It’s Time To Ask Eric Anything
It’s Time To Ask Eric Anything
I asked for questions and now I attempt to answer them, talking about video post-production, windowing, public radio…and we’re hiring for a big job.
Welcome to Dispatch #70 of The Audio Insurgent.
Today is an entire dispatch dedicated to your questions. I invited you to ask anything, and you did.
Plus, we have another job posting…a biggie…
This is a long dispatch, but I only answered a small number of the questions, so let's get straight to it…
[TODAY’S THING: ASK ERIC ANYTHING, THE DEFINITELY 2024 EDITION] If you’d asked me a few weeks ago, I would have told you I do an annual “Ask Eric Anything” dispatch. And it is true that I did them in 2021 and 2022. But somehow, perhaps in the midst of the turmoil of 2023…I forgot.
Once I put the call out to do this again, questions poured in, which is great.
But man, the questions were so different this year, and I think it speaks to where podcasting and the people who work in it are at now. Before, the questions often tossed something catty or controversial to ask my take.
This year: all incredibly practical questions. Very meaty–but all rooted in how to do great work in the podcast industry of 2024.
Unfortunately, I can’t answer them all, but here are some of the most interesting ones:
“How do I improve my skills in narrative podcasting/radio when I’ve just been laid off…especially if I can’t land a job quickly? And - is pursuing narrative audio still realistic….? It feels like the work is frighteningly scarce.” –Tess
Oh Tess, I could write an entire newsletter just on this question. First off, I’m sorry that you lost your job. Regardless of the circumstances, that can be so disorienting and confusing and frustrating, especially in a situation like this where its hard to find a new job in the specific field you were working in.
Every month, more and more jobs seem to be opening up, and companies are still commissioning work, but it is just a different environment for podcast hiring than it was even two years ago. It has completely flipped around from the producers/talent/job seekers having a lot of power and leverage to the current situation where the employers/companies have all the leverage.
But let’s leave that aside. I’m going to answer this two different ways: one about narrative skill and the other about jobs in podcasting.
Narrative-focused podcast jobs are more rare, that’s true, but companies are also hiring producers differently than in the past. There is much more of an emphasis on hiring for projects (even if that project is only a few months long) and less hiring of permanent staff. In some ways, podcasting is starting to mirror how many are hired in TV and film production–and I don’t see this changing anytime soon. That means that if you want to work in podcasting, you will spend a significant amount of time and energy simply looking for work. It is out there, but you may need to be less picky about projects and types of work.
As far as your narrative skills, I would encourage you to do two things. First, realize that almost ANY audio podcast is an exercise in storytelling. Even if a podcast is about ideas, conversation, or points of view–in essence, it is all done through storytelling. One of my chief criticisms of university journalism programs is they teach students how to be a good reporter, but often fail to teach them how to be a good storyteller. So, if you have skills as a narrative storyteller, they can apply to almost any audio project–and not only can you use them, but you can grow them too. Secondly, if you want to hone and practice your narrative skills, why not use them in other narrative forms? Write for a blog or online publication, make a video. Narrative is everywhere and every time you tell a story, you improve as a storyteller.
And as far as getting a job on a narrative project, telling a story over multiple episodes, I think the best way today is to network with the production houses that DO this work today–listen to the credits of narrative projects coming out of iHeart, Wondery, Sony, etc… and you’ll notice that most of them are made by small independent companies. And I can tell you that hiring at those companies is often done on a project-need basis, and the first place you look is the interesting talent who have kept in touch with you. So be that person for these small companies. Hope that helps.
“Is there realizable value in asking current listeners to follow on social media, and conversely, asking social media followers to listen? Broadly speaking, it seems that many stations have social audiences that are 10% the size of our radio audiences, and a CTA on social is a higher lift - especially if it's 'listen live' or 'donate now.' If there is no value in tying these together - why don't we let this idea go?” –Matt
This is backwards. Thinking about platforms is the wrong way to approach these questions. Instead, reverse it. Think about audience. Take the time to define the audience you want to reach and then ask yourself what platforms do they use? The answer will be very different based on the target audience. An audience expects to find you on the platforms they use, and they expect everything, on all platforms, to be a core organic content offering–not a “for appearances” or purely promotional presence on a social media platform. Plan accordingly.
If you are thinking that you are just an audio product (and your mention of “station” makes me think you work in radio)–that’s 2004 thinking, not 2024 thinking.
“What are your best recommendations for efficient audio to video workflows?” –Briana
Briana, I wish I had an answer to this question!! There is a lot of interest in it, as I received four different questions about video from you and others. Despite all the conversation, attention, and excitement about video and podcasting, I think everyone is struggling with figuring out how to do it operationally, including us.
When we at Magnificent Noise first started to produce video as well as audio, I had what I thought was a strong idea: let’s create a combined audio and video post production process that avoids redundancy and keeps the audio and video versions locked together as far into the production process as possible. We’ve now tried this on a few projects and…to be honest…my theoretical strong idea isn’t working as well as I’d hoped.
Here is a pretty typical Magnificent Noise post-production process for an episode that’s centered on a host/guest interview (A narrative episode with lots of interviews, tape, and scripting is slightly different–and more complex–but follows much of these basics steps):
Recordings happen.
Tape gets transcribed and basic clean-up done (Producer in Descript).
Basic edits/outlining is figured out (Producer on paper).
Producer does first edit (Descript).
Producer shares edit with larger team for group feedback and edits (All on paper based off listening).
Producer does second edit (Descript).
Producer passes project to Sound Designer for fine tune editing, mixing, and any sound design (Pro Tools).
Final edits to the episode (Pro Tools).
My original idea was to load audio AND video assets into Descript as a video project–and do Steps 1-5 above as ONE file and one set of edits. Then, as the producer starts on the second edit, we split it into two: the video edit with some incredibly basic camera selections and the audio edit, which is a much finer tuned edit which you can do in audio and is often difficult/unnecessary for video. Then we bring in a video editor to work in tandem with the work with the audio mixer/sound designer. So that process would look like this (Substack won’t let me add color to text, so things that are different below are all caps):
Recordings happen.
VIDEO AND AUDIO gets transcribed and basic clean-up done (Producer in Descript).
Basic edits/outlining is figured out (Producer on paper).
Producer does first edit (Descript).
Producer shares edit with larger team for group feedback and edits (All on paper based off listening).
Producer does second AUDIO edit (Descript).
PRODUCER EXPORTS TO PREMIERE PRO FOR SECOND VIDEO EDIT.
Producer passes AUDIO project to Sound Designer for fine tune editing, mixing, and any sound design (Pro Tools).
PRODUCER PASSES PROJECT TO VIDEO EDITOR FOR FINE TUNE, CAMERA SELECTION, COLOR CORRECTION, AND OTHER ENHANCEMENTS. (PREMIERE PRO).
Final edits to episode MADE IN TANDEM (PREMIERE PRO AND PRO TOOLS).
That seems simple, right? It shouldn’t be that difficult. But the problems with this started in Step 2. Descript can only handle certain types of video files, so we had to make sure our videos were set up correctly, which often involved a conversion pass through Handbrake or Premiere Pro. And the video files are massive, often 40-50 gb per hour per camera. So we were moving around a massive amount of data. Also, Descript can’t automatically sync files, some have to line up all the audio and video files manually. So setting up the project would often take an hour or two.
The time is greatly reduced if we abandon this and just set up the audio in Descript and the video in Premiere. We are experimenting around right now with using XML files to guide the first edits.
So, that’s where we are at. If others have figured out how to do audio and video edits smarter in tandem–and do them with a level of sophistication and emphasis on making something pretty high end, I’d love to hear about it.
But, for now, Briana, I fear we are all figuring this out in real time.
“How do you deal with it when a subject does not like the final product? I'm talking emotionally. In theory, are we journalists who are only responsible to the truth, or producers responsible to a story? ” —Anonymous
When I read this, I thought this would be a perfect question for my Magnificent Noise co-founder Jesse Baker. So here, dear readers, is Jesse’s response:
True story: This is something I have lost a lot of sleep fretting about.
It’s the risk we take every time we ask someone to share their story. “Trust me” is such a powerful request. Sometimes, despite our best intentions, our editorial choices upset the people who have placed their trust in us.
Where Should We Begin with Esther Perel requires the greatest degree of vulnerability I have ever asked of anyone to share behind a mic. Having producers sitting in and recording your therapy session with Esther is an act of bravery in itself. We allow people to be anonymous but we don’t change their voices. Yet at the end of the day, if friends or loved ones listen, chances are they will recognize who’s speaking. Every guest has to be okay with that before we ever start rolling.
Each recording session gets greatly compressed - it starts out as three+ hours of conversation, then is edited down. So, by definition, you have lost often more than two hours of context and detail from their story. But it’s not just reducing it in size: it’s like sculpting from a block of marble, where you knock stone away to reveal the story that needs to be told. And that involves choices about what to keep.
On rare occasions, people have called me after a session and made it clear they did not love their episodes.
In sum: when someone complains, I listen so closely and try to reply directly and candidly. Did I misrepresent myself? Did I fairly represent their story? Or did the story just not present them in the light they hoped?
One couple did not respond to my messages after a session came out. I finally received a harshly worded note that ended with “never contact us again” - the only time in eight seasons I’ve ever had such a response. I was shocked and upset for weeks about it. Finally, I told Esther. And she said “it’s not that you did anything wrong. Or that you made poor edits. It’s that their session did not change anything for them when they got home.” And that is not something I could help them with–but it still sometimes keeps me up at night.
One man from an early season of WSWB felt the episode’s title reflected unfairly on his actions in his marriage. After he berated me, I gently reminded him of the stories we had cut out of his session. There was one about something that happened between him and his nanny–a story that would have made it close to impossible for anyone listening to root for him or experience a trace of empathy. As a character in a novel, he would have been irredeemable. He needed to hear we had made the best choices we could for the story we were telling, yes, but also for his personal story. By the end of the call, he thanked me.
Okay, this is Eric again. Thank you, Jesse. And if doing this kind of vulnerable narrative work on a large show appeals to you, we are hiring a Senior Producer for Where Should We Begin. The first new hire to this team in years.
Next question…
“What do you think of companies (like BBC) 'windowing' their podcasts on their platform. Does it undermine the free RSS feed? Will it migrate audiences off established platforms (Apple, Spotify)?” –Ellen
Ellen, I picked your question because I received around six different questions on open vs proprietary access to podcasts. Your question is actually three different questions with three different answers.
So I think there’s nothing wrong with windowing in podcasting, except that it doesn’t work.
For clarity in case this term is unfamiliar, windowing is the practice of making something available, exclusively, on a proprietary platform or app, for a period of time before it is available widely in the open podcast ecosystem. In essence, if you want to hear episodes early, come to our place–or you can wait and hear it everywhere later.
Many readers may not know that I was an early, vocal, and large scale advocate for windowing–before it even really had a name. Our original content strategy at Audible was based around windowing: our series were initially available in Audible for a few weeks or months, then as an open RSS feed everywhere.
It “worked” in the sense that people listened in Audible, and then a larger number of people listened in the open ecosystem. But I rarely saw much evidence of conversion, meaning that people would become fans, then go to the exclusive place to listen sooner. Those who listened during the initial windowing period tended to be those who were already listening on that platform, not new incoming listeners.
Many who have utilized windowing have claimed it was working, but rarely did they offer any evidence. The biggest piece of evidence that it never worked is the fact that most places don’t do it anymore.
And regarding if windowing undermines the open RSS ecosystem. If it worked well, it might have. But it didn’t. The worst impact on the open RSS feed is that it just makes things confusing for listeners. They just want to find the shows they want where they expect to find them–and get lost (and then disinterested) when we start putting obstacles in their way.
And is it a threat to Apple/Spotify? No. I’ve seen some anecdotal reports on the results of the BBC Sounds app’s exclusivity and windowing, claiming it is a big success. But, nothing against the BBC, I don’t trust it. It doesn’t pass the smell test for me. And even if it is “working” by their standard, it isn’t a threat to Apple or Spotify.
Also no podcast or even podcasting company is big enough on their own to undermine Apple and Spotify’s positions in podcasting. Individual companies and networks don’t have the leverage they wish they did. When they try to throw some weight around, at best nothing happens, and at worst they only harm themselves.
More after this jump…
Be like this reader who became a paid subscriber because they value what they read in The Audio Insurgent. It seems that everywhere you turn, someone is asking you to set-up a subscription. When that thing has value to you and you’d miss it if it went away, you gladly pay up. When I’ve asked subscribers why they decided to contribute to something they can get for free, the most common response is, “Because you asked.”
So here I am–asking YOU this time.
There are many very good places to hear today’s news about the podcasting and spoken-word industry. Here, I’m trying to do something different–create a space to understand several layers deeper, why things happen, and what the implications will be. This is a place for thought and analysis…plus my take on what it means.
If this is valuable to you, you can make sure it comes to you at least twice a month–and be among the first to read it–for as little as $5.
This reader did it. And so can you.
“What would you say to yourself from 5 years ago?” –Gregory
What an interesting question, Gregory. While this feels like a standard job interview question, I have to admit I was a bit stumped by this at first when applying this to my own life. Five years ago, November of 2019, was a very exciting time for me. Jesse and I were about a year into Magnificent Noise and things were really picking up steam. That month I spent some time in Bangkok reporting and gathering tape for what would eventually become the pilot episode of TED’s Far Flung with Saleem Reshamwala. We had just started working on a new show for the New York Times with Priya Parker and a 30 for 30 series with ESPN. And, of course, Make Noise was finished and just about to be published.
It was also just a few months before the pandemic, which we all have a sizable amount of PTSD about–so I look at the months before as the calm before the storm.
I’d say that if I could reach back and talk to myself, I would just say, “Stick to what feels right.”
The pandemic, the economic fallout from that, and the podcasting recession of 2023 were all scary times, but Jesse and I stuck together and stuck to our vision, yet we pivoted here and there and just made sure our decisions were made on principle, not fear. And we came through a stronger company.
2019 was also the “stupid money” time in podcasting, with a tsunami of cash flooding in, big acquisitions happening, and vultures everywhere. When Jesse and I started Magnificent Noise, we made a few decisions that others found confusing: we did not seek out or accept investment (despite several offers), we didn’t distribute our content (instead working with others), and we only worked on projects (and with talent) that we believed in. Part of this was a business strategy, and part of it was spending time talking about what we wanted the professional side of our lives to be like. And we never changed that.
A number of those politely-critical others said we were missing out. But today, we are still here, and a very healthy company, and almost all those other companies are gone.
Stick with what feels right. That is what I’d tell myself.
“Which difficulties does the demise of Chartable entail and how do podcasters best solve them?” –Laura
My friend and colleague Dan Misener wrote a great post on this for the Bumper blog. Rather than share what I’ve learned on this, I’d suggest you read what Dan says. My only other piece of advice is that if you have a show with a Chartable prefix attached to it, you need to get rid of it before December 12th, or your podcast won’t work anymore.
“Why is public radio so hellbent on restricting itself to essentially three formats: news, AAA and classical? All of which have tepid support amongst audiences younger than age 50. Why haven't pubradio stations taken advantage of commercial radio's general total meltdown to move into other, perhaps more lucrative, formats that listeners who aren't traditional pubradio listeners?” –Aaron
Why stop at formats, Aaron? You could make the same case about literally any component of public radio.
I am a huge believer in the mission of public radio, but I’m not very enthused about its leadership. Public radio has been on cruise control for the past 25 years, lacking any meaningful innovation in its service to audiences (those they currently serve or new audiences). Besides a few occasional (and very successful) pockets of innovation, you can even say the same thing about NPR, too. And you see evidence of this every day: lower ratings, reduced revenue, less impact. The spirit just isn’t there to innovate and make change. Leaders in the industry are quick to blame changing media habits, listener taste–anything but their profound lack of vision.
I really wish this wasn’t the case and it is literally painful for me to come to those conclusions. I would LOVE to be proven wrong.
And chasing lost formats in commercial radio isn’t a strategy likely to do better. The questions to make public radio more relevant to more people are actually very simple and clear–the leadership of the industry just doesn’t have the stomach to make it happen.
“I'm concerned about whose responsibility it is to clear out old, dated podcasts from the Internet. Does each platform delete things after a specified period? I produce podcasts focused on health issues. Some have an indefinite shelf life. Others will not hold up forever. I like to think that I am creating a library or treasure trove of health topics, but I'm unaware of an efficient way to tend this library so its content remains useful into the future.” –Amber
Amber, it is your responsibility. No platform is going to do this for you.
As producers, it is so tempting to think that once we publish something, or responsibility is over. We’ve done our part–now it is out in the world.
While it is true that once you publish something, you can never fully “unpublish” it. Even if you delete or update an episode, the older version will still live on in pockets of the Internet or on user devices.
There is no problem leaving dated material online and assuming the user can figure out that something that’s a few years old would note reflect the most current thinking (in fact, you should speak to this in your show notes). However, even for old episodes, new listeners find their way to it every week. The numbers may not be huge by comparison to new episodes, but new people come in all the time. If you don’t think your older episodes reflect your brand, commitment to robust thinking or best practices, or are out of date in ways that make you feel uncomfortable, YOU should go into your hosting platform and delete them.
Okay, last question…
“Can you please caulk behind the kitchen sink where the backsplash meets the counter?” –Katherine (your wife)
This is a real question that was submitted through the form by…my better half. She saw the call-outs in previous dispatches to “ask Eric anything” and took this opportunity to remind me, again, of my promise to take care of this. So I guess you all know what I’m doing this weekend.
[LAST THING: WE ARE HIRING, AGAIN] You may have noticed a few mentions above that we are hiring another Magnificent Noise position: Senior Producer for Where Should We Begin to work with our team to make this singular podcast. It is probably the largest open hire we’ve ever done on a very high profile project. If you are interested, please consider applying.
Okay, that’s it for today.
Thousands of people read this newsletter without even a free subscription. If this was forwarded to you or you read this online, would you mind subscribing?
If you are a regular reader of The Audio Insurgent, I hope you’ll consider doing your part by supporting this work with a small donation. And if that’s too much, you are also always welcome to buy my book or (even better) buy me a beer.
Make great things. I’ll be listening.
--Eric