Show HN: A Reddit style site to discuss podcast episodes
podbabble.com
podbabble.com
The value of Podbabble is the intersection of podcast episodes that 1) people are talking about and 2) I have listened to. Right now the only way for me to find that intersection is to start from (2), searching for every podcast I can think of, looking at several of the latest episodes and seeing there's no comments. It would be great to start from (1), so I can see right away which episodes people are discussing and see which ones might be relevant to me.
Also, it seems like the only way to add a podcast to "my podcasts" is with an RSS feed link? Not from a link on the podcast's page I searched for? I'm unsure on what the desired setup workflow is.
I recommend reading Reddit's origin story. There needs to be interesting content to get the first users to create content.
Maybe the goal is to sell podcasters and get them to bring their audience? Even then I think you need a good home page experience to hook those listeners.
Keep them separate, because the world needs to get back to what we had with forums where people interested in subjects sought ought a place to discuss them. Back then actual discussions happened and the entire world wasn’t a giant flamewar.
If I host a new forum and just leave it on the internet, will someone create a account and post when there's zero messages there? Unlikely.
Ergo, founders of a social site need to seed it with interesting enough content that the first users will stick around.
The niche of a site like this is to not be going for growth at the expense of intellectual discussion.
I'm referencing an example of a broader principle and you're interpreting it as a specific recommendation. Stack overflow overcame the empty website problem by having two founders each with widely followed blogs. That brought enough users on day 1 to generate content. In some way, the problem must be dealt with because an empty website doesn't go anywhere.
> The niche of a site like this is to not be going for growth at the expense of intellectual discussion.
This as much depends on the founder's goals as any growth tactic. Not all podcasts are intellectual.
Things that could be improved: the site is a bit slow and I got at least one broken image - I imagine it is getting HN'd right now, though, so I'll check again later. I also agree with the main page being unfriendly - if it weren't for the side bar, I would have probably never tried it. I also wanted to go to a show's full list of discussions, but I didn't find a way.
Overall I like it.
That said, until it reaches some critical mass which adds value to creators in terms of discovery and community, asking small time creators to fork out 360USD per year is quite a big ask.
Especially given that (1) podcasters would be the primary driver of users to this service, and (2) podcasters will also be doing all the moderation work.
Seems like it would make more sense that an author could create an account on the site and then link podcasts to it. Triggering an email to podcast authors because I selected their podcast in a drop down feels a bit spammy.
Congrats on the launch, I have a couple of questions. Is it only for discussions around recent episodes? Or is it just that the specific podcasts i've searched for don't list all episodes?
Not a good look in terms of data quality here.
Visually, this is more like SoundCloud than Reddit, though that's probably because there's no discussions more than 2 comments deep to notice the difference.
Also, what value does the acast privacy link for each episode provide that wouldn't alternatively be provided by some header element?
Also, I tried claiming my podcast and commenting but neither seems to have worked for me. Perhaps because of high traffic?
I assume that I could make an anon comment here and then share a link to my comment on social media?
EDIT: someone mentioned that podcasters have to pay for access — if this is true, would it mean that I could only comment on certain podcasts? This would be a huge limitation for me, and would make me very unlikely to spend much time on the site.
I would recommend letting people comment on any podcast, but if podcasts want to show up on your topical lists then they have to pay. There are probably other better ways to feature gate; this is just one idea.
Is the commenting system overloaded? Do I need to login first (it doesn't say so)? Does it need to be able to talk to Stripe the payment network to place comments (TrackerControl app shows that as the only detected tracker while using the site)? I didn't include links or markup, so if it was detected as spam (again: there's no mention of that, no error, no nothing) then I'd not know why.
Sign out of reddit and take a look at the homepage. You will see something very different from your homepage. It is a much easier interface to get started with. I lurked on reddit's homepage for a year before I ever created an account or looked into specific subreddits that might interest me.
But the experience around it can and should definitely be a lot smoother.
1. People do their podcast listening on other platforms/players - what's the incentive for them to comment/post on Podbabble?
2. Podcasts have existing community/discussion on other platforms (FB, Discord, etc) that are free - what would motivate them to pay this service?
3. Could you demonstrate that Podbabble drives growth/downloads? That would motivate hosts and podcast marketers
I'm having a hard time believing everyone who produces a podcast is happy to have their shows played through a site that is looking to make money from their content.
you select the exact time, and you put your comment
everyone listening to that music could see what people say about that very specific moment, as they listen
encouraging podcast creators to time their podcast would allow platforms to offer precise comment system that users can consume and contribute to consistently
but nobody cares, because the people who build the platforms are not users, it's not built organically, therefore they don't understand these kind of special things
I can see a significant amount of scepticism in the comments, and I think that much of the feedback is valuable and important, such as the lack of a 'point of difference', interface, value-add above existing solutions, etc.
But, a little disappointed with the pessimism in the comments in general. Someone has gone out of their way to build something from scratch and, regardless of whether it ticks all the boxes at the moment, I think that deserves positivity and a big 'well done'.
Projects rarely ever launch 100pc perfect -- or even 20pc perfect. It is best to launch, adapt, and iterate.
Note to poster: try to imagine that all the comments here start with 'Well done for launching, but something you might want to think about is...' Lots of the points are valid and require your attention, but they have been presented in a defeatist and negative way -- as if your launch is the end of matter and, as a result, it is all doomed to failure rather than providing a springboard to change, improve, and pivot as required.
Doing the work is hard. Putting yourself out there in a vulnerable state and hoping for the best is almost AS difficult.
So, the best of luck to the OP. Adapt and grow.
The comments change as the thread develops so if you really want to help a Show HN out, just write your positive comment (or whatever other comment) about the thing without the meta. It ends up being either inaccurate or generating more meta. Let the Show HN be about the thing showhn.
You could just say your site is like that.
I can kinda see the logic - unfortunately sitting in front of my computer is my least favourite way to consume podcasts - and the workflow seems to break down quickly once you disassociate the two.
First, r/podcasts is for all podcasts, I'd be more interested in a community for a specific podcasts (say my favorite one: Dithering).
But also a r/dithering wouldn't really work that well since I might not be listening to a particular episode right when it came out. I'd prefer to talk to people about only the most recent episode I listened to.
Of course a r/dithering could simply have a meta post for each episode but that isn't that easy to find.
I appreciate this is a bit like the "we have 14 competing standards" XKCD, but there's a deeper, underlying problem that Podbabble tries to tackle: The majority of podcast discussion is either too general (i.e. debating the hashtag of a show as opposed to a specific episode), ephemeral (i.e. Twitter or live chat where discussion only happens within a few hours of episode release) and its almost always distributed (some on Reddit, some here, some there.)
Podcasting - albeit still comparatively tiny) is the fastest growing medium and I am confident that having a central, purpose built place for listener engagement will add value to the ecosystem.
/r/JoeRogan
These aren't just discussion groups for the podcasts - many of the users in these subreddits don't even listen to the podcasts. The subreddits for these podcasts have evolved as their own, independent communities. Why would they just up and leave for yours?
Yes and this is the problem, reddit is reddit and the comment-quality is terribly low, often toxic and dominated by a certain ideology that is particularly dominant and vocal on reddit in particular. I think this has potential if they manage to keep the comment quality higher, somehow.
That said, maybe I'm just not in the loop, but I'm not aware of any subreddit dedicated to reviewing podcast episodes. Also, I'm not sure the Reddit format lends itself to creating a database of user reviews for certain episodes without heavy moderation and a heavy-handed approach to posting (for example, to avoid duplicates). A lot of this needs to be formulated into an automated system that only a custom-made site can offer.
There may be some "goldilocks" subreddit size, but IMO there are approaching zero Reddit communities that are "healthily" run, probably because most of the people involved (users, mods) are literal, actual children.
For example, the podcast subs I frequent on Reddit often have people posting the same questions over and over again. A forum would simply aggregate them into one post that gets bumped to the top when someone comments, perhaps with the first post collating all the information as time goes on. But on the Reddit style boards, the discussion disappears soon after it's posted, just when the information starts to get there. It drops off the front page forever, and a couple days later someone comes along asking the exact same thing. Every podcast discussion starts from scratch, and ends soon afterwards. If you're a day or two late to a discussion, chances are no one will even your response.
This isn’t necessarily true. It sounds to me like you only have experience with some of the larger subreddits like r/pics. If you frequent smaller hobby subreddits you will find that the moderators will do exactly what is being described here. Some are pinned on a permanent basis, others are rotated out on a weekly or daily basis. The tools to do this are already baked into Reddit, it is up to the moderators of each subreddit whether to use them or not.
As I said in my post, I frequent podcast subs, which are usually on the smaller side to things. Sure, you can pin posts, but only two at a time, which means they often get dropped and switched. And unless they're extremely recent (so you're pinning posts all the time), as soon as they get dropped, they disappear. Spent 30 minutes writing a post to a pin discussion that you posted minutes before moderators switched the pinned post to something else? Chances are, no one's ever going to see it.
But a bigger problem is how nothing gets bumped to the top in those places. If I randomly stumble across a 5 year old discussion on IMDB and post a comment, it's going to be bumped to the top of the post list, and plenty of people will see it. If followed a link from something pinned to the top of a Reddit sub to a 10 day old discussion and make a comment, it's likely no one will see it. The only way people would even know there was a new comment is if they kept checking all of the dead conversations that have already fallen off the front page.
And the upvoting/downvoting exacerbates this further. It's not just that you're limited to the most recent posts if you want someone to see what you've said, but you're often stuck replying to the most upvoted comments to that post.
I'm surprised if I get a comment or upvotes on site like Reddit or Hacker News after a couple of days. On the webforums I frequent, I often get them after _years_. If this were a forum, I'd probably be making this post later tonight or later in the week. But on Hacker News, if I don't make it in the next couple hours it's likely no one would ever see my response.
In Comments
Be respectful. Anyone sharing work is making a contribution, however modest.
[...]
When something isn't good, you needn't pretend that it is, but don't be gratuitously negative.
Podcasters will need to meet listeners where they hang out (Facebook, Reddit, Twitter, LinkedIn, etc.) regardless of whether they can also be persuaded to use this additional niche social media site.
Any podcaster who would use this service will have already created a multi-channel social media presence for their show, so instead of "do this instead" the sales pitch must answer "why do this as well".
Or is Reddit the "perfect" community engine?
In my opinion, this isn't even at the beta level yet, let alone at a point where you should be asking for a subscription fee that high.
I'll keep an eye on this because this interests me, but the initial red flags give me pause. You need a talented UI/UX person pretty badly.
as much as i hate ads, i'd say that for this type of project it's better to leave it free but show some relevant podcast ads
How are you categorizing this project? What about it makes you think demanding money for entry is not feasible for growth?
You can sell your user's data to advertisers, or you can sell control or you can find some other channel.
We're e.g. playing with the idea to add a live podcasting feature that allows user's to comment and tip during a show a la Twitch.
I dont see this as a big issue. It seems to be a place for podcast community members to gather and discuss instead of making yet another discord. If you dont have positive feedback for a podcast why comment at all to begin with? The podcast medium is entirely built to taste and fits well with being a bubble (despite bubbles usually being a negative thing).
The hidden issue would be power to cover up a scandal, so I would hope that for serious issues users can report a podcast and site admins can handle it appropriately.
The quality of a podcast is not going to be uniformly positive. So a listener's feedback isn't going to be uniformly positive. It becomes a problem when the primary space for discussing a subject only permits positive feedback. Healthy communities do require negative feedback.
It's ironic that creator of Podbabble couches the creator-based moderation as a means to
> Foster healthy communities. Podbabble lets you moderate, adjust ratings, and flag comments as you see fit.
Too often, allowing the subject of a forum to moderate the forum leads to suppression of valid critique. And good critique can also come from outsiders; those who are not regular listeners.
A better alternative for Podbabble would be to allow creators to sponsor their podcast's forum, perhaps having it be featured more prominently or by removing comment rate limits.
To convince your visitors, your site is just a landing page. It requires commitment to an account before it is possible to judge the site.
I don't have the experience to judge if that is a good strategy. But if you want to be the Reddit of podcast discussions, then you should show the discussions to the visitors and only request accounts from those who want to write comments.
It's important to stress that Podbabble doesn't require accounts to view discussions - in fact, you can even comment anonymously without creating an account. If you click on any of the comments on the homepage or choose a podcast via search you'll immediately taken to its discussion page without any barriers.
When you say "it's a chicken and an egg problem" you're spot on. That's the problem for every new social network or user based platform trying to launch. Until you have a ton of users and content I would argue it's the only problem worth worrying about.
Create content yourselves to fill the void until it grows.
If you focus on building a userbase first it will be easier to sell the service later.
As a user I have a billion things competing for my attention, if you don't make it super easy for me to get to useful or interesting content I'm going to move on and that's going to hurt you overall.
I want to see what the site is about before signing up or doing anything.
Not really in the mood to join such a community.
For every one of you, there may be a dozen people who are attracted to the platform for the fact that these two are included.