What Will Kill Podcasting?

It’s probably not what you think

Photo: avdyachenko/Getty Images

TThe New York Times posted an article last week entitled “Have We Hit Peak Podcast?” For the record, though, I got a brief quote in the article, and I don’t think we have. I just think producing a quality, audience-focused podcast is hard. But podcasting as we know it is very much alive and well.

Still, the article did get me thinking — what could kill podcasting?

I have a thought.

First, here are a couple of things that people say will kill podcasting that will not kill podcasting. The first surfaced in this interview I did a few months back on KPCC, one of L.A.’s two NPR affiliates, shortly after Spotify’s purchases of Gimlet and Anchor, and right on the heels of the Luminary announcement. With so much money being plowed into the medium, I was asked if the arrival of “big money” podcasting would squelch the voices of independent podcasters and oft-unheard voices whose stories may be crowded out by better-funded, better-marketed content. And will that not “kill” the egalitarian spirit of the Pod?

My glib answer was, “Of course not.” Those voices will only be silenced if they, themselves, stop podcasting, right? Anyone can podcast. Anyone can listen to a podcast. That’s kind of the deal with podcasting. As a medium with an almost nonexistent barrier to entry, it’s one of the best ways for the less heard to be heard. Silence is a choice, not a thing caused by “Big Podcasting.”

Here’s what I didn’t say, though. No one has a right to an audience. Though your cause be just and your hearts be pure, you don’t get handed an audience. Not one single pair of earballs.

No one has a right to an audience.

And thus, podcasting simply becomes like every other medium known to humankind. No blogger has the right to an audience, either. Wilkie Collins out-Dickensed Charles Dickens and wrote the first detective story before Poe. But we read Dickens and Poe today, not Collins. Dickens had his own magazine. Go figure.

So, while I agree that it is difficult for some of the voices that may have been ignored or even silenced by other media to be heard in podcasting, the only thing that will kill podcasting is if those voices stop trying. And that has nothing to do with “Big Podcasting.”

The second thing I have heard will kill podcasting is somewhat related to the first: the loss of podcasting’s open, RSS-based standard. I would love to dispense with this by noting that the loss of wax-based cylinders didn’t destroy the recorded music industry, but hey — let’s air this one out a bit and see what we think.

The argument goes something like this: Podcasts that are distributed via paid platforms such as Luminary, or closed ecosystems such as Spotify, are not really podcasts. I’ll go right to the source for this opinion: Dave Winer, who introduced enclosures to the RSS standard, allowing audio to be distributed in a feed, just like text. In his brief post from 2018, Podcasts are Feeds, he notes:

If it doesn’t have an RSS feed it isn’t a podcast.

Please if you make a podcast, remember that.

Similarly, I have heard some podcasters from the earliest days of the medium comment that newer entities were trying to “kill the download” or otherwise cripple the open standards that form the plumbing of podcasting. I am sympathetic towards this line of thought. If RSS is “abandoned,” then the free and open nature of podcasting will be threatened.

Or maybe it’s just RSS that will die. After all, as Andreessen Horowitz’s Andrew Chen has pointed out, it kind of already has, at least in that it’s something we care to discuss:

This, of course, just means that we take it for granted — RSS is still the way many sites talk to each other — but I post this Google Trends snapshot to make my real point here: People don’t care.

Does This American Life cease becoming a podcast if it is consumed on Pandora? Technically, yes. It’s a stream, not a podcast. There are undoubtedly technocrats out there who, after finally getting their Luddite friend to try a podcast, will sharply correct their nomenclature when told about hearing the “latest podcast on Luminary.” As long as it has taken for the term podcasting to finally sink into the zeitgeist, is this really the hill we want to die on? As I have long said, if you believe podcasting is a format, formats die. If you believe it is a medium, like recorded music, then it evolves.

The atomic unit of the podcast is not RSS. It’s the show. (Alex Carter pointed out on Twitter that it’s actually the episode, which is fair.)

And anyway, it’s never been up to the creators. It’s always up to the audience. If I put my show on Spotify, it may no longer be a podcast by definition. But what do you think the average Spotify listener will call it? We’ve done a pretty good job normalizing what is a pretty wonky technical term: “podcast.” Why screw this up now?

So, no, I don’t think closed systems like Luminary and Spotify (and many more to come) are going to kill podcasting. If killing RSS kills podcasting, maybe podcasting wasn’t that strong to begin with. If you think that it has to come from a public feed to be called a “podcast,” I respect that. Let’s come up with a different name for non-RSS podcasting, then. I’ll spot you a few: Videodisc, 8-track, MiniDisc, LaserDisc, Betamax, VHS, Cassette, Cassingle, DAT, and MP2. (Ahh, MP2. Did we ever really even know you? I feel like we got off to a bad start.)

If “Big Podcasting” and “Walled Gardens” aren’t going to kill the medium, can anything? Or is podcasting ensured many more years of continuous global growth? I don’t think anything can kill podcasting, really, just like nothing really killed blogging. Some bloggers were killed, maybe.

But I do think that something could kill the podcasting industry — the fat end of the long tail:

Bad, cheap ads.

At their best, podcast ads are a magical blend of relevance, context, relationships, and the pixie dust of an engaged host. I have been scared into buying a SimpliSafe home security system by To Live and Die in L.A., even though I live on the 18th floor of a secure high-rise in Boston. The partnership between Sonos and the wonderfully produced audio of Blackout is about as perfect a marriage as you can get. And Bill Simmons has convinced me that I need to be using ZipRecruiter, though I am not sure why and for what. But I’ll start recruiting something.

These kinds of partnerships are the backbone of podcast advertising. Free from the broadcast radio mandate of pleasing everyone most of the time, podcasts can produce truly targeted content — and advertising — precisely suited to the right audience in the right context. It’s why podcast advertising has commanded, and deserved, a premium in recent years. In fact, it’s not even a premium, as the leading performance marketing vendors in the space will tell you — it’s worth higher CPMs and CPAs because it works really well.

But, warning signs are starting to crop up. In the past few months, I’ve heard a screaming local car commercial dynamically inserted before a national podcast. A network “tune-in” spot promoting live sports inserted as a mid roll, at about twice the volume as the podcast it was shoved into. Pre-recorded insurance company spots on some very risky podcasts. All exactly as I might have heard them on a local commercial radio station. And that is just the first manifestation of the problem.

If you are an avid podcast listener, you know what a turnoff this kind of advertising is. In fact, for many of you, you started listening to podcasts precisely to get away from this sort of thing. The intimate atmosphere of a podcast is not well suited to an ad that has, to be charitable, been produced for a very different environment. In no way am I saying that pre-recorded spots don’t have a place in podcasting. They do. They don’t work as well as host-read live ads, but they work, and they work well enough to be viable. We’ve got years of research at my company (Edison) that proves all of it. But using the same ads on podcasts that are used on commercial radio is, at best, unimaginative. At worst, it triggers something far, far more sinister.

I’m hearing about some of these ads being sold for really low CPMs — as low as 20% of the going rate. To a pure-play podcasting entity, rock-bottom CPMs are potentially an existential crisis. Podcast ads are worth more than that. The whole economy of the industry is based on that. But here’s the thing: If the larger media-buying shops start putting out RFPs for $5 buys, and one or more podcast networks take those buys, that sets the rate. And that’s a race to the bottom.

Put yourself in the shoes of a media buyer. You’ve got a buy from a leading national advertiser, and on the one hand, you’ve got a podcast network offering something risky — host-read content, or something bespoke to the show, at (say) a $25 CPM, or another network offering reach across all their shows, using your existing audio/radio creative, for a $5 CPM. Which is the safest bet for your media buying career?

Great content is expensive to produce, and great advertising native to that content’s form and delivery is well worth a premium. But if several large players in the space start taking poorly executed, irrelevant ads at ultra-low (for podcasting) CPMs, that’s going to have repercussions on the economic feasibility of great audio content.

And that, my friends, is what worries me the most.

SVP, Edison Research. Co-author of The Infinite Dial, The Podcast Consumer, The Social Habit, and other widely cited studies. Newsletter http://ihearthin.gs

Sign up for Pattern Matching

By OneZero

A newsletter that puts the week's most compelling tech stories in context, by OneZero senior writer Will Oremus. Take a look.

By signing up, you will create a Medium account if you don’t already have one. Review our Privacy Policy for more information about our privacy practices.

Check your inbox
Medium sent you an email at to complete your subscription.

The undercurrents of the future. A publication from Medium about technology and people.