Here’s a self-evident truth; audio generally
has to be interesting to grab the attention of the listener. Whether it’s a
radio commercial, a DJ talking or even a sonic logo... it needs to cut through
fairly quickly to make me want to give it some of my ‘ear time’.
This should also be true of podcasts.
The reason I mention this is I’m currently
working on a project with my colleague Dan McGrath, advising a company wishing to develop an audio podcast
strategy. They work in the technology sector, and as part of my research I
thought I’d listen to some of the other ‘techy’ podcasts that are out there and
seemingly doing well at the moment. And boy was I surprised.
The vast majority of them are really badly
produced, badly presented and just badly thought out. Sorry – but it’s true.
Now, I know that I’m applying radio
production standards to what are (mostly) plainly not radio shows, but I don’t
think that’s a genuine excuse for badly produced audio. The same principle
should still apply. It should interest the listener and grab their attention,
and make them want to listen more, or subscribe or come back for more at a
later date. Many of them had me hitting the stop button. And, for the record,
it’s not that I wasn’t interested in the subject either. I’m as geeky about
technology as the next geeky guy with glasses!
So do the listeners of these podcasts
merely ‘put up’ with the poor quality, as that’s the price to pay for getting
niche content? I guess so. Or is it the case that the very ‘DIY’ nature of some
podcasts are intrinsic to their appeal? Has the democratisation of the means of
production meant that now anyone with a laptop and a £9.99 mic from Maplin can
be an ‘audio content producer’, and therein lies the appeal? Is the allure for listeners
to these that the media is no longer controlled by the elite, but by the
masses? Possibly... but if the masses could make it sound a bit better and try
a bit harder, then that would be lovely thank you very much.
I’m
looking forward to the session at the forthcoming nextrad.io conference called “Top
5 Reasons Why Podcasts Are Different To Radio” presented by Francesca
Panetta, who is Head of Audio at The Guardian. She should know, as she
used to work for BBC Radios 3 and 4, and is now heading up the Guardian's audio offerings,
which are on the whole pretty good. I hope she’ll point out the positive
differences that podcasts have with radio, but still at least want to maintain
a minimum quality threshold.
I really like podcasts. The
on-demand world of speech content is now a very rich and varied one, with every
conceivable topic covered, and the fact that more and more people are consuming
audio content is a great thing.
And although podcasts do have
differences to radio, isn’t it funny how some of the most popular podcasts with
consumers are just re-packaged radio shows, and if they’re not... they have
some really solid radio production techniques behind them.
So – a plea to larger FMCG brands
who have podcasts, and other corporate or semi-corporate entities who have branded audio content
in this arena. Please do think about how the quality of these reflect on your
brand, and don’t settle for something that’s sub-standard just because “it’s only a
podcast”. Produce quality and they will return, and return again.
And then the
relationship with your consumers can really begin.
Posts
