Hacker News Reader

Comment by bambax | Hacker News Reader

> or just relied on people adding his URL manually to Apple Podcasts, but come on. Nobody would do that

But why would nobody do that? How hard is it? Maybe it's too much trouble for something you don't care about, but for a content you enjoy, doing one copy-paste isn't very difficult?

Personally I resent Spotify for the whole move to podcasts.

There is still so much to do with music (streaming quality, music videos, lyrics, chords...)

Instead they choose to publish recordings of guys talking -- not experts in any subject, but random guys who are pretty ignorant of everything, and who, because they don't know anything, tend to have a very political conversation. This isn't art. This is just another way of wasting time.

As a result, Spotify is now in the business of policing content. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

View on HN

> There is still so much to do with music (streaming quality, music videos, lyrics, chords...)

Correct, but:

1. Everyone wants to be the Netflix of podcasts. 2. It's premium advertising real estate. The ad formats you can chuck into a podcast have higher CPM.

Caveat re 2.: I'm not sure how much advertising contributes to Spotify revenue, so take this one with a grain of salt. It used to be the next hot thing in adtech when I worked in the industry before 2021.

Remember: why charge the user directly, when you can charge them indirectly using a bunch of random middlemen (DAAST, VAST, potato, potahtoh)!

> Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Example of a slightly less stupid* game: The Apple Podcasts app. The UX is mediocre, but the ability to pay for series/bundles is something I'd like to see more. Just let me pay for the content. As much as podcast content can be decoupled from the user agent, I'd like to see the same done with payments.

* or differently stupid

> 2. It's premium advertising real estate. The ad formats you can chuck into a podcast have higher CPM.

Not for long. I'm already starting to skip algorithmically inserted ads in podcasts because they're annoying claptrap like terrestrial radio ads. Adtech companies don't just come along and "use" ad space. They actively ruin its original value with their tactics.

I remember a few years ago that Spotify made a big deal about "not censoring explicit songs" and not even giving me the option, so if I had music playing randomly at some point it would blast out some curse-laden song while I'm driving with the kids.

I'm far more concerned with the terrible search function which puts all sorts of user created crap at the top that pretends to be what it's not, rather than album names.

Not sure if I agree that being exposed to explicit content sometimes as a child is on the same level of damage as constant vaccine misinformation/disinformation.

Wow

Does Spotify require you to listen to podcasts? Not sure why your angry that a streaming company would expand into another genre without getting your stamp of approval for what the podcasts discuss and the qualifications of the podcasters. Seems like a perfectly reasonable business move to target curious listeners.

By the way, based on your standards main stream news and most media content should be discouraged. The vast majority of it is “guys talking -- not experts in the [any] subject, but random guys who are pretty ignorant.”

You're right, I don't care much for mainstream news either, especially pundits who are just noise making machines with zero added value.

But yes, as a user and subscriber, Spotify's business decisions matter to me. Because of their decision to host podcasts, which are low-content content and have nothing to do with music, I can't listen to artists who choose to dissociate themselves with that.

It's a loss for me, and the culprit is Spotify.

So, why aren’t people more upset about mainstream news putting out blathering nonsense in 2-3 minute sound bytes about the same topics almost verbatim. Instead, there is an uproar over a podcaster that releases long interviews of people across many subjects (including controversial ones). We should be encouraging more discourse like we see on Rogan’s podcast, not berating it, especially if you prefer deeper discussion without fear of backlash by “squeaky wheel” personalities like Neil Young. Keep on rocking in the free world!

I don't have a problem with Joe Rogan. I never listened to any of his podcasts. He can say what he wants any way he wants. I don't care.

I have a problem with a service that I thought was all about music, hosting talk shows -- and talk shows that are US-centric, and controversial -- because as a consequence, said service becomes involved in a myriad of controversies and serves less music.

Of course I don't control what Spotify does; I will simply need to take my business elsewhere. It's not the end of the world; but it's annoying.

Understood. Yours is a consumer choice, not a political one. I have no problem with more content, but I do have a problem with algorithms and apps pushing content to me that ignores my preferences and/or ability to customize my searches for new content. This is an implementation detail though, not an issue with content I may dislike or not agree with.

I'm mad at Spotify because their recommendations used to be great.

Now the home page is a bunch of podcasts they're trying to get me to listen to. Even though I've never listened to a single podcast through them.

It's really annoying that recommendations, which are the primary reason I use Spotify, have gotten worse, and the UI has gotten worse, and I now have to scroll past podcasts just to get to music. I cancelled my account because of it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com