PRG1: Podcasting Metrics Debate War with Public Radio

Well, welcome. This is Rob Greenlee, and I'm doing a quick audio podcast on my blog. The blog is Podcasting with Rob Greenlee, and I wanted to talk about a pressing topic that's happening in the podcasting space today. It's around podcast metrics. There's been a growing debate around podcast metrics, and it's kind of moved to a higher level, kind of a little bit of a war of words, basically around a public radio measurement document that was recently released by a group of broadcast radio folks. And so there's been some debate back and forth. Actually, I posted a post to my blog that kind of outlines my thoughts on it. I'm probably gonna be voicing more thoughts on that, on this topic, in my new media show that I do with Todd Cochran from Raw Voice this Saturday at 9:00 AM Pacific. And I'm sure that'll be available for on-demand listening after this as well. But I mainly wanted to provide a little bit of feedback to the She Podcasters, basically Elsie and Jessica, about their comments that they made in their podcast about this whole kind of trying to understand what's going on here and the dynamics between public radio and the rest of podcasting that's been doing podcast measurement for many, many years. And I'm going to go through their podcast and I'm going to play segments from it and I'm going to pause it and give my comments and my thoughts to try and maybe draw some clarity to their thoughts on the topic as well. So why don't I go ahead and play that right now.

So what they do to measure themselves and appropriate themselves and assimilate themselves is not relevant because we're not doing the same thing, right?

So what they're talking about is the public radio measurement standards that was put out, um, here in the last week, week and a half. And so let me continue that. I just wanted to make sure everybody understood that's what, uh, Jessica is talking about here. And so you have, uh, Jessica and Elsie kind of going back and forth on this discussion on this topic.

We don't do the same type of shows. We'll never do the same type of shows because we're just— and that, yeah, it's just two totally different animals, two totally different people running the mic. Those people are on the mic, but they don't run it. Their corporation runs it, their affiliates run it, and they have producers that run it. Like, we don't have any of that, so why even compare? That was my point last time.

No, I, I think that it's not a fantastic What I was listening—

I read, um, Hot Pod by Nick Koa, and he did say something that made me think perhaps I was slightly wrong, only because the way he phrased it was that they got together to attempt— wait, what did he say? Hold on, I can't— and I can't look it up because I have no internet. He— they got together to attempt to, um, I didn't say simplify, attempt to standardize podcast measurement standards. He didn't say public radio podcast measurement standards. He said all. And so that makes you think, well, if that's true, then they, they can't do that by themselves. I agree. They can't do that by themselves.

I don't know what the real intent was on that document, if, if it was intended to be for the whole podcasting space, uh, or if it was just for that group, um, of public radio folks trying to put that out there. I'm not sure what the real intent was necessarily. I haven't heard any official comment on, on that from them. But it could be construed that this has really been the first time, I'll be honest, that there's been any kind of public, basically, expression of a podcast metric standard that's been put out in the public since about 2008. So, you know, taking this as a standard that maybe some platforms took and maybe compared it against what they were doing is kind of at the very beginnings of what a standard really is. So here, let me continue playing..

But I also don't think we have to pay attention. Who gives them— we don't have to pay attention to their standards. Who gives a rat's ass what they say about our standards?

Totally.

But I've been making up my own standards all along.

I know, but they're attempting to have that standardized thing. So would— that's something that we didn't mention before last, which is where the conversation actually stemmed from, uh, that we started last week. It really stemmed from that public radio has released a public radio podcast measurement Guidelines document. They now have version 1.1 online. There will be a link in the show notes, which I assume is going to be updated as that happens.

Now the thing is, because the title, I assumed it meant public radio podcast, measurement guidelines.

Yeah.

No, not it's for all podcasts measurement guidelines, but according, yeah, according to Nick, it's for everybody. And I don't, I, you're right. I don't agree with that.

Necessarily.

I also think we don't have to pay attention though.

Totally. But the first, uh, introduction to this, these podcast measurements title says, measurement of podcast usage is comma, at best, the Wild West.

So that's, I know that's specific.

Is that wrong? No, it is absolutely 100% wrong. And so this is what happened though. There was a huge response. Blueberry, who is, uh, another of the biggies out there who does a lot of data, uh, intake and then they do, you know, lots of,, uh, podcast stats measurement, just like Libsyn. Those are the two like kind of like biggest, um, podcast hosts out there that have worked to really make sure that your podcasts are measured in, in the most optimal way possible. Actually, they put out a press release and, uh, and basically it was a call to them to take that specific sentence out because this is what they said. While perhaps well-intentioned, the public radio podcast measurement guidelines document released on February 3rd by the Public Radio Coalition is fraught with measurement shortfalls and an inflammatory statement that threatens to undermine the credibility of podcasting and podcast measurement.

Yeah, I wanted to make a little bit of comment there. It's actually true that that the platforms RawVoice and LipSync and PodTrak have been working on a fairly common standard base and adding capabilities and better filtering over many years. Nonetheless, they will all admit when you talk to individual platforms that there can be up to 2-3% difference between the metrics that comes out of LipSync or the metrics that comes out of RawVoice. That differential is really being used as the ammo that the public radio folks and other new people that are coming into the podcasting space are looking at the podcasting space and seeing that it's what's being termed here the Wild West of metrics. Now granted, it's maybe a little bit true, but it's not entirely true because Most of the advertisers are basically accepting this podcast metrics that's coming out of these major platforms. Spreaker's involved in that. I think most people trust what's coming out of that, but there is variability there because we do not have today any standard that's abided by every single player in the space. So we do not have a standard, thus the perception that we have of everybody having different numbers. Now granted, the range of what those numbers are can be pretty wide right now, depending on how far wide you move from the core players of Lipson and Blueberry that have been around forever in tracking podcasting. So it's my opinion that nobody can actually own the podcasting standard, or nobody should own the podcasting standard. It should be put out there as a public thing., to the whole, all the players in the space and everybody gets on the same page. If we're truly trying to build a billion-dollar podcast advertising market, we all have to get on the same page here. And that has not happened yet. And that, that is exactly what the reason I believe that the public radio folks put this standard document out. It was like, this is like a standard that we're putting in the ground today because we don't have something yet. That's come out of the IAB podcast working group. I've been involved in both the Association of Downloadable Media in the early days, along with RawVoice and Blueberry and those groups, as well as been involved in the IAB group. And it's still forming, still coming together. So I believe that the public radio folks got a little frustrated in waiting for that to actually develop. Thought they would just put something out there now that people could start adhering to instead of having to have everything be different, right? Let's start creating a base level standard here. And I don't think it's the right thing to call this declaring a war on the podcasting space, because that's only going to create a division between both sides of this. And that's not what we need here. What we need to be doing is coming together, not dividing each other right now. And I fear that we are dividing the space very aggressively right now with this kind of language and people throwing bombs back and forth, you know, at each other. The public radio folks aren't talking to Lipson and Raw Voice. And I've reached out to a few of the public radio people, and they're not— responding to emails anymore coming from this side. And that's just my perception of what's happening here. I think what we've created is a divide in the space, whether that was caused by public radio by putting this document out, I don't really know. I just know what I'm seeing starting to happen here, and I'm a little concerned about it. So I'm going to continue playing what the ladies have to say about it, and I'll talk about it some more.

RawVoice/Blueberry takes serious exception to the characterization of the podcasting industry in the first line. Quote, "Measurement of podcast usage is at best the Wild West. There has been no standard or even informal consensus around how to count downloads, listens, listeners, or time spent listening." Unquote. For the past 11 years, RawVoice/Blueberry and other leading companies in the podcasting space have worked tirelessly to provide accurate reporting to podcasters and media buyers.

Yes. And I want to say that that is true, that RawVoice and Lipson and PodTrak and other longstanding players in the space have worked tirelessly for a decade. I just want to make sure this is clear to create the best standard, or the best practice might be the way to say it. They have not created a standard. And I think we need to get very clear on that because what we're talking about here is creating a standard. And that does not exist today, irregardless of what individual players in the space say, that does not exist today. What we're striving for, hopefully, is to have that soon from the IAB podcast working group. But that was more than likely, this is the honest truth too, that is going to be a baseline standard. That won't be a top-line standard. That'll be like a minimum standard that will be probably a little bit better than what the public radio standard was put out. That's the truth of the matter, because there's still going to be players in this space that want to have better metrics as a competitive advantage in the market. And we've seen that play out to today. And some of the players in the space don't wanna share all of their secret sauce, to create a high-level standard. So what we're going to wind up with is a minimal baseline standard that will not even create what I consider to be a 100% standard. I think what we're going to create is, is tiers of baseline standard, and then there's going to be players in the space that are going to do it better. But that's not what the practice of having a standard is. That is creating a baseline that is then keeping in place a market where metrics becomes kind of a business model of differentiation between podcast hosting platforms in the market. That's the actual truth here, and I'm not trying to make anybody in the podcasting space upset. I'm just saying what needs to be said here because that's exactly the direction that we're going right now. I don't necessarily agree with it, but let's listen some more.

The Wild West statement in the document is unwarranted. Raw Voice/Blueberry is asking the coalition to retract the language and publicly recognize those who have successfully championed meticulous, rigorous, and precise podcast reporting. So that's really kind of the beginning of this because public radio just went out of their way to put this stuff out and kind of left everybody else, especially 'cause they're working with the AIAB, which is sort of like the, at this point, the place where there should be a communication between all of entities. Rob Greenlee from Spreaker, He also made his point of view known over at Radio Inc. And that title for his episode, for that specific link, not episode, is "Will the Plan to Measure Podcasting Work?" is there as well. And really, I think the issue that most of these guys—

And that link is also available at the bottom of my blog post over at RobGreenlee.com on my blog as well, if you wanted to read that. That comment that I made as well. It's a little bit more moderate compared to what I'm saying in this podcast, but it's nonetheless, I think, fairly consistent with what I'm saying here today.

But anyway, let's keep playing. Have against this is that public radio just went out of the way to try to standardize things when that's already happening, and they kind of didn't want to take into consideration very much what has already been done.

Do you think any one of those people was like, do you guys think we should call Robert Lipson? Do you guys— I mean, the thing is, like, do any of those people who were on the coalition, would they even know who to ask? I mean, the problem is there's no— there is no—

they do, unless they're working— they're working with the IAB. They're working with the IAB. They meet together.

They meet together.

Advertising, isn't it? Yes. That is true. Many of the public radio people that were kind of involved in that new public radio standard document that was put out have been involved in the IAB Working Group. And so this is clearly kind of a splintering. Now granted, there are people that were involved in the list of groups that were part of the new public radio spec that were not part of the IAB Working Group, But I do believe that the players that were involved in the IAB working group were working somewhat as a proxy for the much larger group with public radio. So there may have been an alternative motive here, an ulterior motive of trying to present some urgency to IAB to get a standard done here. Because I just have this feeling that the radio folks are getting impatient in wanting to have something more specified because they're trying to build real businesses around this. They're trying to take public radio to the next level. They're trying to make it digital. They're trying to make it financially successful. And I believe a lot of other players in the podcasting space want that as well. So I think this new spec document that was put out, it's a little bit of a wake-up call for everybody else in the space to get this standard put together. And I think that that's the urgency call that I hear. It's not a declare of war against each other. It's a declare of war against us getting access to the advertising revenue that is currently in radio and getting it into podcasting in a much larger way that will be good for everyone.

So let's continue to listen here. It's Interactive Advertising. Yeah. And Inter— Advertising Bureau. So, so they've been, they've been meeting together. All of these guys know each other. They come into the same room, they have meetings, there have been discussions about this in the same room. They all know each other. But what happened is public radio just decided to just do it because things were taking too long for them and they wanted like, this is what we want to do then.

So basically—

It's not that things were taking too long, it's just that none of us really work with the IAB.

The IAB works with corp— But all of these higher entities, meaning Blueberry and Spreaker and Google and you know, all those and all the public radio people, they do get together and they do want to have a proper measurement thing, which is what they've been working towards. But a faction of that group moved away basically and just did what they wanted to do anyway. So that's what I'm saying. It's like if we're meeting, if we're meeting and we're having a discussion, let's say with our ladies or whatever, I don't know if we wanna have a standardized, I don't know, whatever we want to do in— for she podcasts, and we're meeting together with all of these factions, and we are together in one room, and then all of a sudden people that we've been meeting with for months decide to put out a public statement, this is the way it's going to be. What do you think? That doesn't— that just basically says, uh, forget you people, we're gonna do it this way.

So that's all I'm saying. I realize that this statement is hurtful. The statement goes, there's been no standard or even informal consensus around how to count downloads, listeners, or time spent listening. I realize that that statement is hurtful, okay? But for their purposes, which is advertising, for their purposes, which is sponsorship and advertising, there is no consensus as to like, or standard of, you know, measurement.

They're not wrong. Right.

No, it's not that they're not wrong. Yes, Jessica, that is exactly correct. There is no standard of measurement that all players, hosting platforms in the platform, or advertisers have today. Everybody is operating from a slightly different code base on how to filter these downloadable audio files. And it goes the whole spectrum from everybody in the radio industry all the way down to the, the earliest players in the podcasting space. Sure, we had something back in 2008 that kind of got everybody to the same starting gate, but that's not where we are today. There are differences between each of these platforms. They're not oftentimes huge, but there are differences, and some players are doing it better. Than others. Some of those players are calling that out, saying that we are better than everybody else and we are better than you and you're getting it wrong. So let's continue to keep playing here.

It's just that they don't want to accept the standards of measurement that are being put out and worked through and have been worked through already.

No, the problem is some of us count downloads based on whether or not they push play. Some of us count downloads whether or not they've listened for 20 minutes. Some of us count downloads even though they've been downloaded on the iPad, on the computer, on the iPod. They're not wrong. There's no one out there saying a download only counts if X, Y, and Z have taken place. We actually do. All these people, where does it say that?

Oh, we, we, that's what, that's what Blueberry and Libsyn count. They have very specific ways of counting what a download is and making sure that, yes, you know, like there's algorithms and things like that that have been set up to be able to count and to make sure that certain downloads are actual downloads, because there's a lot of things that are not really downloads.

So that standard is— they're tracking it, but there's no consensus between the two of them, or even in the podcast industry itself, as to what makes a podcast successful. That's why you and I have a course.

So that certainly is true. There is no 100% consensus on the metric standard, though I will say that Libsyn and Rob Voice are within 2-3% of each other in their metrics. So we are very close to a standard with the two of the biggest players, but I have to say that there are other bigger players that are not part of that group that are that close. There are other players— SoundCloud, there's players now getting into the space like Google Play and Spotify and Stitcher that are rehosting this And to some degree Spreaker and other, you know, Podbean and these other ones that don't, that were not a part of the original ADM group that originally put this together. And they've all kind of gone off and done their different things. And then you look at the other groups that are doing this too, like PodcastOne and CBS and other groups out there. They have no standard to work from. Because they were not a part of that original group. So they're out there doing their own thing. And so what we need to do is corral everybody together so everybody has the same metric. And we're still going to have players that are not going to play, even if we have a standard, because they're going to want to do their own thing. They're going to want to do it the way that they think that they need to do it. All we can do is try and corral as many of the players in this space together as we can to try and keep our advertisers as happy as possible. And, and honestly, let's be truthful here. Most of the advertisers that are out there are okay with the metrics that come out of the major players. Where they get a little hazy is some of the newer entrants into the podcasting space that maybe aren't using those same level of filtering that Blueberry and Lipson are using. That's where the perception of wild, wild west comes into play. It's not the problem of Lipson and raw voice. It's the problem of everybody else in the space. Not being on the same page.

So let's continue to listen. Because we define success as this and they define success as that. And John Lee Dumas and Podcasters Paradise define success as something else. And it goes round and round. That's why there's so many podcasting courses, because there's not one standard of measurement. Whereas if you advertise on any other medium, there is, right?

But if you were to talk about— but this is what I'm saying. It's like they are only looking at one thing, and they're only looking at downloads. They're only looking about— there's no talk in this document of anything that is not related to the consumption of the media. There's no engagement things, there's no, like, comments, there's no platform, there's no nothing. So that's true, you know. So what I'm saying is that I understand what you're talking about, but that's not— I think that, you know, Defining success is also a very individual thing. Nobody in no business really, you can even get to a point where you can figure out you're successful because you did X, Y, and Z.

Yes. And I agree with that. Um, the document does not have the scope, um, of taking into account other aspects of what is considered to be maybe a successful podcast, you know, like what kind of engagement with an audience that the podcast has? What are the kind of metrics around their website or their views or subscriptions and those kinds of things? But where we are today is we're just trying to get to a baseline level of standards around how to track downloads, because that's the big issue right now in the space. And that's what the focus of the standard is today. Now, granted that there are evolving issues around streaming, that are going to come into play more here as more streaming distribution comes into play with podcasting. But in a lot of ways, those specifications have already been established, and primarily by the IEB. So there is a digital audio spec out there that already exists for streaming advertising. So we kind of have the streaming side of it covered. What we need to get is this kind of this black box of downloads and how to properly track those. That's the really the point of the spear of, of what the issue is here.

But I'll keep playing here. You know, Tim Ferriss has that— that's one of his questions. Like, he— one of the questions he asks is, who is the most successful person that you know?

I know.

And then he asks them to then qualify it. And there's a lot of people who say like, well, if it's about this, then it's this person. If it's about this, then this person, right? So they're just talking about measurement of, of downloads. And that the, the point is that it's like, I think the bottom line, and again, we're going back to the same thing, it's a disrespect to some degree of what has been happened in the past with no respect for the work that has been put in by a lot of different companies and a lot of different people who have spent a lot of time developing a system to be able to filter, download measurement, and deliver stats from a way that can be accountable.

So I know they're not talking about platform, but in the document it says we've been convening to discuss measurement and develop our own guidelines to establish greater accuracy, consistency and accuracy for measuring on-demand audio performance, because there are ways of measuring those other ways of advertising. This is the only one with no particular standard of measurement. Not unit of measurement, standard of measurement as to what creates success and what doesn't. It is a little bit like, well, is this a download or is this a listen? Is this a listener? There's no like, I mean, we are up to interpret it ourselves. And that's why when you Twitter bomb and then brag that you've got 2 million downloads a month, everyone else calls bullshit. But that doesn't mean that there's a standard out there. They're just trying to create a standard just for audio. I'm not saying that means that the— they're not saying your podcast is going to be successful based on these download statistics. I think they're just trying to quantify what makes a listener, one person listening to the show from start to finish. How do we figure that fucking shit out? Because iTunes won't tell us, right? I mean, I understand. I mean, I get the podcasters are like all pissed off and stuff, but like The platform, the website tracking, the email, all of that is quantifiable. All of that is, well, did they click? Well, did they buy? Well, did they see it? Is there an impression? But downloads is the only thing where we're just like, oh, maybe.

Well, maybe they downloaded and heard it. I'm not discounting that that's necessary at all.

You're just discounting the fact that they didn't ask.

They just went ahead. Yeah, that there was conversation. This is what's happening. And then all of a sudden, this is how we are going to measure, period. And that it's not about the measurement. It's not about the document itself. It really is, again, again, it is about that there is a discounted— basically, they're not wanting to kind of do the work of being able to open up to see what has been done before and how there's meticulous counting. This is data. This is like a whole— it's all developmental. Developer type information here that you're going to have to invest a lot of money into to be able to make sure that things don't go wacky.

Yes, I do agree with that, that there is, and there has been a lot of investment made by RawVoice and Lipson in improving these specifications for a long time, and investment, and I'm not sure how, the industry kind of moves beyond that fact. I certainly think that, you know, acknowledgement on the part of the public radio side of the role that both of those companies have played in getting us to where we are today and including them and involving them in that process, I think would have made a lot of sense. And I think that would have been the right thing to do. I'm not quite sure what the rationale was beyond just being— feeling like nothing was happening and that they needed something that they could stand on, that they could tell their advertisers of what they were going to do with the podcasts that they were hosting, because they didn't necessarily want to have all their podcasts hosted on either Libsyn or Blubrry. They have their own hosting platforms that public radio uses, and they need to have their own specification because they don't want to rely on a third party to do that. So you have this challenge and that's why they need a standard because there, there are a variety of places in the public radio ecosystem where they host podcasts and there needs to be a standard amongst all those radio station groups. Uh, and there's a huge amount of content there and a lot of money to be made. And so they just want to have something that they can point to and say, this is what we're doing., because it honestly, it doesn't exist, uh, yet, but it's coming.

So I'm going to continue. That's all I'm saying with that.

Um, the other part is that they're talking about measuring from Nielsen. They're just talking about a totally different animal. I just feel like they're not talking to us because they're not talking about us. That's all. I know it's upsetting and annoying, but like, they're going by, by Nielsen.

Jessica, it's, it's really all one game here. The public radio folks are podcasters and more and more podcasters are getting involved in some form of radio. So these worlds are blending together and there isn't really a difference because what the public radio people want is to be able to monetize podcasts that is separate from monetizing broadcast, the broadcast radio side. So they're trying to figure that out. They're going to keep their broadcast radio models, but they also want to have a standard on the podcasting side. So that's what they're talking about here. It's not that, that those folks over there don't, or don't care about podcasting, or don't care about the other side of podcasting. It's just that, like I've been saying, there wasn't a lot happening that would help them with their revenues., in presenting consistent numbers to their advertisers.

So I'm going to continue.

And they're talking to IAB, and our, our, for our purposes, we have no need for that. But it's going to, uh, it, it, that, that's what you, you say, and the problem is that it will, it will affect regardless. It will affect.

That's what people are going to go to.

Nielsen ratings have it They haven't affected YouTube, but it has even the most amazing shows that are canceled because they're not getting the views.

You know, there's so many— Nielsen is wanting to get into the podcast metrics business. Um, I was back at the Nielsen Audio Partners Conference, uh, back in December and talked to that team back there, and they are going to be putting together an SDK and working with podcast hosting platforms to try and come up with a an all-up capture of what's happening in the podcasting space. And this is another area of both confusion and opportunity and frustration in the podcasting space because Nielsen NetRatings used to be involved in Podcast Metrics back with Lipson many years ago, and they dropped that. So the challenge that they have now is that if they want to get a deep dive into all of the audio metrics around podcasting, They have to have relationships with all of the playback platforms out there as well, which means all of the, the apps that enable downloading. So you start talking about that and you start talking about a huge percentage of downloads that happen through the Apple ecosystem. And is Nielsen going to get access to that play data off of downloaded podcast episodes? And the consensus in the industry is that Apple is not going to disclose that, which means that Nielsen is never going to have a 100% view of podcast playback, even though that's what they think that they can get. The only metric that they can get their hands on is going to come out of places like Libsyn, Blueberry, Spreaker, SoundCloud, you know, Rainmaker, all of the podcast hosting platforms that exist today. And that's a, that's a very big and very large group of platforms and apps out there that they would have to partner with to be able to capture all the data on this area. And it's a big question mark of whether or not that's even realistic for them to actually do.

So I'm going to keep playing. Different shows that are like, why, why are you canceling that? That's such an incredible show.

Oh, because they didn't have— you can't cancel my YouTube show. No, you can't. Based on your Nielsen ratings, you can take your Nielsen ratings and shove them up your fat ass. And that applies here. That's what I'm saying. You can never be canceled. You can never go off the air if you don't get Nielsen ratings. Nobody knows and nobody cares.

The end. Big deal.

And no, you cannot see my numbers. I'm just saying, like, why does it not compare? If you can find a reason why in this particular instance our podcasts aren't comparable to your neighborhood YouTube show and the importance or lack of importance thereof, then I'll— I'm not saying I'm not listening now, but then I'll, you know, I'm trying to understand, I guess, what the hubbub is about. I just wish that— I wish that they saw it as well, that they are using a different standard of measurement because they are a completely different project. Completely different. And of course, The Tonight Show, they're— I mean, yeah, they're checking to see how many viral— yeah, I mean, Jimmy Fallon's got a huge amount of pressure to create something viral every single night.

But do I?

No.

Yeah, but nobody cares if my shit's viral ever.

Let's—

we can, we can look at it just from one last perspective, and then we really got to cut it because we got to go. But, um, yes, with the fact that there's a lot of these, you know, these companies have been in fact doing advertising and, you know, negotiating advertising deals for podcasts for years. That have been measuring in these ways that are getting big, big clients and have for a long time. We're not talking about public radio here. And so when somebody else comes in and says, you mean like Adam Curry, like, no, I'm just talking about Lipson and Blueberry. They've been getting some pretty, I mean, they make, we, I mean, both the companies do a lot of ads for podcasters.

Yeah.

They run a lot of ad campaigns. Measuring with their, with their measuring numbers. So then you see this document come out that says, no, no, no. I'm just saying, you see this document that says measurement of podcast usage is at best the wild, wild west. There has been no standard or even informal consensus around how to count downloads. How do you think that's going to make, um, the advertisers feel about trusting a company like Libsyn or Blueberry? I hear what you're saying. You know what I mean?

So then it's like that.

I mean, as a person who's starting an agency and trying to pitch to sponsors. So Elsie, I, I do agree with your thoughts there that, um, that this whole debate, um, is, is really bad for the podcasting space. Um, and it's also bad for public radio too. It's not something that I was hoping, um, to see in this space where, where we have this kind of public and open, war around metrics in this area because it doesn't build confidence with the advertisers out there, who is the whole point of why we're doing this. So both Lipson and Rob Voicereq are exactly right, are key players in driving revenue to most of the big podcasts out there today. And most advertisers do view those two platforms as the, you know, a pseudo-standard per se. But there are other players in the space that are going to those advertisers not using those techniques of filtering and presenting their numbers. And that's what's giving the perception of the Wild Wild West. And though that's wrong of the public radio folks to use that terminology here, because it only inflames the conflicts between the parties involved in this space, 'cause all that stuff was getting worked out through the IAB, and now it's been like thrown to the wind here. And hopefully the IAB can kind of corral it back into a cohesive group again and not have this fractured situation last for very much longer. So I'm going to continue playing just a few more minutes.

I think the way that I would explain that is by saying this person is hosted on Blueberry and according to their host, these are the standards.

And what if they say, well, that's not the standard public radio podcast measurement guideline that they put out.

It's different. There's no way that Nike's ever gonna come back to me and say, I expect Sports Gal Pal to be on a Nielsen rating system, right? They do not expect that.

They will never care.

Never. Are you sure? There's never gonna come a time— yes, yes, they're never gonna come back and say, if you're not on ABC, CBS, or Fox, fuck you. They're never gonna—

they're never gonna say that because I'm pitching Now it is true that there is a chance that the numbers that would come out of a metric system that's compliant with the public radio spec will be higher than the numbers that are coming out of Lipson and Blueberry. And I think that's the danger area here, because you're exactly correct that there could be this perception that the public radio document is now the standard in podcasting, and both Lipson and raw voice are not. They are compliant with it. They just have exceeded it, right? And that's where the issue comes in. I don't think it's going to cause as big of a problem as people say or think it might, because the numbers that are being filtered there, it's only going to cause problems for public radio because their numbers are going to be higher than podcasts that are hosted on other platforms. But it does raise this confidence question. About who is right, which platform is the, is the correct measurement and the correct standard. Is the lower number accurate or is the higher number accurate? It does raise that concern. And that's why I didn't want this. I didn't want to see this happen. And it's always, it's been a danger that this was going to happen for a good couple of years now, or a year and a half now, that this fracture was going to happen and somebody was going to put out a public standard that was going to rock the boat here, and that's what we're seeing.

A different animal. I'm not pitching them WNYC, otherwise I would work for them. I'm not pitching— I'm pitching them shows on Libsyn and Blueberry who are being rated and measured by those standards. Now, it would be nice if those two could have a standard rate of measurement for the rest of us, and maybe even— they do got SoundCloud, and then you've got Rainmaker, and then you've got Podbean. Like, how are they all going to get together and be like, here's what we're all going to build our software on?

Yeah, you're right. 'Cause there's SoundCloud and, and Spreaker and, and Podbean. So different. All of them have their own way of, yeah, absolutely. And there's, and there's PodcastOne who has their own special way of counting things, which seems to be completely and so diametrically opposed to everybody else's.

So it's, so as an agent, I would just, so as an agent, I would just say, you know, if there was a question about what's considered a listener or a download, I would show them the Libsyn stats and just say, this is what Libsyn considers, you know? And if it had to be, re-added to be comparable to a public radio standard. I'm sure I could do that. Like, their downloads, you know, 4 Libsyn downloads equals 2 whatever. I mean, I'm just saying, like, if there has to— if it comes to that, it would come to that. But they're not— we're just not measuring the same thing, right? I just want to know, like, let's just say they asked Todd Cochran and Rob Walsh to the table at that conversation., and they're sitting in the room and those guys are all talking about IAB and Nielsen ratings and impressions and click-throughs. And so what the hell would Todd and Rob have to add to the conversation? All they know and what their expertise is in is the software that they represent. They don't know anything about where those guys are coming from. I'm assuming, I don't know for sure because I don't know.

I disagree with that. They do have a lot of more information than that. You know, they, especially Todd, Todd, I mean, he works with like WordPress, for gosh's sake. He— yes, he totally knows that stuff.

And the man's like— broadcast media though. What do they know about broadcast media?

What do Rob and Todd know about broadcast media? I don't know anything.

I don't know about that. Let me draw some clarity on that. Um, both those guys, um, have an understanding of broadcast radio and understand how they— the metrics is handled over there. There's a baseline kind of understanding, but there's also a rejection of it. And that's where the line is drawn, is that when RawVoice and Lipson look at the market, they look at what they're doing, and what they're doing is podcasts. So that's what they're focused on. I think there is a lot of resistance to podcasts being measured like radio is measured. Because there's a perception that it's not very accurate. And that presents conflict because many of the radio industry people want to be able to track podcasts in a very similar way to how radio is tracked. And the reason for that is to get access to bigger advertising budgets. Now, granted, that is a short-term view. The view is going forward is to treat podcasting as a separate medium that has a separate metric and a separate way of evaluating performance. And that's what this is all about. This is all about looking at podcasts as something separate from radio, and that's what the goal is here.

So I'm going to continue playing the last few minutes.

I don't know exactly if they knew about metrics. That's what they were talking about though. That's what they're trying to create a standard of measurement to.

Broadcasting, not podcasting. They come from broad— No, they were actually making a standard for podcasting, not broadcasting. So that's an incorrect statement about what the intent of this document was and what they're trying to do. They are coming at it, looking at it from a perspective of broadcast radio. But I wouldn't say that this document was looking at broadcast radio metric type of approaches. They were trying to be pure digital with this. And trying to handle things in a similar way to what the other players in the podcasting space are looking at podcast metrics. It just doesn't go far enough.

And that's where the conflict is coming into play here. Broadcasting. They're using their broadcast knowledge to create their standard of measurement for their advertisers, their podcasters, people who are already advertising on radio. That's it. People who are advertising through Libsyn, people who are advertising through Libsyn and Blueberry. They don't care about them because that doesn't apply to them ever. It will never apply to them. Even people who are advertising through mid-roll, they don't care. That's why mid-roll— mid-roll is not on that list either, are they? No, I'm just looking now. It's 100 acronyms. It's a WBEZ, PRX, CBC, WNYC, NPR, CBC. You don't see mid-roll there because they don't give a fuck about mid-roll because they're not doing broadcasting. They don't care about how podcasts measure for their advertisers because they're just different. They want to know how to— you know what I think they're doing? For example, 1-800-MATTRESS, okay? They want to know how to tell 1-800-MATTRESS what they're going to get out of giving them another 4 grand to be also on the podcast. How do they tell that guy, we want more money to put you here? How do we tell them what they're going to get out of it? They're trying to figure that out. They don't need to ask Rob and Todd. Do you understand what I'm saying? They need to figure out for themselves how to pitch it to the people that have already spending money with them. That's all this document is, I think. Now again, I don't like the way that Nick said all podcast standard of measure because I, I don't know that I agree necessarily. Well, because I don't know that they would care. That's all. I'm not trying to— and for you, you sound defeated like I've beat you down. I don't want— to give that impression that I'm trying to beat down the person. I just, I know they want to be included. I know they're the experts at podcasting, but until— I'm just, I want to know what they could add to the conversation for those guys. How do you tell WNYC how to pitch to their own sponsors?

Can you? Uh, based on— Yes, they can. I think that Rob and Todd from Lipson and Blueberry can help public radio a lot. They have basically done the hard work over the last 10 years to refine their filtering and to refine getting to a pure unique listener, which is exactly what everybody in the podcasting space wants today. And I do believe, and I want to make sure that these guys know that I feel this way, I respect the work that they've done. I respect the place that they have in this market based on all the years that they've been putting into figuring this stuff out, because it is hard work. And somehow we need to acknowledge that, and somehow public radio needs to, to acknowledge that and ask for their help instead of going alone and trying to do it themselves. I'm 100% in support of Lipson and RawVoice and Blueberry and what they've done in this space and express my, my total appreciation for all the work that they've done.

And I feel strongly that the public radio folks should take that approach as well.

What? Do you know what I mean? Based on what? Yeah, no, I get this is a deep conversation. And the other thing too is that I don't know enough to comment. I don't know enough to comment. I don't know. I'm way down, down in the totem pole here of any kind of knowledge.

Because you don't even care about—

you don't even care about monetization anyway. No, I don't care about this. No, I don't. I, I really— I don't. I know that it's a big conversation for a lot of people, and for me what matters is, again, just coming back again from the same position of being like in a John Hughes movie, and I am, you know, what from Some Kind of Wonderful, forever and ever I will be. And podcasts, you know, public radio is kind of like Amanda Jones and her boy— actually, her boyfriend. It's more like her boyfriend. And I don't understand. I don't get— I don't get that. I just— and so I'm still wanting to go just sit at my drum set and drum with all my stuff on my wrists and my cool makeup and my really cute short hair.

Yes, this is exactly my point though. That's me. This is exactly my point. If you were trying to come up with a standard unit of cool outfit, would you ask Eric Stoltz what he thought, or would you ask Amanda Jones's boyfriend what he thinks is cool? Right, totally. You don't ask Eric Stoltz. He's busy wearing black leather. They know what they like already. It's not relevant, that's all. But I still love— I love my Eric Stoltzes.

I am the Eric Stoltz girl. I love Eric Stoltz. That's like my choice. Like, I'd rather not even see the other dude.

Like, you could just not exist in my world. Well, that's the problem, is that Eric Stoltz doesn't want Amanda Jones's boyfriend and their show hogging up our iTunes. And I get it. And on some level, I agree. I think it's sucky that they're always hogging New and Noteworthy and What's Hot when the rest of us have been working our tits off for 10 years They fucking show up with their NPR professionally produced bullshit and hog the show, and I get it. I agree. I— but just maybe it's the autistic part of me, like, just logically, I just know I, I don't think this is the thing to get upset about. Maybe you should talk to iTunes about who they highlight, put them all in their separate corner, and then put the grassroots people and have our own top categories. I get it. Why should we share our top categories? Like list.

Put all the top, you know, give them their own station. Ah, all right. Well, anyway, on that note, we are gonna have to close the show.

Well, um, what, what, what?

I was just gonna say, if I'm wrong, and tell me why, because I, I can't tell you why because I don't know enough. I said, like, shout out to Daniel, Daniel Lewis, The Audacity to Podcast.

If you're listening, do send some feedback to Jessica and explain to her what's going on, or Rob, or Todd, or Rob Greenlee. I mean, either send feedback, or maybe we could interview you or talk about it some more. Like, I'm not saying I want to debate because I don't. I want to learn why.

Well, maybe because it is relevant. Yeah, we'll see. I certainly, uh, appreciate you guys asking for comment, and that's, that's what I did here. I'm going to be gone for the next week, so I wanted to provide some feedback. I know this is a lengthy episode. Was it 50-plus minutes long? And just wanted to give you guys some feedback along with the post on my blog. I certainly appreciate both of you spending so much time talking about this and driving your brain cells to be applied to this topic. It's not exactly a fun topic. One that kind of gets in the weeds of what's happening behind the scenes in the podcasting space today. But this is growing pains. This is what we're all going through right now. We've been going through this for over a year now for many of us in the podcasting space. And, and to have it out in the open like this is, is good from one perspective, but bad for another, you know. And I'll, I'll say it again, and I say it in my article, this public radio document is a symptom of the problem. It's not the problem. And solving it is pretty clear to me. It's just whether or not all, all the parties involved are wanting to come to the table and get that done. And it's focused on the IAB Podcast Working Group. That needs to be the focal point of where this all goes. We've gone down that path a long ways and we just need to get to the finish line as fast as possible. And that's, that's my vote. Thank you very much for listening to this extended episode off of my blog at Rob Greenlee, and that's R-O-B-G-R-E-E-N-L-E-E.com, in my little podcast that I have there that I'm going to put like a little web player into my blog post here with my thoughts on this. So everybody, thank you for listening. This is Rob Greenlee, and if you have comments or questions for me, you're certainly welcome to send me an email. You can send it to rob@robgreenlee.com. I also am the head of content over at Spreaker at spreaker.com and have a keen desire to get to a standard so we can get Spreaker all on board a standard as well. So I have a common desire to get that done for a significant platform that currently hosts about 120,000 shows with RSS feeds. Anyway, thank you very much for listening to this, and I'll probably post more audio here in the future. Thanks, bye-bye.