文字起こし 🔗
WEBVTT
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.500
Today, I want to do a little reaction piece.
00:00:03.879 --> 00:00:09.179
A couple of weeks ago, Eric Nuzam? I have never
00:00:09.179 --> 00:00:11.500
said his last name out loud. Writer of The Audio
00:00:11.500 --> 00:00:14.519
Insurgent wrote an article called, Podcasting's
00:00:14.519 --> 00:00:19.019
pivot to video will end up in a charred mess
00:00:19.019 --> 00:00:24.039
of garbage fire wreckage. Now, last week I covered
00:00:24.250 --> 00:00:27.070
Is video worth it? I kind of gave you three questions
00:00:27.070 --> 00:00:30.070
there. Is it going to add a lot to your process?
00:00:30.530 --> 00:00:32.289
Is it going to add more to your process than
00:00:32.289 --> 00:00:34.710
it's worth? And what is the goal of your podcast?
00:00:35.049 --> 00:00:38.710
You know, if it's if if your goal is more views
00:00:38.710 --> 00:00:41.649
and it doesn't add a lot to your process, it's
00:00:41.649 --> 00:00:43.530
probably worth it. If it's newsletter signups
00:00:43.530 --> 00:00:45.210
and nobody's signing up to your newsletter on
00:00:45.210 --> 00:00:47.429
the audio version, maybe it's worth the test.
00:00:47.490 --> 00:00:49.829
If it adds a lot, maybe not. But also, are you
00:00:49.829 --> 00:00:53.100
going to play the YouTube game? And so I came
00:00:53.100 --> 00:00:57.100
across this article and I thought it was a really
00:00:57.100 --> 00:01:00.820
interesting approach. A podcast's, podcasting's
00:01:00.820 --> 00:01:03.899
pivot to video. And so he opens up this article
00:01:03.899 --> 00:01:06.000
by saying, you know, if you are around long enough,
00:01:06.060 --> 00:01:08.159
you start to know how stories are going to end.
00:01:08.299 --> 00:01:13.700
And then he, he pivots this towards podcasting's
00:01:13.700 --> 00:01:17.420
current obsession. with video. So he says, quote,
00:01:17.659 --> 00:01:19.900
the industry convinces itself that video isn't
00:01:19.900 --> 00:01:21.859
just an opportunity, but the future, the only
00:01:21.859 --> 00:01:25.459
future. And suddenly every podcast needs cameras,
00:01:25.799 --> 00:01:29.060
lighting, a studio, video editors, shorts, clips,
00:01:29.599 --> 00:01:32.219
and a YouTube strategy. And then he says, OK,
00:01:32.340 --> 00:01:35.219
admittedly, this part has already happened. All
00:01:35.219 --> 00:01:36.659
of this costs a lot of money. He's absolutely
00:01:36.659 --> 00:01:38.299
true. I'm not going to read the article verbatim,
00:01:38.319 --> 00:01:41.799
but he he basically talked about how this is
00:01:41.799 --> 00:01:46.409
transforming the audience, right? Video isn't
00:01:46.409 --> 00:01:48.250
allowed to steadily find an audience, develop
00:01:48.250 --> 00:01:50.590
its own creative language. It's transforming
00:01:50.590 --> 00:01:56.670
everything quickly. Everything is rushing. And
00:01:56.670 --> 00:02:00.310
then conclusions are jumped to too quickly. The
00:02:00.310 --> 00:02:03.530
show is
Load full transcript
blamed. Video didn't work. Budgets get
00:02:03.530 --> 00:02:07.189
cut. Teams disappear. Everything, everyone rushes
00:02:07.189 --> 00:02:09.770
towards the next bright, shiny object. But then
00:02:09.770 --> 00:02:13.090
he says this. A perfectly real opportunity ends
00:02:13.090 --> 00:02:15.990
up buried beneath the charred wreckage of an
00:02:15.990 --> 00:02:19.930
entirely preventable, rushed, and mistargeted
00:02:19.930 --> 00:02:23.349
pivot to video. And that's the part that I like
00:02:23.349 --> 00:02:29.210
about this, right? Is we are so reactionary as
00:02:29.210 --> 00:02:33.229
a people, right? A year ago, if you weren't using
00:02:33.229 --> 00:02:38.250
AI, you are falling behind. And now I feel at
00:02:38.250 --> 00:02:42.270
least more people are listening to the beat of
00:02:42.270 --> 00:02:48.009
my drum, which is AI is good for certain things.
00:02:48.449 --> 00:02:52.090
Now you do have what I'm calling AI blue -pilled
00:02:52.090 --> 00:02:55.409
people who think that AI is is everything in
00:02:55.409 --> 00:02:57.629
the future. And if you're not using it to do
00:02:57.629 --> 00:02:59.629
literally all of your work, then you're a fool.
00:03:00.289 --> 00:03:03.819
Those people are fools, but. We're seeing the
00:03:03.819 --> 00:03:05.879
same thing in video, right? Oh, Apple Podcasts
00:03:05.879 --> 00:03:08.259
supports video. You need to have video. Netflix
00:03:08.259 --> 00:03:12.060
is calling the Pete Davidson show a podcast,
00:03:12.479 --> 00:03:15.479
even though it's only on Netflix and only available
00:03:15.479 --> 00:03:19.280
on video. And I am not one of those people who
00:03:19.280 --> 00:03:23.479
says video is not really a podcast, right? I
00:03:23.479 --> 00:03:29.819
think the idea of a podcast is that it is ubiquitous,
00:03:30.039 --> 00:03:32.960
right? It's you can... your audience can consume
00:03:32.960 --> 00:03:36.860
it where and when they want. And if that's Netflix,
00:03:36.900 --> 00:03:40.280
then great. But if I can only get the Pete Davidson
00:03:40.280 --> 00:03:42.939
show on Netflix, then it's a Netflix show. It's
00:03:42.939 --> 00:03:47.919
not a podcast, right? You wouldn't call a House
00:03:47.919 --> 00:03:51.520
of Cards or something more recent than Bridgerton
00:03:51.520 --> 00:03:55.460
a podcast. That would be crazy, right? So I think
00:03:55.460 --> 00:04:00.319
that like there is this rush and I agree with
00:04:00.409 --> 00:04:02.770
Eric's assessment here that people are rushing,
00:04:02.830 --> 00:04:09.169
but also there is a perfectly good opportunity,
00:04:09.449 --> 00:04:11.949
right? So he says a couple of other things in
00:04:11.949 --> 00:04:15.030
this article that I just want to highlight. Any
00:04:15.030 --> 00:04:17.389
time media starts making decisions to solve their
00:04:17.389 --> 00:04:20.410
problems, instead of the audience problems, things
00:04:20.410 --> 00:04:24.009
start to go off. This is such an important point,
00:04:24.170 --> 00:04:28.750
right? Because your content should be in the
00:04:28.750 --> 00:04:34.259
service of your audience. Nobody is going to
00:04:34.259 --> 00:04:38.740
watch or listen or read something that sucks.
00:04:39.040 --> 00:04:42.740
And we know we have such limited time and there
00:04:42.740 --> 00:04:48.639
are so many avenues for content now that you
00:04:48.639 --> 00:04:52.180
need to do something good. And I don't buy into
00:04:52.180 --> 00:04:56.259
the fact that or to the idea that attention spans
00:04:56.259 --> 00:04:59.069
are getting shorter. Christopher Nolan just had
00:04:59.069 --> 00:05:03.009
his biggest grossing movie ever, and it's three
00:05:03.009 --> 00:05:06.089
hours. And we routinely see this, right? Long
00:05:06.089 --> 00:05:09.269
movies are killing it at the box office. People
00:05:09.269 --> 00:05:12.350
aren't saying, oh, it's too long. As long as
00:05:12.350 --> 00:05:15.269
it's good and compelling content, people will
00:05:15.269 --> 00:05:18.149
consume it. So the first thing you need to do
00:05:18.149 --> 00:05:20.889
is serve your audience. And if your audience
00:05:20.889 --> 00:05:23.529
is begging for video, then by all means do video,
00:05:23.850 --> 00:05:27.490
right? But if you are degrading the experience
00:05:27.490 --> 00:05:31.269
by adding video by making, you know, I made a
00:05:31.269 --> 00:05:34.269
mistake in last week's episode. I haven't edited
00:05:34.269 --> 00:05:36.970
it yet. So you'll know before me at this point
00:05:36.970 --> 00:05:39.069
if I took it out. But like I reference something
00:05:39.069 --> 00:05:41.050
on the screen and I try really hard not to do
00:05:41.050 --> 00:05:43.709
that because it makes the listening experience
00:05:43.709 --> 00:05:46.949
worse. Right. And so this is a really important
00:05:46.949 --> 00:05:50.370
thing. Right. I think people see, oh, I don't
00:05:50.370 --> 00:05:52.490
have a lot of downloads. YouTube has an algorithm.
00:05:52.550 --> 00:05:54.829
I should add video to solve my problems. But
00:05:54.829 --> 00:05:57.100
that's that's not going to solve your problems.
00:05:57.220 --> 00:05:59.779
You still need to make something that serves
00:05:59.779 --> 00:06:03.240
the audience. So that's number one. And we see,
00:06:03.300 --> 00:06:04.939
I see this all the time, right? I want to start
00:06:04.939 --> 00:06:07.699
a podcast and get sponsors and make money. Okay,
00:06:07.699 --> 00:06:09.720
that's a little bit like the underpants gnomes
00:06:09.720 --> 00:06:12.300
from from South Park, right? We steal underpants
00:06:12.300 --> 00:06:14.740
question marks profit. The question marks in
00:06:14.740 --> 00:06:18.600
this case is who were you serving? And are you
00:06:18.600 --> 00:06:20.759
going to get sponsors? Maybe. I'm a sponsorship
00:06:20.759 --> 00:06:24.139
coach. I should say yes, definitely. But you
00:06:24.139 --> 00:06:27.279
need to solve an
audience's problems before any
00:06:27.279 --> 00:06:30.720
of that. And video is not going to magically
00:06:30.720 --> 00:06:33.620
solve your audience's problems. So, the other
00:06:33.620 --> 00:06:37.300
thing that is mentioned in this article is if
00:06:37.300 --> 00:06:40.279
video were replacing audio as the preferred podcast
00:06:40.279 --> 00:06:42.019
experience, we would expect to see established
00:06:42.019 --> 00:06:45.879
audio audiences migrate to video once it becomes
00:06:45.879 --> 00:06:48.560
available. And he says this isn't what he is
00:06:48.560 --> 00:06:50.980
seeing. Talking to producers across a lot of
00:06:50.980 --> 00:06:54.180
shows, video results are largely Modest. This
00:06:54.180 --> 00:06:56.720
is something that I found last week. I know this
00:06:56.720 --> 00:06:59.540
is anecdotal for me. I haven't done the legwork.
00:07:00.319 --> 00:07:05.459
I assume as I record, well, as this episode comes
00:07:05.459 --> 00:07:09.680
out, podcast movement is next week and I suspect
00:07:09.680 --> 00:07:13.879
we'll get some data from Sounds Profitable about
00:07:13.879 --> 00:07:18.139
this very thing. So we'll see. But according
00:07:18.139 --> 00:07:21.660
to Nielsen, 90 % of all podcast consumption is
00:07:21.660 --> 00:07:24.050
still audio. Right? So again, serve your audience.
00:07:24.350 --> 00:07:29.110
And then he breaks down a few things that video
00:07:29.110 --> 00:07:33.029
podcasting has three jobs. And so again, I like
00:07:33.029 --> 00:07:34.050
this a lot. I'm going to read this. I'm going
00:07:34.050 --> 00:07:35.850
to link the article in the show notes because
00:07:35.850 --> 00:07:37.350
I'm not reading the whole thing. I'm giving you
00:07:37.350 --> 00:07:40.730
the highlights. I strongly recommend you read
00:07:40.730 --> 00:07:44.490
this. Video's first job is discovery. Absolutely
00:07:44.490 --> 00:07:47.209
true. Video's second job is expansion. Everyone
00:07:47.209 --> 00:07:51.329
assumes that new audience will be just more people
00:07:51.329 --> 00:07:53.850
who demographically and psychographically resemble
00:07:53.850 --> 00:07:56.089
the current audience, and that is rarely true.
00:07:56.209 --> 00:07:58.449
I'm reading directly from the article now. Video
00:07:58.449 --> 00:08:02.910
podcast reviewers are different people who come
00:08:02.910 --> 00:08:05.910
to the show with different needs. Really good
00:08:05.910 --> 00:08:09.750
and important. There are podcasts where I will
00:08:09.750 --> 00:08:13.670
switch between listening via audio or video.
00:08:13.769 --> 00:08:16.250
And I really so Seth Meyers Lonely Island podcast
00:08:16.250 --> 00:08:18.709
is one of them or the lonely Island Seth Meyers
00:08:18.709 --> 00:08:21.389
podcast is one of them I will listen basically
00:08:21.389 --> 00:08:23.470
up into the point where I start where they start
00:08:23.470 --> 00:08:27.649
watching the short Then I will watch or I'll
00:08:27.649 -->
00:08:29.730
stop listening and watch the short because I
00:08:29.730 --> 00:08:31.930
think that's important context I was doing this
00:08:31.930 --> 00:08:33.929
with John Boy media podcast for a while because
00:08:33.929 --> 00:08:36.870
they would show a video They do the thing right?
00:08:36.970 --> 00:08:39.570
Like if you're only listening, I recommend you
00:08:39.570 --> 00:08:42.049
go over to the YouTube channel. I don't think
00:08:42.200 --> 00:08:46.940
that is good podcast content, but they are and
00:08:46.940 --> 00:08:50.600
have always been a YouTube first media company.
00:08:50.759 --> 00:08:55.100
Like they they live stream their shows on YouTube
00:08:55.100 --> 00:08:58.019
a lot of the time. And so that's just part of
00:08:58.019 --> 00:09:01.159
their DNA. And then video's third job is monetization.
00:09:01.620 --> 00:09:05.480
Even though podcasting has priorities, bass ackwards,
00:09:05.759 --> 00:09:08.399
he says, monetization is still a priority, just
00:09:08.399 --> 00:09:10.879
not the primary one. So, again, I would agree
00:09:10.879 --> 00:09:13.789
with this, right? if you can launch a show. And
00:09:13.789 --> 00:09:17.389
you know, YouTube has just made it harder to
00:09:17.389 --> 00:09:21.269
monetize. They have increased, doubled, in fact,
00:09:21.429 --> 00:09:24.490
the number of watch hours and subscribers. So
00:09:24.490 --> 00:09:29.990
they're making it harder. And that's why I suspect
00:09:29.990 --> 00:09:35.830
he made this third, because you need good content
00:09:35.830 --> 00:09:40.450
that serves an audience. that can get discovered
00:09:40.450 --> 00:09:45.350
and expanded via video. So maybe this is like
00:09:45.350 --> 00:09:48.049
the second part of last week's episode where
00:09:48.049 --> 00:09:51.590
I kind of talked about is podcasting worth it?
00:09:51.850 --> 00:09:54.629
But is video podcasting worth it? I should say.
00:09:54.690 --> 00:09:58.730
But this is really important. You need to align
00:09:58.730 --> 00:10:03.009
with your audience. Video is not some magic wand
00:10:03.009 --> 00:10:06.789
that is going to solve your podcasting problems.
00:10:07.230 --> 00:10:11.090
You can only do that by focusing on your audience.
00:10:11.149 --> 00:10:14.429
And that means talking to them, solving their
00:10:14.429 --> 00:10:18.429
problems, not asking AI what their problems are,
00:10:18.769 --> 00:10:21.409
or just assuming, I want to talk about this.
00:10:21.429 --> 00:10:23.929
It's going to be a casual show. You should solve
00:10:23.929 --> 00:10:26.909
problems for most people. I mean, and if you're
00:10:26.909 --> 00:10:28.610
an entertainment show, you are solving someone's
00:10:28.610 --> 00:10:31.490
problem, right? It's boredom. It's curiosity.
00:10:31.870 --> 00:10:34.350
Right. There's there's some problem there that
00:10:34.350 --> 00:10:35.710
you're trying to solve, even if you're not a
00:10:35.710 --> 00:10:38.110
business focused podcast, which is mostly who
00:10:38.110 --> 00:10:42.389
I help. Right. So if you do want more tips for
00:10:42.389 --> 00:10:45.409
how to improve your process to build what I'm
00:10:45.409 --> 00:10:49.110
calling solo ops for conscientious AI usage.
00:10:49.350 --> 00:10:51.870
Right. So it's doing the tasks and not the craft.
00:10:52.169 --> 00:10:54.529
Head over to streamlines .fm slash join to join
00:10:54.529 --> 00:10:56.929
my newsletter. You'll get lots of goodies, but
00:10:56.929 --> 00:10:59.919
mostly regular tips on. how to build systems,
00:11:00.039 --> 00:11:01.799
how to focus on your audience, how to do the
00:11:01.799 --> 00:11:04.179
important work, and take the grunt work off of
00:11:04.179 --> 00:11:07.200
your plate. But that's it for this episode of
00:11:07.200 --> 00:11:10.299
The Streamlined Podcaster. Definitely check out
00:11:10.299 --> 00:11:13.360
that article. It's over at audioinsurgent .substack
00:11:13.360 --> 00:11:16.159
.com. I will link it in the show notes as well.
00:11:16.460 --> 00:11:18.559
And until next time, I hope you find some space
00:11:18.559 --> 00:11:19.519
in your week.