How do we cross podcasts
Today I would like to voice and discuss with you one thought or even an idea. The first time she sounded in the after-show of Radio T # 101 , but because of the specifics of this action, it might seem that this is just another joke and gibberish. Sim, I hasten to assure you that everything is not quite so.
It is about the fact that podcasts and podcasts experience 2 differently directed aspirations.
First, with maturity, and sometimes with youth, the podcast tries to break away from the incubator where it usually originates. I am talking both about the main place of “birth” - the rpod.ru podcast directory and the less visible podfm.ru podcast sites and audio rambler . There are a couple of heroes born in the podcast section of the habr.ru social site , but this is more the exception than the rule. Of course, birth is nothing more than a metaphor. In fact, podcasts arise in the minds, and then go into voice and recording. So, colleagues podcasters do not rush to throw furniture at me :)
As my experience and the experience of a significant part of the acquaintances that have taken place to me of podcasters shows, sooner or later they (podcasts with their brainchildren) come off in free flight. To put it more mundane, they open their own websites and try to convince the audience to go there, subscribe to feeds there, write comments there and listen there from the web. I also experienced this centrifugal phenomenon at the time and for quite some time all my podcasts are autonomous and have everything of their own.
It seems to me pointless to discuss why this is happening and try to create some conditions for podcasts to live together. My working hypothesis states that these podcasts that have left behind are interesting because for the most part individualist introverts, or podcasting them, do so over time. However, this is nothing more than an empirical observation, built on the observation of tidal waves and spitting at the ceiling. It’s hard for me to believe that, under certain conditions, podcasters who have come off the dormitory terminals to return there. Therefore, we take this idea as an axiom and go further without exposing it to ridicule.
On the topic of how to separate and assemble your podcast site, I even wrote a noteHowever, this is only one side of the coin, and one end of a stick. The second side is the need to somehow unite. I am well aware that at first glance this contradicts our working hypothesis, however, such a need brings podcasters together. There are several good reasons for combining. First of all, together it is easier to promote this relatively new business to the masses. And the field for promotion here is almost not plowed. Secondly, listeners are not satisfied with passive subscription and listening, but want to say their weighty word, and prefer not to go to 20 different places to say their comment on a particular podcast. Thirdly, some of the listeners prefer to perceive podcasts not by subscription and also wish they would find this whole thing in one place.
This applies to entities visible to the naked eye. If you take a closer look, you will see a number of tasks that podcasters, for all their tendency to scatter, would not mind putting on a reliable partner and would be happy to solve these problems together, well, to put it mildly, using some common services. I am talking primarily about ranking and statistics. With statistics, everything seems to be understandable without any special explanation, and podcasters will probably understand my desire to have reliable, competent statistics, considered in some understandable way, comparable to the statistics of other participants (although this is more likely for ratings) and used as an external, easily connected service. While I suggest you put the word “rating” on the stack, we will come back to it with all the inevitability of a falling jack.
There is one more problem concerning both podcasts and listeners. I’m talking about finding your audience, or, as some say, promoting on the one hand and finding a new “to listen” podcast on the other. This is not so relevant for well-known and popular podcasts, but very, very relevant for good, interesting but little-known podcasts. Something new and interesting can be found on the rpoda mentioned above, but oh, how difficult it is to do it. In fairness, on other services this is probably even worse. And although at the beginning I ridiculed the idea of “creating conditions”, but for these young and new conditions it is necessary to create. On the other hand, listeners should also be helped to find good new podcasts.
What am I getting at, you ask out loud? I will say, I will not hide. Then the time came to remove the word from the stack that we pushed a couple of paragraphs back there. Let me remind those who supplanted it - it was the word rating . It is on the rating that I have all hope as something that can help us in everything at once. No, “right away” is certainly a definite bend, but in the future it’s more likely than not.
Talk about ratings. I consider ratings and other all kinds of tops to be very useful and simply necessary in any creative field. Although I won’t say anything about any, but in our podcast, ratings are very necessary for a number of reasons that are quite obvious to me. The presence of an authoritative place that considers and serves everyone who wishes these ratings is very useful for podcasters as something that sets the bar and, if achieved, pleasantly tickles our huge ego. However, for listeners this is even more useful as a tool for selecting, filtering and selecting a podcast for your loved one.
Of course, we are talking about an unbiased, high-quality and technically correct rating, and looking ahead, even about a whole family of such benchmarks. It is absolutely essential that there is no doubt about its mathematical accuracy, resistance to markups and maximum reliability. Otherwise, the whole idea of a penniless is not worth it and worse than a compromised rating is only its absence. Although there is also a moot point, what is actually worse.
By the way, another consequence of the implementation of the ideas discussed will be the return to the tops and ratings of their value and attractiveness and washing out of a completely unsuccessful and even harmful, in my opinion, thesis, which is actively promoted at the party and partially on the shame about the shame of the rating and that being a little it’s indecent, and discussing it is just shameful. We need our Oscars, our Grammys, our hit parades! To get to the top should be an unprecedented achievement and an indicator that both colleagues and students have merit your hard, podcast hobby and tell you - “you are the best!” In this reality, the word "scribbler" or "karmodrocher" will not be indecent - they will simply be inappropriate.
So, we are talking about a service for centralized calculation and presentation of ratings, statistics, as well as the consolidation of podcast feeds and podcast comments. All your own will remain theirs for the podcast. The site will be where it was, the files will be laid out as they were laid out before, and students going to these sites will be able to listen, subscribe and comment as before. However, a certain “intersection point” will appear from where the listener will be able to listen to and comment on and evaluate the show, and will also be able to conveniently find new interesting podcasts. This will not be another podcast terminal, i.e. essentially a hosting and podcasting service. This will be a kind of meta-service that sets the task of creating a convenient podcast catalog, an honest rating and pleasant interaction with users (listeners and authors of podcasts).
If by this moment the question “what the hell is the goat of slaughter” has not yet been dispelled, and what does not suit what is today, I will answer briefly but ruthlessly :) Rpod is primarily a podcast terminal, with its own rules encouraging authors to live only there and ignoring , on the issue of rating, individual renegades. In addition, after his efforts to make the top 10 a rudiment not mentioned in a decent society, which they have threatened to remove the last year, then I think the contradiction is obvious.
Habr has a well-developed rating system and ratings, but it is completely unsuitable for podcasts. This is not surprising, since evaluating audio shows along with texts, translations, and other text materials, leading all this diverse economy to a common denominator, in my opinion, is a completely hopeless venture.
I can’t say a single positive word about podfm counting systems and rambler audio. what they think in my opinion reflects the weather on Jupiter, or at best on Mars. Those. Today, it does not seem to me that these services provide at least some sort of information relevant to our task. And the concept of manually rating podcasts on podfm (for this they shamelessly borrowed my term “correct podcasts”) also does not inspire optimism.
These are all my initial, staged thoughts for the voiced idea. I would like to talk at a conceptual level before discussing the technology of this service. Those. and from podcasters and listeners I would like to hear answers to the eternal question “do we need it?”, and also try to understand how close my vision of the problem is to yours and what to add and what to take away.
I hope that after discussion and exchange of views, we all will have a clearer picture, which allows us to start discussing and even designing the final system.
*This text may seem to you somewhat strange in the manner of presentation and most likely - reasonably. The fact is that, gaining all this, I, on the one hand, tried to systematize my thoughts, and on the other, I kept in mind that I would not mind saying this text. So it turned out such a hybrid of me squeaking with a speaker.
** In the original, the note was entitled: "To disperse in order to meet ." I renamed it for understandable, in the light of recent conversations, reasons.
It is about the fact that podcasts and podcasts experience 2 differently directed aspirations.
First, with maturity, and sometimes with youth, the podcast tries to break away from the incubator where it usually originates. I am talking both about the main place of “birth” - the rpod.ru podcast directory and the less visible podfm.ru podcast sites and audio rambler . There are a couple of heroes born in the podcast section of the habr.ru social site , but this is more the exception than the rule. Of course, birth is nothing more than a metaphor. In fact, podcasts arise in the minds, and then go into voice and recording. So, colleagues podcasters do not rush to throw furniture at me :)
As my experience and the experience of a significant part of the acquaintances that have taken place to me of podcasters shows, sooner or later they (podcasts with their brainchildren) come off in free flight. To put it more mundane, they open their own websites and try to convince the audience to go there, subscribe to feeds there, write comments there and listen there from the web. I also experienced this centrifugal phenomenon at the time and for quite some time all my podcasts are autonomous and have everything of their own.
It seems to me pointless to discuss why this is happening and try to create some conditions for podcasts to live together. My working hypothesis states that these podcasts that have left behind are interesting because for the most part individualist introverts, or podcasting them, do so over time. However, this is nothing more than an empirical observation, built on the observation of tidal waves and spitting at the ceiling. It’s hard for me to believe that, under certain conditions, podcasters who have come off the dormitory terminals to return there. Therefore, we take this idea as an axiom and go further without exposing it to ridicule.
On the topic of how to separate and assemble your podcast site, I even wrote a noteHowever, this is only one side of the coin, and one end of a stick. The second side is the need to somehow unite. I am well aware that at first glance this contradicts our working hypothesis, however, such a need brings podcasters together. There are several good reasons for combining. First of all, together it is easier to promote this relatively new business to the masses. And the field for promotion here is almost not plowed. Secondly, listeners are not satisfied with passive subscription and listening, but want to say their weighty word, and prefer not to go to 20 different places to say their comment on a particular podcast. Thirdly, some of the listeners prefer to perceive podcasts not by subscription and also wish they would find this whole thing in one place.
This applies to entities visible to the naked eye. If you take a closer look, you will see a number of tasks that podcasters, for all their tendency to scatter, would not mind putting on a reliable partner and would be happy to solve these problems together, well, to put it mildly, using some common services. I am talking primarily about ranking and statistics. With statistics, everything seems to be understandable without any special explanation, and podcasters will probably understand my desire to have reliable, competent statistics, considered in some understandable way, comparable to the statistics of other participants (although this is more likely for ratings) and used as an external, easily connected service. While I suggest you put the word “rating” on the stack, we will come back to it with all the inevitability of a falling jack.
There is one more problem concerning both podcasts and listeners. I’m talking about finding your audience, or, as some say, promoting on the one hand and finding a new “to listen” podcast on the other. This is not so relevant for well-known and popular podcasts, but very, very relevant for good, interesting but little-known podcasts. Something new and interesting can be found on the rpoda mentioned above, but oh, how difficult it is to do it. In fairness, on other services this is probably even worse. And although at the beginning I ridiculed the idea of “creating conditions”, but for these young and new conditions it is necessary to create. On the other hand, listeners should also be helped to find good new podcasts.
What am I getting at, you ask out loud? I will say, I will not hide. Then the time came to remove the word from the stack that we pushed a couple of paragraphs back there. Let me remind those who supplanted it - it was the word rating . It is on the rating that I have all hope as something that can help us in everything at once. No, “right away” is certainly a definite bend, but in the future it’s more likely than not.
Talk about ratings. I consider ratings and other all kinds of tops to be very useful and simply necessary in any creative field. Although I won’t say anything about any, but in our podcast, ratings are very necessary for a number of reasons that are quite obvious to me. The presence of an authoritative place that considers and serves everyone who wishes these ratings is very useful for podcasters as something that sets the bar and, if achieved, pleasantly tickles our huge ego. However, for listeners this is even more useful as a tool for selecting, filtering and selecting a podcast for your loved one.
Of course, we are talking about an unbiased, high-quality and technically correct rating, and looking ahead, even about a whole family of such benchmarks. It is absolutely essential that there is no doubt about its mathematical accuracy, resistance to markups and maximum reliability. Otherwise, the whole idea of a penniless is not worth it and worse than a compromised rating is only its absence. Although there is also a moot point, what is actually worse.
By the way, another consequence of the implementation of the ideas discussed will be the return to the tops and ratings of their value and attractiveness and washing out of a completely unsuccessful and even harmful, in my opinion, thesis, which is actively promoted at the party and partially on the shame about the shame of the rating and that being a little it’s indecent, and discussing it is just shameful. We need our Oscars, our Grammys, our hit parades! To get to the top should be an unprecedented achievement and an indicator that both colleagues and students have merit your hard, podcast hobby and tell you - “you are the best!” In this reality, the word "scribbler" or "karmodrocher" will not be indecent - they will simply be inappropriate.
So, we are talking about a service for centralized calculation and presentation of ratings, statistics, as well as the consolidation of podcast feeds and podcast comments. All your own will remain theirs for the podcast. The site will be where it was, the files will be laid out as they were laid out before, and students going to these sites will be able to listen, subscribe and comment as before. However, a certain “intersection point” will appear from where the listener will be able to listen to and comment on and evaluate the show, and will also be able to conveniently find new interesting podcasts. This will not be another podcast terminal, i.e. essentially a hosting and podcasting service. This will be a kind of meta-service that sets the task of creating a convenient podcast catalog, an honest rating and pleasant interaction with users (listeners and authors of podcasts).
If by this moment the question “what the hell is the goat of slaughter” has not yet been dispelled, and what does not suit what is today, I will answer briefly but ruthlessly :) Rpod is primarily a podcast terminal, with its own rules encouraging authors to live only there and ignoring , on the issue of rating, individual renegades. In addition, after his efforts to make the top 10 a rudiment not mentioned in a decent society, which they have threatened to remove the last year, then I think the contradiction is obvious.
Habr has a well-developed rating system and ratings, but it is completely unsuitable for podcasts. This is not surprising, since evaluating audio shows along with texts, translations, and other text materials, leading all this diverse economy to a common denominator, in my opinion, is a completely hopeless venture.
I can’t say a single positive word about podfm counting systems and rambler audio. what they think in my opinion reflects the weather on Jupiter, or at best on Mars. Those. Today, it does not seem to me that these services provide at least some sort of information relevant to our task. And the concept of manually rating podcasts on podfm (for this they shamelessly borrowed my term “correct podcasts”) also does not inspire optimism.
These are all my initial, staged thoughts for the voiced idea. I would like to talk at a conceptual level before discussing the technology of this service. Those. and from podcasters and listeners I would like to hear answers to the eternal question “do we need it?”, and also try to understand how close my vision of the problem is to yours and what to add and what to take away.
I hope that after discussion and exchange of views, we all will have a clearer picture, which allows us to start discussing and even designing the final system.
*This text may seem to you somewhat strange in the manner of presentation and most likely - reasonably. The fact is that, gaining all this, I, on the one hand, tried to systematize my thoughts, and on the other, I kept in mind that I would not mind saying this text. So it turned out such a hybrid of me squeaking with a speaker.
** In the original, the note was entitled: "To disperse in order to meet ." I renamed it for understandable, in the light of recent conversations, reasons.
played 394 times