Podcasts & Politics

This week, I’ve been cramming on podcasts (although I can’t match Jim’s current consumption of 13). It’s an interesting form of media – somewhere between broadcast radio and books-on-tape; a phenomenon made possible by our near-constant use of digital devices and the number of people/media companies looking to increase their market share. The distinguishing feature of a podcast is that it’s often a fairly lengthy discussion of a certain subject – kind of like a radio show – but it is serialized and released episodically – unlike books on tape. Podcasts aren’t subject to the same market forces that drive widely appealing content and thus often have niche topics and audiences. You can find podcasts about everything - even podcasts about podcasting.

According to an article from DigiDay, a media publication and events company, this election season has seen a spate of “pop-up podcasts,” programs that pop up to cover a certain news event or subject and then end when it’s over. Julia Turner of Slate explains, “The interest in focused, breaking coverage of a fascinating news event in creative audio form is really high.” Slate’s pop-up podcast this season is called The Trumpcast; (how amazing is that?) Other examples include the New York Times’ The Run-Up and the Washington Post’s Presidential. On my phone, I have Pantsuit Politics, and The Ticket from the Texas Tribune.

What happens to these podcasts once the election is over? Some will likely end and others (I’m looking at you, Pantsuit Politics) will continue their political coverage. One thing for sure, podcasts are here to stay. According to Pew, 26% of Americans over 12 have listened to a podcast in the past month. This is more than double what it was three years ago. In addition, just under half are familiar with the term podcasting. There are no reliable figures on the numbers of podcasts produced, but commercial podcast hosting companies say the numbers are increasing. In April, Nielsen announced that it would begin measuring podcasts as part of its Digital Audio Ratings Service.

From an economic standpoint, podcasting makes sense. Episodes are relatively inexpensive to produce and provide valuable opportunities to cross-promote content. The ways that we consume media are changing and podcasts offer another option for consumers. They can be links that bring listeners in to consume other content. (Think about the legacy media organizations that are hosting podcasts about the election. It’s substantial). 

What makes podcasts tick? According to Digiday, “having a distinctive voice and brand are crucial.” I don’t disagree. Part of what makes the guys on Keepin It 1600 appealing is their easy banter; you feel like you are part of a special behind-the-scenes conversation. It’s authentic.

How does the proliferation of podcasts affect the election? There are two things to note here. First, as a share of audio listening, podcast only account for 2%. Most people are not listening to podcasts, which means they are getting their news from other sources. Second, podcasts are another example of the personalization of media. Unless you intentionally listen to podcasts with various viewpoints, podcasts tend to be one sided. We know that people choose to listen to media that agrees with their worldviews; podcasts aren’t any different.

Are podcasts going to make a difference in the results of the election? No, but they are an interesting media phenomenon for what they tell us about news and media consumption. As people find their esoteric sources, we continue to move farther and farther away from a common understanding of the problems facing this country. This election demonstrates the severity of that problem.