.280 that we should be looking out for, and if we 0:13:39.280 --> 0:13:41.800 see it, we should elevate it. I think that's that's important. 0:13:42.360 --> 0:13:47.120 That to me only gives more thought around subscription models 0:13:47.400 --> 0:13:49.559 and people saying, you know, we'd rather pay than than 0:13:49.679 --> 0:13:52.360 listen to the same sort of experience Nickels alluding to 0:13:52.760 --> 0:13:54.880 within commercial radio. So the curious to get your thoughts 0:13:54.960 --> 0:13:59.360 on the subscription approach and if you have any idea 0:13:59.520 --> 0:14:03.280 insight into those that may be um thinking about this 0:14:03.360 --> 0:14:06.400 and that you're excited for. I've seen unheard of a 0:14:06.440 --> 0:14:08.600 bunch of different plays within the space right now that's 0:14:08.600 --> 0:14:11.560 podcast specific. There as a company called Theminity that's trying 0:14:11.559 --> 0:14:15.960 to build sort of paid platform for podcasting. They literally 0:14:15.960 --> 0:14:18.320 want to be the Netflix for podcasts. UM. There are 0:14:18.400 --> 0:14:20.880 a bunch of other companies to have similar plays. UM. 0:14:20.920 --> 0:14:25.480 Stitcher has Stitcher Premium, which essentially offers like bonuses and 0:14:25.480 --> 0:14:29.520 and interesting UM exclusive shows on that kind of recites 0:14:30.000 --> 0:14:32.920 on top or to the corner of their overarching ad 0:14:33.000 --> 0:14:36.320 driven model. I have written. I wrote a column about 0:14:36.360 --> 0:14:38.760 this a couple of months ago. I think we're looking 0:14:38.960 --> 0:14:41.480 at the wrong models. UM. I think we're looking at 0:14:41.480 --> 0:14:45.200 the wrong metaphors. We shouldn't be drawing from things like 0:14:45.200 --> 0:14:47.560 like Netflix because they just have different histories if how 0:14:47.560 --> 0:14:49.360 they get to to where they are. We should be 0:14:49.400 --> 0:14:52.240 looking at things like head Space, which is a sort 0:14:52.280 --> 0:14:55.360 of meditation app that's able to slip into people's lives 0:14:55.360 --> 0:14:57.920 in a very specific way. UM. And it's and it 0:14:58.040 --> 0:15:00.640 sort of fits into a very specific use case for 0:15:00.840 --> 0:15:02.800 a lot of people that would drive them to say yes, 0:15:02.840 --> 0:15:05.640 I will pay five or six dollars a month for 0:15:05.760 --> 0:15:08.920 this for this content. UM. I think that's the sort 0:15:08.920 --> 0:15:11.800 of model for where people should start before moving out market. 0:15:12.400 --> 0:15:16.240 But UM, I haven't quite seen anything as podcast specific 0:15:16.440 --> 0:15:19.920 that UM that's encouraging or that's interesting. Do you think 0:15:19.960 --> 0:15:22.520 there's a new model that needs to be built for 0:15:23.040 --> 0:15:27.040 Amazon and Google Home and those types of things in 0:15:27.080 --> 0:15:29.520 the podcasting space? You know, right now there are a 0:15:29.560 --> 0:15:34.040 lot of podcasts that are available on Amazon, for example. 0:15:34.520 --> 0:15:36.840 I'm not sure that the same experience that we hear 0:15:37.080 --> 0:15:39.240 when we plug in our phones and listen to a 0:15:39.320 --> 0:15:42.640 podcast should be the same experience is when you're listening 0:15:42.680 --> 0:15:46.120 to it in your home. I think that's right, But 0:15:46.200 --> 0:15:49.840 I think there are some things that do retain. UM. 0:15:49.880 --> 0:15:52.640 There are ways in which I can activate Alexa skills 0:15:52.680 --> 0:15:57.240 that overlap with the nature of being on demand, right, 0:15:57.280 --> 0:15:59.440 like one of the sort of bigger value propositions of 0:15:59.480 --> 0:16:02.840 podcasting sort of like you're able to UM, you made 0:16:02.840 --> 0:16:05.600 a choice to listen to this thing, and therefore it's 0:16:05.600 --> 0:16:07.680 something that you bought into and you have a testive 0:16:07.720 --> 0:16:10.200 relationship with to track this out, as opposed to something 0:16:10.240 --> 0:16:12.520 that's more of a linear stream that you catch onto 0:16:12.720 --> 0:16:14.600 and you either choose to opt out or to switch 0:16:14.680 --> 0:16:19.200 around if you if you didn't like what you're listening to. UM. 0:16:19.480 --> 0:16:20.800 The way I've been trying to think about this is 0:16:21.080 --> 0:16:25.240 sort of the shift between desktop two mobile UM. The 0:16:25.280 --> 0:16:28.080 way that we had sites specifically designed for a stesktop 0:16:28.120 --> 0:16:31.800 that never really designed specifically for mobile, and as a result, 0:16:32.160 --> 0:16:34.720 there are breakdowns in that relationship when when one carries 0:16:34.760 --> 0:16:38.400 to the other. UM. The question I think is sort 0:16:38.400 --> 0:16:41.480 of how do you either restructure shows or redesign shows 0:16:41.480 --> 0:16:44.680 that could fit in both environments or and or how 0:16:44.720 --> 0:16:48.920 do you build things specifically for alexa UM. There was 0:16:48.960 --> 0:16:51.120 a point that was raised in the at Week panel 0:16:51.120 --> 0:16:53.680 that that Laura and I did that was so super interesting, 0:16:53.680 --> 0:16:55.960 which is the coupling the idea of podcasts with the 0:16:56.000 --> 0:17:00.800 idea of audio. I think that's definitely an inevitability. Publishers 0:17:00.800 --> 0:17:03.480 need to do that, especially not just when one smart 0:17:03.480 --> 0:17:06.960 speaker is really sort of become the touch, the first 0:17:07.000 --> 0:17:11.080 touch for most audio consumption, but also when platforms like 0:17:11.119 --> 0:17:14.280 Spotify or or pandor really really really sort of buy 0:17:14.359 --> 0:17:19.280 into a co opt um space previously occupied by podcast publishers, 0:17:19.720 --> 0:17:22.040 and you know, it's it's sort of I think it's 0:17:22.080 --> 0:17:23.679 it's it's all audio the end of the day, but 0:17:23.760 --> 0:17:25.000 it's all it all has to be sort of a 0:17:25.040 --> 0:17:27.760 little bit more thoughtful than than what's going on right now, 0:17:28.400 --> 0:17:31.679 thinking about the use case and the utility. Well also, 0:17:31.760 --> 0:17:34.800 then I think forced brands to think about it's not 0:17:34.880 --> 0:17:37.639 just it's not good enough just to create podcast content 0:17:37.720 --> 0:17:40.600 or audio content. It's a strategy, like how are you 0:17:40.640 --> 0:17:43.359 deploying your message accordingly? So I agree, and I think, 0:17:43.760 --> 0:17:45.640 you know, Nick, this is something I'd love to get 0:17:45.640 --> 0:17:49.359 your opinion on. We have been, for lack of a 0:17:49.400 --> 0:17:51.919 better term, in a really linear I think you actually 0:17:51.920 --> 0:17:56.160 said this earlier, like a linear media world, I personally think, 0:17:56.200 --> 0:17:59.879 and maybe it's more of a hope the audio is 0:18:00.080 --> 0:18:03.080 going to actually break that, and so we're gonna be 0:18:03.119 --> 0:18:07.280 looking at more non linear types of media, and that 0:18:07.320 --> 0:18:11.639 could look like something where you start franchising not only 0:18:11.680 --> 0:18:15.280 a brand, but a talent or an idea. So if 0:18:15.359 --> 0:18:18.280 like I'm headed into a meeting with the CMO and 0:18:18.320 --> 0:18:20.840 I need to talk to them about something that's happening 0:18:20.880 --> 0:18:23.520 trend wise, there's no reason I couldn't have Serificial give 0:18:23.560 --> 0:18:26.160 me the top three things right as I'm walking out 0:18:26.200 --> 0:18:28.439 the door that I need to know about X, Y, 0:18:28.440 --> 0:18:32.560 and Z. All of a sudden, those voices, if you will, 0:18:32.920 --> 0:18:39.760 or that content I p becomes almost um uh just omnipresent. 0:18:39.880 --> 0:18:41.679 What's your opinion on that, Nick, I mean, do you 0:18:41.720 --> 0:18:45.760 think that's possible and and and prompted by this kind 0:18:45.760 --> 0:18:50.080 of um potential and audio. Yeah, I think it's super 0:18:50.080 --> 0:18:53.439 interesting because I feel like we were always trending in 0:18:53.440 --> 0:18:58.400 this direction, regardless of the specific context of the media industry. UM. 0:18:58.440 --> 0:19:00.119 Going back to what we were talking about early or 0:19:00.200 --> 0:19:03.760 sort of trust in institutions and trust and authorities have 0:19:03.880 --> 0:19:05.840 sort of been declining over time, and I think what 0:19:06.000 --> 0:19:09.000 has replaced as this notion of you know, trust, trust 0:19:09.040 --> 0:19:11.879 in individuals and you know, you know, folks kind of 0:19:11.920 --> 0:19:14.200 say like always invest in a person in kind of situation. 0:19:14.680 --> 0:19:18.120 And I think I think what we're seeing I don't 0:19:18.200 --> 0:19:21.719 quite know how this translates to every media company or 0:19:21.760 --> 0:19:26.200 every new media context or different kinds of programming UM, 0:19:26.240 --> 0:19:28.960 but I think we're seeing sort of really interesting UM 0:19:29.200 --> 0:19:32.719 new compandia companies being built around individual voices. And one 0:19:32.760 --> 0:19:35.160 of the best examples of this is probably Actio says 0:19:35.400 --> 0:19:38.240 and you were talking about Sara Fisher. It's not just her, 0:19:38.320 --> 0:19:42.240 but they've also built sort of um it's built architecture 0:19:42.280 --> 0:19:46.399 around Jonathan Swan who's their political correspondent, and and Mike Allen, 0:19:46.440 --> 0:19:49.600 who's the founder a co founder of acxios where UM 0:19:49.640 --> 0:19:51.680 they go into the world that you can read them 0:19:51.680 --> 0:19:53.560 in the newsletter, you can see them on TV, you 0:19:53.560 --> 0:19:55.840 can see them on Twitter. They probably have like four 0:19:55.920 --> 0:19:58.760 or five different other touch points of how they're distributing 0:19:59.080 --> 0:20:02.160 the information that they know UM and you know, it's 0:20:02.160 --> 0:20:04.720 all sort of value being carried outwards into all these 0:20:04.720 --> 0:20:07.040 different directions. The questions sort of how do you sort 0:20:07.040 --> 0:20:09.520 of monetize all of those and and the question for 0:20:09.560 --> 0:20:11.320 me and a brother's sense, it's also how to you 0:20:11.320 --> 0:20:16.560 adapt this model to other kinds of UM media context 0:20:16.600 --> 0:20:20.200 and programming cells and genres, because I don't think it's 0:20:19.960 --> 0:20:22.520 a model that could fit for everyone, but it is 0:20:22.600 --> 0:20:25.119 there's something intriguing about the truth that there is trust 0:20:25.119 --> 0:20:27.320 in the individuals there. Nick. One of the things you 0:20:27.320 --> 0:20:29.720 and I were chatting about on that panel was around 0:20:29.720 --> 0:20:32.960 the idea of formats and the ability for people to 0:20:33.040 --> 0:20:36.160 get creative and not just thinking about it as talking 0:20:36.160 --> 0:20:39.359 heads or interviews or news style content, but some of 0:20:39.400 --> 0:20:42.320 the mechanisms that have been used by people like panically, 0:20:42.359 --> 0:20:45.240 where they've built been series around Empire and Blood, some 0:20:45.320 --> 0:20:48.200 of the relationships that are starting to happen with Hollywood 0:20:48.240 --> 0:20:51.359 that we see Gimlet moving toward. What are your thoughts 0:20:51.359 --> 0:20:55.240 around sort of non news, sort of the fictional storytelling 0:20:55.440 --> 0:20:58.520 and the ways people are really getting creative with format. 0:21:00.000 --> 0:21:02.760 And so we've seen like a bunch of historically seen 0:21:02.800 --> 0:21:05.280 like a bunch of really interesting innovations over the past 0:21:05.280 --> 0:21:08.240 couple of years, specifically of the podcasting. So in Para 0:21:08.280 --> 0:21:11.320 Blood dropped all their episodes at once, but so did 0:21:11.480 --> 0:21:15.160 as Town uh like I believe March of last year, 0:21:15.240 --> 0:21:19.240 where they dropped this entire novelistic story um down in 0:21:19.400 --> 0:21:21.600 I sell all seven chapters in one day and it 0:21:21.680 --> 0:21:25.679 ends up being this sort of really remarkable experience, which is, 0:21:25.720 --> 0:21:27.359 you know, in hindsight, what do you think about It's 0:21:27.480 --> 0:21:30.000 really hard to monetize. Also, it's hard to sort of 0:21:30.040 --> 0:21:31.919 evaluate the risk of whether you want to get an 0:21:31.960 --> 0:21:34.560 ad buy on that um. But we've also seen, like 0:21:34.920 --> 0:21:38.720 I think even something as early as a comedy Bang 0:21:38.760 --> 0:21:41.480 Bang like that's sort of a really popular comedy podcast, 0:21:41.480 --> 0:21:44.639 your Wolf Um. They really play with how long you 0:21:44.640 --> 0:21:46.720 can go, how deep you can go a different segments 0:21:46.760 --> 0:21:49.360 and and sort of blurring the line between something that's 0:21:49.359 --> 0:21:51.479 fictionals I think it's not fictional. There are all these 0:21:51.480 --> 0:21:54.560 sort of different elements that carry different amounts of risk 0:21:54.800 --> 0:21:59.000