-
Website
http://leoville.com/ -
Original page
http://leoville.com/2007/09/27/1035/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
mndoci
6 comments · 2 points
-
leolaporte
90 comments · 32 points
-
kingkool68
8 comments · 4 points
-
reechard
6 comments · 6 points
-
jerichobp
6 comments · 2 points
-
-
Popular Threads
What excites me about where we are heading is that people with good stories and the ability to tell them well are surfacing all over the web and giving the "real" broadcasters a run for their money. There are still good guys in there but they are buried under crap that has built up over years.
Whatever you call what you do Leo DON"T STOP!!
You create online media that should be called as they are, great content.
Can we now get rid of that saying at the beginning of your shows about netcasts; it drives me crazy! haha
Definitely linking to this. Great stuff, and you may have started to slightly, sort of, almost convince me that Podcast isn't a good word. Kind of.
Aren't there quite many examples of things that seem to have odd names, once You start thinking about it, and yet we use them because that is what we called them in the beginning and the name kinda stuck and now everyone knows what is meant even though it might not be the most descriptive one.
Maybe the name podcast will subside as 'shows' on the internet and the good old TV/radio will merge even more and/or become otherwise indistinguishable, but until that time please let us not agree on a new one each year. Podcast(ing) is just fine for now, I think - it's easy to remember and (as long as it's still necessary) sets it apart from traditional offerings. Because for now, there still IS a difference, You see?
Podcaster: "I produce shows."
Average Joe: "Really? What network?"
Podcaster: "Ah, no, on the internet."
Average Joe: "Oh, I see..."
I'm pretty sure that when there is no more differentiation to be made, the name podcast will fly off into obsolescence and take its rightful place somewhere on Wikipedia.a
leocast...
Renaming it would be like trying to get everyone in the US to call Q-Tips, "cotton swabs." You've decided to call them netcasts in hopes to separate the content from incorrect belief that you needed an iPod in order to listen; that obviously never caught on. Podcast just stuck, just like 'google' is now used to mean 'search.'
"Hey did you see the new James Bond podcast? Great special effects, huh? Katie Couric talked about it on the CBS evening podcast. My girlfriend left me a podcast about it on my voice mail."
I'm in the process of starting up a {net,pod}cast of my own, and haven't been able to decide which term to use. I'll likely go with podcast because in my experience it's a very recognizable term (used to work at an Apple reseller and most of the "switchers" that came in had heard of podcasts, but usually stared blankly at me if I referred to netcasts - go figure).
It will always be about the content. People will seek out good content. And as the big network content producers flood the net, it is up to networks like TWiT.TV and Revision3 to keep up the quality, and see it as a challenge to produce the best shows. I'll try to do my part!
Then came the idea that we just write text and call it a "TYPECAST".
So web pages should all now be called Typecasts...
Keep up the good work Leo.
I end up saying something like "..it's a radio or TV show you get on the computer".
It's a Show!
I wholeheartedly agree with you on this. I co-host a podcast with a few friends of mine and using the word "podcast" to describe it have confused people which are less literate than us.
I really liked your idea of calling it a netcast, but as you've pointed it out, we shouldn't confuse the distribution method with the content.
I hope that more podcasters take note of this reality and do something to change this. Putting less emphasis on the word "podcast" might be a good start.
Keep up the great work,
You're a genius!
Sincerely,
Paulius
I don't podcast either. I make a show!
I think you have a good point in that outside the "tech"community, the term is not well understood. This leads to a very large general audience not wanting to tune in because they think podcasts are just too "techie". Both in terms of topic and in terms of how to "receive" them. Of course, TV shows are named for the device that they are watched on. I think we need something to differentiate audio vs video to start with. I think Video Show (or Video Program) or Audio Show (or Audio Program) is what's needed. Either that or some cool new synonym of Video Program or Audio Program. Hence, "This Week in Tech Audio Show" or "MacBreak Weekly Video Show". I think a key goal needs to be the elimination of any reference to the medium used to distribute or watch (or listen to) the program. We should concentrate on "Media Neutrality". So as not to alienate half the potential listeners before you even tell them the subject of the program.
Dave.
Video Content - Videshow
Audio Content - Audishow
I fully support this idea and hope that if you do get this to change, that the trend will carry on to other mediums.
The question that comes next (sometimes) is "I don't have an iPod...." which is answered by "you don't need one to listen to the show [there's that word again] you can listen on the web page or you can download the MP3 which will play on any player.
But no matter what it's called the "show" takes some support to get some of the potential listeners. That's why this "medium" sucks. It's not simple enough for some people. Which is why we have a limited potential listener base.
Beyond the "whatever we call this podcast, netcast, whateverCast" is an even worse problem. Which is "large media" swooping in filling the top 25 most popular. As that happens we'll see less people seeking out the speciality shows.
I've been broadcasting over the internet for over 5 years, always hated the word "podcast".
Hated it so much, when we put together our newest project, if you go to the site, you'll see our shows marked as they should be...
1. T.V. Show
2. RADIO Show
3. JOURNAL
When we criss-cross the USofA the last thing I'm gonna say over a beer with plumber is "I'd like to record this for my podcast".
I think new-media will die if it doesn't market ourselves outside of the existing community.
A show could be created and distributed without RSS, using email.. (I know it is slow, but it works) so NETSHOW it is!
I have been banging on about content being the most important thing, and that the delivery needs to be transparent, not a focal point.
I've been a radio producer for more than 15 years, and I just see podcasting as a delivery method - and not a very clever method at that.
When my gran can switch MBW on as easily as she can BBC 1 (we're in the UK) we'll be nearer that transparency.
"Podcasting" and "Podcast" should refer to shows with iTunes-only distribution or anytime you are screening a certain 1950's Don Seigel movie.
Also, I should be a billionaire with a harem.
And the term, while still causing some confusion, is becoming mainstream enough (not as much as "blog" yet) that people at least have an idea what I'm talking about when I mention it. That has some value in itself, while just talking about an Internet-based audio or video show seems too vague, at least to me.
I'll stick with the word for now, at least in most contexts, but you have a good point.
https://www.godaddy.com/gdshop/blogcast/landing...
It can be just the option some people need.
p.s. This kind of stuff is driving the big networks crazy. I love it!
one thing I've seen on a few websites is a link to 'Automated Download' .. sorta describes a Podcast but sounds even worse imho.
tv show
internet show
simple no confusion.. make sence. I like it Leo ;)
Leo does a great job both as a producer in the sense of directing, engineering, editing, and publishing the content, as well as being the host of most of the shows, interviewing guests discussing news, etc.
From what I've done, and talked with others about, engineering, editing, and publication uses most of the same skills, just different tools related to the medium the content is on. You package the content as appropriate for the system that will utilize that content. That may mean connecting the output of a sound card to a phone line, or a broadcast transmitter, storing the recording on a web server, or ftp server, or streaming it.
That distribution part is rarely the critical aspect of the show itself. It does affect who the audience is, and as a result may affect the content, but in most cases that's decided far enough in advance that it does not directly impact the production itself. (It may affect advertising, and expenses...)
-Rusty
To the technically non-savvy public-at-large, ANY digital music player is an iPod. So calling something a "Podcast" is building on the awareness of that. It's simply good marketing.
Yes, language is a powerful thing. But just think of the word "show." How did that come to mean anything dealing with entertainment? I'm going to "show" you something, on stage... Theater. Show was simply easier to say. We're going to a show. Then radio, ironically, adopted it. You can't "show" something on radio. But because show had come to mean a program of entertainment, the programs started being called "shows." Radio shows. Then TV eclipsed radio, and the term stuck there. By all rights, we should be calling what we're doing "PodShows." but it sounds pretty dorky.
So somebody came up with "Podcast" rather than "Broadcast." And it had a ring to it and stuck. It has a visual element to the name; "Pod." Something you can associate with sound. And "Cast," a distribution system.
Netcast on the other hand has a muddier meaning to it. The internet is pretty huge and nebulous and means many things to many people. So adding "net" to the word "cast" muddies the meaning of the phrase.
Anyway, I think Podcast is here to stay, and we have to deal with it, like it or not. And unless someone huge like Microsoft starts promoting "netcasts" or "Microcasts" or "MSCasts" we're not going to see a change anytime soon.
And I think Podcasting has reached a plateau. Without reaching that critical "Tipping Point" of popularity. (Read that book, "Tipping Point." It's fantastic) I think as content producers we're doing as much as we can. There just needs to be that little thing that pushes it over the edge to the public-at-large.
Anyway, I'm rambling. So I'm just going to say that whatever one calls it, Leo, you're a big part of the independent net/pod/web/cast industry. So keep it up! :) I listen to 4 or 5 of your shows a week. They're awesome.
Also, kind listeners, check out my humble internets show at
http://weeklyradioaddress.com
and .. I forgot to give some props earlier .. Leo, I've been diggin' your style since I first saw Screen Savers years ago when I wasn't even living in the US yet ..
When I set up the linklist in my tumblog earlier this year I made a conscious decision to list iptv shows next to tv shows I am watching and audio podcasts next to terrestrial radio shows with no distinctions noted. (Although I admittedly listen to all the radio shows exclusively via podcasts at this point for timeshifting convenience)
If not, this is an empty post. Back up the words.
"Hello! My name is Leo Laporte. I’m a technology journalist and podcaster and this is my blog."
Q: if you can't call it a podcast, what is a podcaster?
Cheers,
Eric
Maybe Radio is wrong too, but it does communicate the idea.
How about SOIP (=Show Over IP)? ;)
Podcast - the name is here for good. Get used to it. Well that is what I think.
Rob W
I agree on the word webcast, or streamcast. Streamcast has a nice ring to it.
That said, netcasts is a name that really needs to go away. If it's really "shows" then you need to change your introduction: "Shows you love from people you trust"