Quite a cathartic read! However -- I have had this conversation with so many clients now, and it has fallen on deaf ears. My thought is that people who actually edit audio and video 100% understand these distinctions -- but the average person working in a toothpaste company and wanting to stretch their dollars does not. They just want to be "everything, everywhere, all at once." (sigh...)
My only hope is that doing mediocre work in a new medium doesn't discourage people from trying to improve or figure out how the medium works in the future. Trying the 'everything, everywhere, all at once' rarely works... but sometimes it's a good lesson that people don't want average or mediocre anything and that results come from stepping up your game. (And, obviously, if you can't afford to step up your game everywhere, instead step back and focus on the ones where you can be awesome)
This all makes sense to me. And, FWIW, I usually far prefer podcasts over video because they take just enough of my attention to keep me entertained, but I can still GSD (think dishes, alphabetizing herb drawer, gardening). Almost like body-doubling! Video is the Evil Attention Sucker.
Hallelujah - at last someone pointing out Joe Rogan isn't a podcast, but a video interview that translates well to audio. It's performative, screen-driven content where how you LOOK is part of the equation. Whereas audio-first interviews focus on what you SAY and how you say it - tone, emotion, thoughtfulness... listening in real time is all part of the authenticity, not distracted by flash visuals. But, while I like good talk podcasts a lot, they're in the ha'penny place when it comes to narrative pods - those layered, immersive, utterly compelling stories that create the theatre of the mind we've enjoyed as audio (radio) for a century. And no, they absolutely do NOT translate to video. Why would they?? They're their own art form. This idea (pushed at glitzy expos etc) that audio is an inferior version of video drives me nuts!
Brilliant newsletter, Steve - so much here! And thanks for the kind shout out. Making R3TV was the most creative freedom I’ve had in my crazy career, and it’s nice to know it’s still an example you hold up of how to do things differently and effectively!
Quite a cathartic read! However -- I have had this conversation with so many clients now, and it has fallen on deaf ears. My thought is that people who actually edit audio and video 100% understand these distinctions -- but the average person working in a toothpaste company and wanting to stretch their dollars does not. They just want to be "everything, everywhere, all at once." (sigh...)
My only hope is that doing mediocre work in a new medium doesn't discourage people from trying to improve or figure out how the medium works in the future. Trying the 'everything, everywhere, all at once' rarely works... but sometimes it's a good lesson that people don't want average or mediocre anything and that results come from stepping up your game. (And, obviously, if you can't afford to step up your game everywhere, instead step back and focus on the ones where you can be awesome)
This all makes sense to me. And, FWIW, I usually far prefer podcasts over video because they take just enough of my attention to keep me entertained, but I can still GSD (think dishes, alphabetizing herb drawer, gardening). Almost like body-doubling! Video is the Evil Attention Sucker.
Thanks for another insightful post.
Those are all amazing contexts for audio-only podcasts! Love it!
Hallelujah - at last someone pointing out Joe Rogan isn't a podcast, but a video interview that translates well to audio. It's performative, screen-driven content where how you LOOK is part of the equation. Whereas audio-first interviews focus on what you SAY and how you say it - tone, emotion, thoughtfulness... listening in real time is all part of the authenticity, not distracted by flash visuals. But, while I like good talk podcasts a lot, they're in the ha'penny place when it comes to narrative pods - those layered, immersive, utterly compelling stories that create the theatre of the mind we've enjoyed as audio (radio) for a century. And no, they absolutely do NOT translate to video. Why would they?? They're their own art form. This idea (pushed at glitzy expos etc) that audio is an inferior version of video drives me nuts!
Love everything you've written here, Siobhan - you nailed it! "They're their own art form" YES!
Brilliant newsletter, Steve - so much here! And thanks for the kind shout out. Making R3TV was the most creative freedom I’ve had in my crazy career, and it’s nice to know it’s still an example you hold up of how to do things differently and effectively!
You're a legend! Here's hoping we get to do something as fun and weird as R3TV again sometime soon.
Just signed up for the newsletter. Thrilled to be able to hear your insights again!
-Brendan Monaghan
Thanks, Brendan - that is so nice and much appreciated!!!