Controversial statement suitable for quoting: The 2006 Podcast Awards are now even less meaningful than the Miss America Pageant.Â
The 2006 Podcast Awards illustrates why popularity contests will not be meaningfull for podcasts, or video casts, or blogs, and I don’t envy the Todd and the Podcast Connect folks. Last year’s Podcast Awards was more like a Peer-Review Awards because you (as a listener) had at least heard of nearly all of the nominees! After last year’s awards show, no self-respecting podcaster could really argue against any of the winners.
Now in 2006, there are too many podcasts and too few objective voters to even pretend that “number of votes” for a podcast correlates to “how much I should care” about a podcast. I don’t mean that there should be fewer podcasts, or that the “podcasting space” is getting too crowded - I mean that the 2006 Podcast Awards contest is now meaningless.
How many of the nominated shows do I recognize this year? Oh, maybe five or six. Even though I like two or three the shows that I recognized, I doubt I’ll even vote this year. Not because the rest of the nominated shows are bad shows, but because of the same reason YOU would find it difficult to vote for one of seven foreign films you’ve never seen, nor heard of, nor know any of the actors, nor really know what the show is about. You can’t force yourself to care about choosing one show from a seemingly arbitrary collection of shows in a category.
The Miss America Pageant is a more valid contest than the Podcast Awards. At least the Miss America contestants passed through a multitude of elimination rounds before the final contest, judged at each stage by ‘impartial’ judges who reviewed all of the contestants’ merits. When I watch the next Miss America Pageant, at least I can pretend (as I witness the “health and fitness” competition) that the ladies on display represent a filtered subset of hundreds (or thousands) of women, and that the ladies on display are not there just because they received the most cellphone text messages promted by an advertisement on the Howard Stern Show.
Here’s another thing that bends my spoon: I also know that many of the nominated podcasts have far fewer listeners than some of MY favorite podcasts, and that result smells to me of hucksterism and “marketing.” If you’re of the same mind as me (and would like to assume certain things without being hindered by actually researching anything), you can see right through some of these podcasts’ strategies for getting nomiated: contests, e-mail campaigns, shouting, repeating, promotions… many of the things from which I am seeking refuge.
These popularity contests are becoming more difficult for Hollywood to justify, too, with the decreasing number of blockbusters and the increasing number of independent producers and distribution channels.  WE KNOW THIS. WE PODCASTERS SHOUT THIS AT THE MOON EVERY NIGHT. So why are we interested in the Podcast Awards contest? Why are we still drinking the popularity Kool-Aide?
Granted, another reason for getting nominated is that a show’s audience might consist of highly motivated, rabid fans willing to do anything to please their host master. (I’m talking to you, Tim Henson! You and your damn rabid fans! …and your damn zesty joi de vivre!)Â
In summary, I suppose that congratulations are in order for all of the nominees. I’ll be interested to see if the nominated shows get any more votes than they did nominations. My suspicion is that many of the categories will see the same number or fewer votes than they received nominations. I suspect that the only people that will vote for the shows will be the people that nominated the shows.
Voting for the 2006 Podcast Awards opens July 28th, 2006 and closes August 28th, 2006. Fans can vote once daily for their favorite shows in each category. Sometime after the polls are closed, Todd Cochrane and crew will then very anti-climatically announce the winners weeks before the Podcast Expo, and everyone will *sigh*.Â
I don’t care how/why the shows got nominated. I feel no personal connection with the contest this year.
(A note to the listeners of Podcheck Review: I decided to post a text entry ahead of my audio commentary. I was preparing the shownotes for the next Podcheck Review and felt that this topic deserved a separate text post. )
July 27th, 2006 at 7:26 am
From Don’s McAllister’s Screencasts Online blog: http://blog.screencastsonline.com/scoblog/?p=61
July 27th, 2006 at 8:40 am
[…] PodCheck Review » Blog Archive » 2006 Podcast Awards less meaningful than Miss America Pageant […]
July 29th, 2006 at 6:43 pm
You know, the whole idea of having “awards” in a narrowcast medium is actually quite funny if you think about it.
If a show is popular enough, it’s almost a loser, having aggregated too many people to really fulfill the promise of Podcasting - to reach small segments of communities of interest.
July 30th, 2006 at 4:17 pm
Once again, Mr. Fletcher speaks for the masses! I was very disappointed by the nominees in general. Too many podcasts that are popular because their subject matter is popular (TWO Harry Potter podcasts up for podcast of the year? Come on!).
Also, where are the video podcasts like Tiki Bar TV or Rocketboom?
I think the concept of a Podcast Awards is still valid, though clearly more weight should be placed on a judging panel of experienced podcasters. I’d also like to see Todd Cochrane be a bit more transparent about these sort of things.
Thanks again for being right on the money, Scott!!
July 30th, 2006 at 10:30 pm
Hey P. Fletchy,
You are (as usual) right on the mark. I was totally shocked at this year’s crop of nominiees (i hate speling that word).
It’s nothing more than a popularity contest. Someone on the yahoo podcast group likened it to a “Circle Jerk”…I however look at it as more of a “Sphere of Self Love”…you say potato..I say french fries…
I agree with Kevin above and you when it seems a more meaningful award would be a peer based one.
But…as Denis Miller says “…that’s my opinion, but I maybe wrong!”
Thanks for hitting the nail on the head Scott and calling a spade a shovel!
August 2nd, 2006 at 3:02 pm
Well, while it has been very disheartening to hear how many people are upset with the nominees, I simply refuse to let it detract from my amazed delight at being nominated. Repeat — refuse. I did NEXT TO NOTHING to ask people to vote for me, save one post on my Web site, so it was a great surprise to be on the list.
Now that I have been nominated, I have been uncomfortable about asking people to vote for me. I have done it, but I try to also ask people to also consider the other nominees as well. I hear many shows saying “vote daily for me.” That’s nonsense. What does anyone learn about other shows simply by clicking on what they already know?
Win or lose, I am happy to have been on the list.
As far as other awards go, I am also participating in the Podcast Peer Awards. Please don’t think that those are too far removed from being a popularity contest. Podcasters are not immune to going with the flow. Some shows have lots of votes on their nominations, others have next to none. I have been going through the list of potential nominees very slowly myself, because I want to listen to a few episodes of unfamiliar shows before I vote, rather than say “I’ve never heard of that one. It’s probably no good.” It’s not easy, but who said it was supposed to be?
Am I committing nomination suicide here by ranting? Not sure, but I’m a little tired of some of the accusations and “ho hum my favorite show wasn’t nominated” stuff. While I am not the world’s biggest fan of awards, someone out there thought my show was worth nominating and. as a lowly podcaster, what could be better than that?
August 2nd, 2006 at 3:45 pm
Scott–
Oh, I was so sad to read your post! I do see your point, but I was heartened when Polyamory Weekly, a show at which I’ve been working my little but off at for a year and a half now, made it into the running with Dawn and Drew, Keith and the Girl, and other mega-popular shows in the Mature category. These nominees have easily 100 times my listenership!
Don’t know what the criteria were, but my small but devoted listenership and I are thrilled to be in the running, meaningless though the awards may be.
August 2nd, 2006 at 8:05 pm
[…] Clinton from The Comedy 4Cast and minx from Polyamory have every right to be PROUD that their listeners enjoy their shows enough to go OUT OF THEIR WAY to nominate their shows in the contest. Without backpeddling, I will sum up my July 30, 2006 post in a much more clear and succinct manner: “Never before in the history of podcast awards shows has the winner of the ‘Best Produced Podcast’ award been less likely to be the best-produced podcast. How do you pick the prettiest grain of sand in a jar of sand? No one has time to examine all of the candidates!“ — Scott Fletcher […]
August 3rd, 2006 at 11:56 pm
[…] See my July 30th post for my Miss America rant. ———————— […]
August 7th, 2006 at 10:20 am
Preface: I love Clinton, Keith, Fausto & Marc and I am voting for them.
However, I see your point. I have actually gone back and listened to some of the shows that are nominated (what I haven’t listened to, or at least haven’t heard in a while), and I heard some of them telling their listeners how/where to nominate them and to make sure that they do it often and that they only do it in “XYZ” category because otherwise the votes would be spread out. My point being that it was a very calculated and move on the part of some of them. (Of course not all, and some of these casts are good and absolutely deserve to be there), but I think we can all agree that there are some that are there only because they identified an “easier” category to win, and they are manipulating the system. I don’t really blame them (well maybe a little), but it is really just a problem with this so-called “system” itself.
My opinion (which is less slightly less than 2 cents) is that they need a panel of experts (maybe people from media production and/or a panel of actual survey respondents to LISTEN to the casts and rate them in some way. Are we actually voting on best-produced?? This is obviously a popularity contest. I would venture a guess that almost no one (if anyone) went and listened to every single one of those casts on the list before they voted. How could a really small podcast (in terms of listeners) ever even be nomiminated, let alone win by a voting system??
I’m sorry to anyone I’ve offended by my comments. I really do like some of these casts and I’m voting for them and cheering for them to win. Really. I am just commenting about the process as a whole.
P.S. Not to kiss this blog-owner’s butt too much (don’t want his head to explode), but I think podcheck review is better than many of the podcasts on the list. Seriously.
August 8th, 2006 at 8:41 am
Ah, yes, awards…
I dunno. There’s something so compelling to people about, well, popularity contests, and even moreso in podcasting, where few indeed have any financial reward, so seek intangible rewards to validate the experience, be those votes on Podcast Alley, nominations in this or that podcasting awards, big numbers of Feedburner subscribers, entrants into a contest, or whatever. Note that some or all of those may well be relevant to trying to turn it into financial reward, but at the same time, I think the immediate goal is often just a little ego support. Not necessarily a bad thing, that.
I will say that I will always prefer the inclusive rather than exclusive options for egoboo, though. There doesn’t seem to be a shortage of ears, so everyone can play when it comes to gaining listeners. On the other hand, only N podcasts can be nominated in Joe’s Podcast Award Show, so it’s exclusive; a few dozen podcasts get a pat on the head and the rest get to enjoy not seeing themselves in print again. Same goes for top 100 lists and “what’s your favorite podcast?” threads and the like.
I dunno, maybe I’m a bit of a pinko hippie podcaster. But I figure there’s a whole lot of us at the 100 listener mark (and fewer, I’m sure) and we look for some emotional reward, too, and a podcast awards show just doesn’t seem to hold any benefit to us.
Ultimately, the only “top list” or “awards list” or anything of the sort I care about is my subscriptions list (and hey, Clinton’s a winner there!) Second to that would be, well, everyone else’s subscriptions lists. All else is fluff.
-R
August 15th, 2006 at 12:02 pm
Scott - you’re right on the money…I watched the previous awards with dismay but at least I could say 1 or so of the podcasts would deserve the award, whereas this year there is only 3 that I know or deserve an award - the rest either I don’t know or are terrible…
August 28th, 2006 at 1:51 am
YES. I agree you’re right on the money, Scott. Also good points made by all posters above me. “Popularity KoolAid” Hah. Your penchant for new terms and well-turned phrases continues.
Listened to your guest shot on Today in Podcasting and the PCR that ref’d this post. One comment brought to my mind “Podcast Awards…Tastes Great, Less Filling”. And, maybe, doesn’t actually taste so great, either.
I especially agree with:
- field far too wide to make nominations/votes meaningful,
- popular casts/hosts, pimping and manipulating the system will skew the results
- votes often meaningless cuz few voters have listened to all nominees; who has time? and to vote a full slate (responsibly, anyway), you’d have to listen to 50 you’ve never listened to before.
- perhaps good to do peer review, but with field so wide now, how could you fairly choose those to be evaluated?
But people want lists. They want to know what’s popular (equating it with “most worth listening to”). Two categories of podcasts have (and will continue to have) a huge edge here: 1) repurposed commercial content; they have the brand recognition (of the network, the franchise, the personality, etc.) that will carry weight with old fans and new listeners.
2) The indie casters who’ve been in it long enough to have established themselves on enough directories’ lists, current listeners’ subscriptions, mentions in bigger media and books about podcasting, etc.
Newbies who hope to “get on the lists”/break the 100 listener level have scant chance of overcoming the momentum of these two groups. There will of course be exceptions.
Podcasting is creating many new paradigms. If any rating/award system is to be meaningful, we need a new paradigm for that system.
A few thoughts: perhaps casters could nominate themselves and submit one episode for judgement. Listeners could register to volunteer for initial screening. They’d be assigned a category and would be required to listen to x number of shows within that category (perhaps a “secret word” inserted in each show to verify they listened?). Choose their top 3. This way even if there are 200 self-nominated entries under comedy, a relatively small number of volunteer listeners could actually listen to them all and reduce the field to a manageable number for the next phase.
Aggregate the results of this, then have a panel of judges (podcasters who know their stuff but whose shows aren’t in that category) listen to and judge the shows that rated highest. Some format like this would, I hope, eliminate the popularity contest/pimping/etc. and yield something resembling “actually the best”.
Thoughts anyone?
(no need for pimping)
September 15th, 2006 at 10:04 pm
[…] Media mogul David Lawrence invited me to be on his show again tonight (September 15, 2006) for an hour tonight at 7pm Pacific time (10pm Eastern). We’ll talk about podcasting stuff, like my thoughts (from my July 26th’s post about) the “People’s Choice Podcast Awards,” David’s one-on-one training sessions at the Podcast Expo (just two weeks away), and other entertaining blahbity-blah-blah. […]