Apple Podcasts Subscriptions
apple.com
apple.com
I listen to my podcasts in podcatchers that I want to use. I've switched pocatchers many times too. But platform lockin stops people from using what they want. Spotify is the biggest risk here.
DAI lets podcast networks deliver extremely weird ads. It's hard to describe, and I think it's kind of hilarious. One of the reasons why sponsorships on podcasts have been so lucrative in the past has been "impersonal personalization." If a podcast host runs a sponsor read, they often at least vet the sponsor and understand the product. They usually have personally used it, and on many podcasts, the sponsors are just products that the podcasters already use or actually support. Sponsors that sponsor tech podcasts target tech, which makes sense, and they're read by the hosts, usually. In contrast, DAI just brings back "commercials" with the added benefit of being privacy intrusive. I find it really creepy to listen to a podcast from the UK and get an ad for a car dealership a mile away. Yet, that's what DAI does. It's enough of a turn off that I wish I had an adblocker for podcasts, which says something.
The podcast medium has always been a niche, and I'm happy to see it growing. But it seems like the companies who want to grow it are going about it in some of the worst ways possible. Apple re-entering the fray is good competition wise, but it's scary to think that they might lockdown their podcast directory or pitch podcasts without RSS feeds. I'm sure they won't tolerate privacy invading analytics, but it's such a delicate balance that I'm fearful for the future.
Edit: Looks like Apple's premium features (like subscriber only content) are indeed behind DRM and only accessible in the Apple Podcasts app: https://podcasters.apple.com/support/899-set-up-your-show-fo....
This is also why conventional advertising (print and billboards) has remained sane compared to the race-to-the-bottom that online advertising has become.
The barrier to entry (in both price, vetting by the owner of the advertising spot, regulation and exposure to fact-checkers) usually meant that the advertised product isn't a total scam or overly malicious. It was a win-win both for the advertisers and potential customers.
If it’s pre-recorded (even if read by the hosts), I tend to skip it more often, since I’ve usually heard it before. I don’t think I’m interested in listening to any show with DAI at all.
True live reading of ads is hard, it doesn’t scale, and you don’t get micro-precise audience tracking, but it makes me pay more attention. That’s what should really matter.
I don't see very much of a problem if the podcasters aren't forced to use Apple exclusively or provide premium features exclusively on their platform. As it is now, many podcasts already do the same but their premium offering is buried somewhere on Patreon, which is a kludge. If they aren't barred from continuing premium features on other platforms (like the App Store where developers cannot even mention other payment options) I don't see too much of a problem, maybe that the other platforms might get neglected.
However, there's been lots of misinformation about Apple "killing RSS feeds." As far as I can tell, the majority of podcasts on Apple Podcasts will still be driven by RSS (hosted on 3rd-party platforms).
This video explains how it works now: https://youtu.be/g9ZVucX0J80
Found it: looks like Apple is taking a 30% cut. Yikes. https://twitter.com/mattmedeiros/status/1384561220909473800?...
With this and what Spotify is doing I foresee a future where podcasts are like streaming video: siloed across dozens of incredibly mediocre applications. Hopefully this doesn't lead to the locking down of the Apple Podcast Directory, which I believe is still the de facto standard source for most podcasts.
Are you thinking along the lines of people who make the podcast their full time jobs? Do you think the likelyhood of accomplishing this will be easier or harder for a given aspiring podcaster once a middleman controls their revenue, ability to distribute, and context of listening?
And honestly, I don't know the answer to that, all I know that is my experience is going to end up massively worse if authors keep choosing centralization.
> once a middleman controls their revenue, ability to distribute
Patreon already is their middleman that controls their revenue and ability to distribute premium content.
Some podcasts I listen to already do this via Patreon. The additional content is great for me as a listener and it has allowed a number of the creators to turn their hobby into part- or even full-time jobs. If Apple can make this easier than Patreon (where you have to figure out how to import a private feed into your podcast app), while still allowing the podcasts to exist outside their ecosystem, it's a win for everyone.
I hope they implement it in a way that third-party podcast clients can support it.
As a consumer of podcasts and as someone who pays for many services, I am not only unlikely to pay much for access to a podcast, but to attempt to juggle multiple listening platforms for podcast discovery and listening. If I can't get a podcast on the podcast app I use, I likely won't listen to it beyond a one-off episode that really interested me.
I used to listen to an occasional Joe Rogan episode before he switched to Spotify. I rarely catch it at all now, though I subscribe to Spotify. I just don't take the time to stay caught up on his guest list outside of my podcast app of choice.
I'm certainly fine with ads in podcasts.
But I don't begrudge podcasters that want to produce exclusive content to support their efforts and perhaps offer add-free podcasts.
Generally, I am not sure that no-ads means no-tracking, either. Though, that could certainly be a selling point to paying for a service of any kind.
It was news to me that what I thought was a simple audio file also came with a bunch of analytics/tracking. I previously thought analytics were limited to simple events (play, pause, subscribe, finish, etc.) collected on Apple's side, but apparently not.
Even Netflix started showing pre-rolls when they were at the height of their power. If a company starts thinking of its users as captive, I expect them to do what almost every other company does in that situation.
Things are pretty fractured in online streaming right now. So hey, maybe none of the providers get to the point where they feel like they have you.
It took Apple ~15 years to decide charging for podcasts.
I have no clue how much money I spend between Patreon, Youtube premium, Netflix, iCloud storage, Spotify, Dropbox, Notion, etc. God knows what else is on my CC bill.
Subscription fatigue is kicking in for me. Apple One subscription was trying to unify this into a single payment per month and now we have this.
"Why is my cable bill $100+? I should be able to subscribe to channels a la carte. They bundle everything together so they can charge me for channels I don't even watch!"
I might jump over to Apple Podcasts, if only as a step to keep Spotify at bay.
If any of the MBAs at Spotify happen to read HN, please please please reconsider your life choices. Spotify is committing slow-motion brand suicide.
Forcing a listener into an ecosystem may severely limit audience size. But if popular enough, it may work just fine for some creators, such as Stern, Rogan, etc.
Presumably to start their new subscription service. Pretty typical of mega corps, gather market share for free then change how it works once you have enough lock in.
They've had podcasts for more than a decade and barely touched it. I assume the new growth in podcasts recently spurred this more than some typical mega corp evil plan from the start.