Hacker News Reader

Comment by jetrink | Hacker News Reader

I think this whole piece is a pretty bizarre exercise.

> I consider [podcasts] an enemy of music. [...] With all of the world’s unheard songs beckoning us with their endless mystery, why would anyone choose to waste their precious listening hours on a podcast?

This isn't just comparing apples and oranges, it's arguing that apples are the enemy of oranges. "With so many delicious oranges uneaten, why should anyone waste their time consuming a mealy, flavorless apple?" At least apples and oranges are both types of fruit. I don't think there is anything to be learned by debating the relative worth of two different types of media. He has his reasons for disliking podcasts, but they sound very personal. If he is annoyed by how podcast hosts talk, for example, that is simply how he experiences it. Others will have a completely different perception.

View on HN

The commenters over there are falling into the same trap hard. So many variations of "Why would I listen to this when I could just read the information quicker?" Who are these people who cannot fathom that people may want to listen to something mildly informative while they are otherwise unable to focus on reading? Or just have an easier time absorbing information audibly rather than visually? Or even that someone would listen to something because hearing another human voice provides a value beyond pure information?

Really though, I just wonder how valuable these people think their time really is? I assume their "I need to be absorbing optimal information at all times" shtick is supposed to come across as smart, but it just comes across as a little slow.

It's part of the whole tech self-important "Always be hustling" schtick. The same people who want an abstract at the beginning of every article that isn't written in inverted pyramid style.

That said, I've never liked talk radio (or even radio in general) very much. And am certainly not a fan of meandering chit-chat style podcasts. A lot of podcasts could also probably stand to be shorter as could many presentations. But even a simple 20-30 minute interview conveys information and nuance in a way that a transcript or article doesn't necessarily.

ADDED: There are of course also produced shows that are more than just the words spoken just as a film is more than a paragraph synopsis of the plot.

It's not about valuable time, it's about the low bandwidth. That's why I also, in general, don't watch Youtube videos that try to explain theoretical concepts. It's like watching paint dry, when I could just read it in a small fraction of the time if the material is available in written form. At least Youtube videos are useful where the visual is important, e.g. repair instructions. Podcasts don't even have that. The only time (in my particular situation) where podcasts could be an alternative is when I'm driving my car, but my commute is very short, so in practice there's never a time where I would want to listen to a podcast. How each of us feel about bandwidth is, of course, completely individual.

Just to provide a counter experience, there are so many moments in my life that I find more enjoyable now by "low bandwidth" consumption. Washing dishes, cooking, weekly and even daily yard work, dog walks, commuting of all sorts, exercise. I can fill all of these moments with news or laughter or critical thought or just another voice to have in the background keeping me company in what would otherwise be a very singular task.

With that said, I'm not a music person, I never have been, so I don't turn to music often for entertainment and don't really find much joy in it. I also learn extremely well from spoken word and visuals and much less-so from written (probably why I like youtube videos that explain things).

You can speed up videos. 3x is easy and efficient.

I forgot to add that in addition to the bandwidth issue, it's also about the sequential nature of podcasts and videos. I like to move back and forth when I'm learning something. E.g. an explanation that I want to re-read after reading something more, for a better understanding. So for me it's the slow input _and_ the sequential nature of audio and video that I don't like, for the most part. With some execptions, of course.

It's not solely about 'time value'. I have an inherent dislike for reiteration and meandering, which is easy to skip in written works by scanning ahead. But with podcasts I have to do a skip-dance without cues.

On the contrary I've found that listening to air traffic control recordings is relaxing and helps with task-concentration because it follows strict procedures and no-one wastes time blethering. It's like a verbal metronome. You really have to make your own if you want high quality, though, since LiveATC is an earsore.

He's outraged because he can be. Personally, I think it would be better to be against pointless written opinion pieces.

Is he though or is this an attempt to discredit a competitor? This guy is a journalism in a era when newspapers and other forms of tradition media are dying. Journalism is seen as a joke, partisan, propaganda, and even an enemy of the State by large swatches of the public.

Lol and articles like these are exactly the reason why people feel this way

Yea, I'm not going to listen to music I want to listen to for the first time on a crowded noisy tube thanks.

As if where you listen to some music the "first time" matters?

(Like the first time one has sex, which has rom-coms and romantic fiction instill on us that it has to be "special"?)

I've discovered and first heard all kinds of great music on the tube and other casual places, and didn't hurt my later re-listening and appreciation of them...

I dunno, I have an intense fandom for certain artists and when they release new music I like to listen with my higher quality headphones, at home in peace and quiet to really take it in as fully as possible.

Though this is only for maybe 3 projects a year so it isn't how I listen to all new music.

I guess this comes to personal rites etc.

I like to do that too, but if you're anything like me, most of your early music, you listened in high school or college in whatever kind of crappy quality (e.g. downloaded mp3 or crappy cassette copy depending on age), random conditions, etc, but still connected fine with it.

I think they are actually apples to apples when you consider that the apples are 'attention' and that we live in an attention economy where every piece of media is trying to maximize the time you spend with it. So what he's saying is that your attention is being wasted on shitty podcast, instead of trying to find good unheard music. I disagree with this, because I find that knowledge should get more attention than art/entertainment. But that's not to say that there aren't shitty time-wasting podcasts, but you can say the same about music.

> "With so many delicious oranges uneaten, why should anyone waste their time consuming a mealy, flavorless apple?"

Well, you're not wrong, apples are a garbage fruit. And podcasts interviewing people via cellphone lines is a garbage podcast.

If any podcaster is worried about inconveniencing their guests by asking for quality recordings, consider that the viewership takes a lower view of their guests when audio quality drops: https://psychcentral.com/news/2018/04/14/scientists-often-di.... You practically owe it to your guests to insist on a quality line to avoid disadvantaging themselves in the marketplace for ideas.

I'm fine with the rest of your comment, but no, no NO you just don't get to say apples are a garbage fruit without contention, just no. Apples are great. Not all (I'm looking at you, Red Delicious), but I'd much rather eat an apple than an orange. (I'd much rather have fresh orange juice than any form of apple juice, if that takes the edge off my orange-hate.)

> Not all (I'm looking at you, Red Delicious)

Red Delicious is the American platonic ideal of an apple. When I think of all the apple's I've been given in childhood, they were all RD. Any vigorous defender of apples has to answer for the crimes against humanity that we call "Red Delicious". After all, one rotten apple spoils the bunch.

If you haven't had one yet, one of my recent favourites is an Ontario-grown Red Prince apple. There should probably just be a whole thread for apples as that's a subject I could get into!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com