The Future of Podcast Measurement
Today's episode looks at podcast measurement standards. We discussed the challenges of open-source analytics, the critical need for integrity in data, and how industry standards like IAB certification are shaping the landscape.
We explored how these measurements impact both podcasters and advertisers. Our conversation also underscored the necessity of community support in fostering sustainable models that respect creators and listeners.
Your Hosts
Find Dave at schoolofpodcasting.com
Find Daniel at theaudacitytopodcast.com
Support The Show
Daniel
Podgagement - Boost Your Audience Engagement
Social Subscribe and Follow Plugin
Dave
Mentioned in This Episode
OP3 Stats
Podcast 2.2 Standards
https://iabtechlab.com/standards/podcast-measurement-guidelines/
Podcast Certified Companies (it shows compliant....)
https://iabtechlab.com/compliance-programs/compliant-companies/#
Mentioned in this episode:
If You've Received Value From This Episode
This podcast supports podcasting 2.0 boosts and streaming of sats. You can boost the show using a new podcast app at www.newpodcastapps.com
00:00 - Untitled
00:31 - Spotify Has Left The IAB
01:36 - We NEED a Standard
02:19 - Apple's Early Changes
05:25 - Can Soundcloud Be More Out of Date?
06:18 - Manipulating Data
07:57 - The Bot Blacklist
10:36 - Certified vs Membership
11:30 - Spotify Certification?
13:35 - Compliant vs Certified
18:25 - Time Listened
20:30 - The Battle Over Detaiils
21:31 - Using Sats to Measure Time Listened
22:38 - Activity Stream Option
25:38 - Two Futures
26:51 - Can We Have Our Own Measurement Agency
27:38 - Podcast Standards Project
30:22 - Dreaming of a Universal Stat System
31:28 - OP3.dev Stats
36:37 - How is Alby Still in Business?
39:00 - Example from Focus on the Family
41:47 - BOSSTAGRAMS
43:12 - Positivity Point Podcast Guru
44:23 - Kudos to Fountain.fm
The future of podcast measurement.
Speaker:Daniel, future of podcast episode number 43,
Speaker:the future of podcast measurement. Everybody
Speaker:bust out their rulers or something, I don't know, to, measure that with
Speaker:this, inspired by our good friends at Spotify who
Speaker:have left the IAB. And,
Speaker:I guess they're just gonna let their certification. They're no longer certified on
Speaker:I think we're up to 2.2 now for the IAB certification. Yeah.
Speaker:2.2 just came out. And the one thing I liked I saw in there
Speaker:where this whole thing of we're not certified. We're
Speaker:Compliant. Compliant. Yeah. Yeah. IAB compliant,
Speaker:which that was a trademark issue to begin with,
Speaker:and I'm glad that they're focusing on that. So what is it that they're they're
Speaker:actually standing here on? I always thought that was weird and it just
Speaker:kinda has the whole, oh, no. No. We're compliant. Trust us. You know? I'm
Speaker:like, yeah. That's anytime I've ever heard of any kind of government
Speaker:agency or anything at all that has to police itself, it usually
Speaker:does not end well. And you find out later that, oh, yeah. They weren't even
Speaker:close. So it's interesting to see. I know a lot of people are
Speaker:throwing out ideas about it'd be nice if we could come up with,
Speaker:some sort of separate entity or or if it's not the
Speaker:IAB, then what is it? I don't know. What are your thoughts? Yeah. We do
Speaker:need a standard of measurement, and that's the difficult thing. The podcasting
Speaker:landscape is not like it used to be. In the original
Speaker:days before there were all these bots scraping podcast and
Speaker:such, a download was done by a person. Yeah.
Speaker:And so you could know if this file was downloaded, it was
Speaker:most likely downloaded by a person. You could maybe
Speaker:easily filter out certain bot download scrapers but I'm not sure if they would even
Speaker:touch something like an MP3 file. Certainly not from an
Speaker:RSS feed because RSS feeds just aren't indexed by
Speaker:the web really that much. Since then though, there have been all these
Speaker:other things that have happened. Like, do you remember several years
Speaker:ago, Dave, when Apple sent that confusing email
Speaker:that said a couple technical things? They said, make
Speaker:sure your podcast cover art is hosted on a server that supports HTTP
Speaker:head requests. And they said, make sure your
Speaker:media files are hosted on a server that supports byte range
Speaker:requests. Remember that? Because we're all like,
Speaker:byte range. Got it. And then we all looked at each other and went, what's
Speaker:byte range? What did you Exactly. But
Speaker:then it made perfect sense why Apple was saying that because at
Speaker:that time, they didn't support what we call, with
Speaker:massive quotation marks around this, streaming which is where
Speaker:you press play and it starts playing immediately and you can skip to anywhere in
Speaker:the episode without having predownloaded the episode. It's
Speaker:streaming from that point or it's pre buffering or it's downloading
Speaker:in the background. It's not technically streaming, but all that aside.
Speaker:So they gave us that technical stuff. That changed
Speaker:how stats worked because then you weren't
Speaker:downloading the whole file. You might be downloading only a portion of the file.
Speaker:But then as Internet connection speeds, both mobile and
Speaker:wired and wireless and everything, have caught up. Now
Speaker:when you press play, even if you haven't downloaded the episode, it's very likely
Speaker:the entire episode downloads in the background within only a few
Speaker:seconds. Whether you're on WiFi or you're on mobile data, it's
Speaker:really fast now. That's changed but still there is some of that kind
Speaker:of partial streaming. We've also got things where if someone is
Speaker:streaming and for whatever reason the whole file doesn't download right away,
Speaker:then if they're mobile, their IP address could be changing
Speaker:as they are moving around or even just joining different networks.
Speaker:And how do you track that? What if there are multiple people in the same
Speaker:location downloading an episode? All of this stuff. So all of these
Speaker:things plus the whole manipulation field
Speaker:and bots and servers and things that you can set up to
Speaker:download this stuff automatically, there is a need to
Speaker:have a standard of this is a
Speaker:legitimate download and this is an illegitimate download and therefore don't
Speaker:count it. I think that's important for
Speaker:advertisers, of course, because they need to know what they're paying for,
Speaker:how many people they're actually reaching. It's also important for
Speaker:podcasters to have a good idea of how many people
Speaker:are they reaching so that they can know how to
Speaker:approach their show. Even things like, if you get feedback,
Speaker:if you get one negative feedback about a new section in your
Speaker:podcast, well, is that one out of 10,000
Speaker:people? So the other 9,999
Speaker:love that thing or don't say anything about it? Or is that
Speaker:one out of 10 people, and therefore, it's 10% of your audience
Speaker:thinks that thing? So it's important to know that, and that's why we need
Speaker:the standards. Yeah. And, also, if some media
Speaker:host comes up with new features and you decide to move, you
Speaker:kinda want the numbers to be somewhat in the ballpark
Speaker:where, you know, SoundCloud hasn't updated anything as far as I
Speaker:know since 2017 because that's when the the
Speaker:new Apple categories came out. And those, to the best of
Speaker:my knowledge, are still not in SoundCloud. And I don't believe
Speaker:SoundCloud is IAB certified. I know if you if
Speaker:you Google, you know, SoundCloud plays, you can buy, you
Speaker:know, thousands of plays on SoundCloud for a very little
Speaker:bit of money. So no sponsor will touch you. You so, yeah, it's
Speaker:one of those things where if somebody moved right now from SoundCloud
Speaker:to Lipson or Captivator, Buzzsprout, or whoever, they're gonna take a
Speaker:serious haircut because, you know, it's just they haven't kept
Speaker:up. And who knows how they're calculating what a download
Speaker:is, but it's gonna be, I'm assuming here, pretty different
Speaker:than if you go to somebody who's been certified. Yeah.
Speaker:And there can be all kinds of ways to manipulate
Speaker:downloads too. And I stumbled across one of them even myself
Speaker:a couple of years ago when I did that podcast speed test
Speaker:thing where I started comparing the speed of RSS feeds and
Speaker:then started comparing the speed of hosting providers and discovered some are
Speaker:significantly slower than others and it in the end, it just didn't really make all
Speaker:that difference. I was basically building a bot farm
Speaker:to automate this testing from multiple regions. And the most
Speaker:interesting discovery, actually, in all of that research was that
Speaker:some of the podcast hosting providers and analytics were
Speaker:counting those bots. Yeah. And I did nothing
Speaker:to try and disguise them as legitimate downloads. They
Speaker:were clearly identified as being from
Speaker:whatever software package I was using to cause those downloads,
Speaker:and they were coming from a server. So
Speaker:some of the companies counted every single
Speaker:download I did. So I knew, and I even played with it
Speaker:a little bit. I knew all I have to do is make it download this
Speaker:file 20 more times and it will show in my numbers 20 more
Speaker:downloads. While others, I could make it download as many
Speaker:times as I wanted and it never counted. So whether
Speaker:they knew by the user agent, the technical identifier of
Speaker:what's downloading it or maybe they knew that IP
Speaker:address is blacklisted because it's coming from a
Speaker:known server farm or data center. Whatever case, they
Speaker:knew to filter that out. And that's thanks to the
Speaker:standards that we have with podcast measurement. Right. Because that's one of the things you
Speaker:get from being certified is there is a
Speaker:blacklist of all these bots and things like that that you can
Speaker:easily implement into your system. So, again, there's a little
Speaker:bit of everybody's kind of on the same page to a certain
Speaker:extent so that we know, oh, yeah, that particular
Speaker:location or whatever is false. So don't count that.
Speaker:And if you were going back to the, hey, we're just compliant.
Speaker:Well, you don't get that list. So you're kind of
Speaker:guessing. Okay. This, you know, this giant building
Speaker:that's, you know, AT and T and it's all their employees.
Speaker:Do we count that IP as 1 or do we count all
Speaker:the ones in turn? How does that work? Those kind of things where if we
Speaker:can all come together and count them the same, we don't really matter which
Speaker:one it is. It just if we have some sort of consistency in
Speaker:how we count, then it just makes it easier to
Speaker:move forward with everyone somewhat on the same page. And I
Speaker:think that might be for the podcast hosting providers and analytics
Speaker:providers who are thinking of joining the IAB. That's almost the
Speaker:more valuable part is getting that list. And that's
Speaker:where I think it doesn't necessarily have to be
Speaker:an open list, like, available for anyone to
Speaker:see because then when certain things like that when blacklists
Speaker:are made public, then it it can be easy to manipulate some of those
Speaker:things. But think about some of the email spam
Speaker:lists out there. There are multiple ones and some
Speaker:email service providers will track multiple
Speaker:or subscribe to multiple lists so that they can keep themselves off of
Speaker:it or know what gets flagged and such. So I could see that maybe
Speaker:coming in the future where it's decentralized then. I
Speaker:mean, the list itself is centralized, but you can get
Speaker:similar lists from other places. Like, I know Blueberry
Speaker:has done probably the most foundational work of anyone
Speaker:in the IAB for developing the standard, building those whitelists and
Speaker:blacklists. And Blueberry could I mean, maybe they have
Speaker:some kind of noncompete with the IAB about this. But that's something that
Speaker:Blueberry could do, is they could offer an enterprise feed of
Speaker:their whitelists and blacklists. So, yes, they're competitors, but, hey,
Speaker:they get money from their competitors then. But their competitors, like
Speaker:anyone else out there, could subscribe to that list to then get
Speaker:that. And it's decentralized. It's supporting the company that
Speaker:actually built the list, and then there's not the need for the
Speaker:huge expense for certification. Now that's something that we haven't even brought up,
Speaker:although probably most of you listening right now know about chapters
Speaker:that there is a huge expense and it's different for each company because it's based
Speaker:on revenue, not just ad revenue anymore, but it is based
Speaker:on the revenue of the company, how much you pay to be a member
Speaker:of IAB. And then you also have to pay I've heard it's
Speaker:something like 15,000. Does that sound about right? And that's
Speaker:where I thought I had these backwards. I thought it cost
Speaker:a lot to get certified. And so I heard where James Cridland
Speaker:had kinda done some math and gave a very rough, you know,
Speaker:estimate of, like, a half a $1,000,000 for
Speaker:Spotify. And I thought that was to get certified, and that's not. That's to be
Speaker:a member of the IAB. So I forget where I'd said
Speaker:that. That was wrong. That's how much to be a member. So but
Speaker:they still could've. I don't think the certification has anything to do with how
Speaker:much money you make, and they could have easily still stayed certified.
Speaker:And so that is kind of the head scratcher, but I just have this feeling.
Speaker:I have nothing to base this on. It's just my gut. I can see Spotify
Speaker:coming out with their own kind of measurement because they,
Speaker:you know, they have Chartable. They have the app in Spotify. They've
Speaker:got Megaphone. They've got, Spotify for so they kind of
Speaker:control every aspect of the listening aspect of from hosting to
Speaker:listening to where they have a really decent feature
Speaker:set in terms of statistics. I'm not sure how you would tie
Speaker:outside people to that, but I just I can just see them saying, oh, no.
Speaker:We're not IEB certified. We're Spotify certified
Speaker:because we're measuring our own stats and just trust us. They're
Speaker:they're accurate. Are you actually suggesting
Speaker:that Spotify I mean, hear me out here.
Speaker:Are you act do you actually think Spotify
Speaker:would build something proprietary? Well, if you
Speaker:think about it, so I've got a big show. Let's say they're on, I don't
Speaker:know, Buzzsprout. And an advertiser comes to them
Speaker:and says, oh, we wanna give you lots of money to be on your show.
Speaker:And they're like, great. They're like, but we use, you know, the Spotify
Speaker:measurement thing. And they're like, that's that's the one we trust. So, like, great.
Speaker:Okay. So how do I do oh, well, you have to move your show to
Speaker:Megaphone to Spotify for Chapters because you only you know, you have
Speaker:to go into their ecosystem again. I could
Speaker:see, part of me goes, no. No. No. Because they would have to move so
Speaker:many shows, and that would be crazy. I don't know. It's just I
Speaker:just have this feeling that they're gonna try something to make their own because
Speaker:they've never been they they kind of teeter totter. 1 minute
Speaker:their RSS is holding us back and then the next minute they're, oh,
Speaker:we love the open ecosystem. And I'm like, okay. Which one is it? You know?
Speaker:So but I so I kinda have a feeling they could try to do their
Speaker:own thing just based on their polls that
Speaker:originally only worked in Spotify. The video podcasts that only
Speaker:work in Spotify. So I can see them kind of coming up with their
Speaker:own little stats package or something. I'm hoping they prove
Speaker:me wrong on that, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did. I think there
Speaker:is an aspect to all of this where someone could look at this and
Speaker:say, alright. We were certified 2.0.
Speaker:We can make whatever adjustments come out in 2.1 and
Speaker:2.2 and so on. We don't need to be certified
Speaker:anymore and therefore, we don't need to be members
Speaker:anymore. We'll just follow along because the guidelines are
Speaker:open. Anyone can read the guidelines. And there was even a period where
Speaker:people could comment publicly on the guidelines and
Speaker:provide feedback to the IAB about those guidelines. So that's where
Speaker:this whole compliant thing even came up as it's not just saying, oh, yeah, we
Speaker:follow in principle. It was people who would read the guidelines
Speaker:and then design their software to follow those guidelines.
Speaker:But I love the line from the Pirates of the Caribbean, The first
Speaker:one, where Elizabeth Swann says, hang the code and hang
Speaker:the rules. They're more like guidelines anyway. And
Speaker:that is the truth with the IAB guidelines, is they are
Speaker:merely guidelines, and some of them are open to some
Speaker:pretty wide interpretation that can lead to
Speaker:some significantly different results. And just one of those
Speaker:things could be even an IP address by itself. Like,
Speaker:if you have I'm sure they don't have only one IP
Speaker:address. But if Apple corporate headquarters had only one public
Speaker:IP address and everyone at Apple was listening to
Speaker:your podcast. And that IP address
Speaker:was well, I mean how your stats look would depend
Speaker:on whether that one IP address was white listed
Speaker:to allow then every download from the IP address account
Speaker:as a separate download within certain other filtration? Or would it be
Speaker:blacklisted where it could be thousands of downloads from
Speaker:legitimate people downloading the episode, listening to it separately,
Speaker:all count as 1. That one difference
Speaker:alone is significant, but that's not even a measurement. That's just
Speaker:a a whitelist, blacklist thing. Right. But when it comes to some of the other
Speaker:technical stuff, there's room There's lots
Speaker:of wiggle room in there for someone to I I don't really want
Speaker:to say inflate because that sounds that
Speaker:sounds manipulative Right. In a negative way. But it is basically to
Speaker:end up with numbers that might be bigger than they should
Speaker:be, or maybe even the other way might be smaller than they
Speaker:should be. So if you have only just guidelines,
Speaker:you're going to end up with a lot of variety because people will
Speaker:follow and apply guidelines differently. Yeah. It's open to interpretation.
Speaker:Yeah. But I think that we also see, like, with Spotify,
Speaker:with, according to some people recently,
Speaker:Spotify actually overtaking Apple in downloads.
Speaker:I really want to know if that's just network wide. There are a
Speaker:lot of factor. You know, I'm mister caveat. I think of all of the caveats
Speaker:to some of this data and things. For example, is that let's take,
Speaker:SoundCloud, for example. We'll throw them under the bus. SoundCloud has never
Speaker:and will never have an integration directly with
Speaker:Spotify. JSON was the first to have an integration with
Speaker:Spotify to get podcasts on Spotify and JSON encouraged many of
Speaker:their users to submit to Spotify. SoundCloud has no
Speaker:communication with their users. So Lipsyn's data
Speaker:is going to look significantly different from SoundCloud's
Speaker:data because of podcaster education. Right.
Speaker:And because SoundCloud is an opt in platform. Along
Speaker:that same line, they have the ability to
Speaker:track what happens in their player and track even
Speaker:more data than you get from downloads. Maybe
Speaker:they've decided that they just don't care about that anymore
Speaker:because they think they're the big shot smarty pants now and that they're the number
Speaker:one place to consume podcasts. So maybe they think their
Speaker:own downloads that they see in their platform are enough for all of the podcasters
Speaker:using them, all of the podcasters who are on Spotify. Maybe they think
Speaker:that's enough for them, and that's it. Yeah. I know in the past, James had
Speaker:said that Spotify had more users,
Speaker:but Apple had more downloads. And now I'm not
Speaker:sure where that data is coming from. But, yeah, I heard James report
Speaker:that Spotify now has more downloads. And
Speaker:Spotify has more podcasts because they've got all those is this thing
Speaker:on? Is anyone listening? That's it. Alright. This is my first test
Speaker:episode of a podcast. Woo hoo. Lights are blinking. Okay. Cool.
Speaker:What do you wanna talk about? I don't know. What do you wanna talk about?
Speaker:Alright. Thanks. Thanks for coming, everybody. Yeah. So they do
Speaker:have those. So because we need stats on those. Let's see what the
Speaker:completion rate is. Right. Point
Speaker:05%. That's odd. But now that you bring up completion rate,
Speaker:that is the other thing. Now others have been talking about this time listened
Speaker:metric, and that matters to sponsors. I like to think more
Speaker:of a percentage listened because time listened is
Speaker:an absolute, and it's difficult to measure
Speaker:in that kind of absolute when the length of episodes
Speaker:is not an absolute. So for take Pod News
Speaker:Daily, for example, very short couple of minutes per
Speaker:day and so time listened both per day
Speaker:and even per week is going to be much shorter than
Speaker:a podcast like any other podcast. A standard
Speaker:weekly podcast that's 30 minutes or so in length. Or look
Speaker:at Dan Carlin's podcast that are hours in length but released very
Speaker:infrequently. So I think percentage listened is
Speaker:a better metric. But then again, that comes back to like, in this thing
Speaker:of advertising and measurements, we have this battle of what
Speaker:do the podcasters need to know about the size of their audience and what do
Speaker:the advertisers need to know. And so much of this is being focused
Speaker:on the advertisers because the advertisers care about minutes
Speaker:listened. They care about that absolute, the minutes,
Speaker:because there's this basic number
Speaker:in their mind of for this many minutes of
Speaker:content, we can have this many ads. That's
Speaker:not really the way that podcasters think. Right. Podcasters might think I don't
Speaker:want any more than this many number of ads. I don't want
Speaker:the ads to last this many minutes in my podcast
Speaker:regardless of how long the episodes are. For me with my own
Speaker:podcast, my number of sponsors that I'm willing to accept on
Speaker:my own podcast right now is 0. I am the
Speaker:sponsor of my own show. Exactly. Yeah. And,
Speaker:again, I always say, you know, radio is about
Speaker:20% ads. Like, that is not a benchmark we're looking to.
Speaker:Oh, we're almost up to radio. No. No. That's we we wanna stay away from
Speaker:that benchmark. That would be, something to avoid. There have
Speaker:been initiatives in the past, and there are even still now, to try and
Speaker:give us a better metric. And I do support this, but the difficult
Speaker:thing is advertisers want more information.
Speaker:Developers want to give less information. Yeah. So the
Speaker:advertisers want to know what you had for breakfast
Speaker:while you're listening to this episode. The developers
Speaker:don't wanna give any of that. Right. Think about Marco, for example, with
Speaker:developer of Overcast. He has said, he will not
Speaker:build anything that helps people track
Speaker:the audiences. And that's even, at least from
Speaker:the community, that seems to be part of the reason there's some pushback
Speaker:against podcasting 2.0 features is they
Speaker:think, I'll say incorrectly, that some of these
Speaker:features can be used to track people and that's just not the
Speaker:truth. Some of these things can't be. But there are ways that you
Speaker:can measure some of this stuff without violating
Speaker:people's privacy. Just look at, like, we get the streaming satoshis. And
Speaker:this is one of the things that some of these places this isn't the best
Speaker:approach to do it. This is where that whole activity pub and activity stream comes
Speaker:into this, but what some of these places allow you to do is you
Speaker:say, I'm going to send 1% of the sats that I
Speaker:receive from value for value to this other
Speaker:place that will then analyze those. So if anyone is
Speaker:streaming Satoshis to you, you can see on a
Speaker:chart where that happened. So you
Speaker:can maybe make an assumption. That's a very important
Speaker:word to keep in mind whenever you're looking at stats is there are assumptions in
Speaker:place here. But you can make some kind of assumption that this is
Speaker:generally where my audience listened. But then again, I would challenge that
Speaker:with the caveat to say, well, the person who's streaming Satoshis
Speaker:2U is a super fan, so they are going to
Speaker:listen to all of the episode most likely because they're a
Speaker:superfan. So statistics from them using them
Speaker:as your benchmark is not accurate because they
Speaker:are a superfan. You need a benchmark of your overall audience. And that's where
Speaker:one of the things that could potentially be done with Activity
Speaker:Stream is an app could send
Speaker:back ticks or milestones or whatever for
Speaker:every, maybe it's 1%, maybe it's every 5%, maybe it's every
Speaker:30 seconds or something. Nothing that compromises the listener's
Speaker:privacy. So not Right. Like sending their IP address or their name or anything
Speaker:unless the listener consents to that. And there could be a place
Speaker:for a listener to do that. But by default, privacy by default, that's my
Speaker:policy, privacy by default. So it could just simply report back
Speaker:that this one listener listened was listening at 5
Speaker:seconds and 10 seconds and 15 and 20 and so on and so on and
Speaker:so on. But they stopped at about 75% through the episode and they didn't
Speaker:play it again. You can get that information without knowing anything about
Speaker:the listener. I know advertisers want to start getting into that
Speaker:like, alright, what's the demographics of that JSON? Right. Oh, you know, 18 to
Speaker:34 year olds only listen to half of the episode, but 50 year olds and
Speaker:up JSON to 75% of the episode and all of that demographic blah
Speaker:blah blah. Yep. And that's where we've kind of on one hand, we
Speaker:started with newspapers and radio, and those metrics were
Speaker:hideous compared to what podcasting provides.
Speaker:But then we have Facebook and other
Speaker:places that can tell you what you had for lunch
Speaker:on the second Tuesday of the month if you're a Republican in
Speaker:this city. You know, it's just crazy. It's, you know, advertisers are
Speaker:like, oh, this is amazing. And if you if anybody ever shares
Speaker:that, you're like, that is amazing and creepy. You know, it's
Speaker:always a lot of, the AI right now that I'm
Speaker:seeing is, oh, wow. That's kinda cool and kinda creepy.
Speaker:And these advertising different parameters
Speaker:are, again, kind of like, wow. That's really specific.
Speaker:And how did you get that data? So it's and I
Speaker:that's why I think podcasting is just instead of trying to make podcasting
Speaker:Facebook, just go, okay. Here, look. Newspapers
Speaker:and magazines and radio, not so great metrics,
Speaker:but, you know, they've been working for years. I mean, we always hear how much
Speaker:the radio budget is 1,000,000,000 more than than podcasting. And
Speaker:then you go, but look, podcasting actually gives you better statistics.
Speaker:And then, you know, and then you've got Facebook and we're like, yeah, we're not
Speaker:Facebook, but we're not newspapers. And you still send monies to
Speaker:newspapers or, you know, some of these other places. So it's
Speaker:it's one of those where I'm like, can't you just be happy with what you
Speaker:got? Do you really need to know what I had for lunch 3 weeks
Speaker:ago on a Tuesday to sell me some shoes? To quote from
Speaker:another movie and book, Jurassic Park, your scientists
Speaker:were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they
Speaker:didn't stop to think if they should. That's it.
Speaker:Then then the dinosaurs ate everybody. So who's the dinosaur
Speaker:here? Exactly. Depends on how you define dinosaur.
Speaker:But I think the future, there are 2 different ways we
Speaker:can look at this. The future gets more invasive.
Speaker:Google it's crazy that Google is trying to bring in this
Speaker:cookieless Internet as they describe it or some people have called it,
Speaker:where they are kind of shooting themselves in the foot by
Speaker:advocating for this with Chrome. And this is
Speaker:Google, the company who makes money
Speaker:by tracking you across the Internet Yeah. Is an
Speaker:advocate for not tracking you across the Internet? I
Speaker:always wonder again, and I this is just my hunch because it is
Speaker:Google. Are they gonna come up with some proprietary thing
Speaker:that's not a cookie but smells and acts like
Speaker:a cookie, but it only you know what I mean? Are they gonna come up
Speaker:with their own way of tracking where everybody can use cookies
Speaker:now from what I understand? Are they gonna come up with some sort
Speaker:of Google thing that only works on Google stuff
Speaker:and you have to have Google Analytics to see it and everything
Speaker:else? So it just seems like everybody's instead of trying to do
Speaker:things for the industry, they're all out for themselves, which is called
Speaker:competition, and I get it. But I'm just like, ugh. Yeah. Competition
Speaker:is good, and that's what we need more of. Like, who is the competitor to
Speaker:the IAB? Or even just for podcast measurement
Speaker:standards. Yeah. There is no competitor right now. I think it
Speaker:was on Pod News Weekly where they were talking about the
Speaker:fact that the IAB measures podcasting and
Speaker:banners on the Internet and a bunch of other things that are
Speaker:we big enough to break off on our own and have just
Speaker:the podcast and or advertising bureau instead of, you
Speaker:know, the Internet and have our own thing where we can really then, you know,
Speaker:niche down on what kind of stats do we need and come up with
Speaker:that. I like that idea. I don't know how it works or who handles it
Speaker:or who runs it or whatever, but I
Speaker:like the idea, not that the IB is doing a bad thing, but it does
Speaker:have its hurdles. Well, and that's what I think the podcast
Speaker:standards or podcast standards project, whatever you wanna call it, that's
Speaker:what those should be for. And that's why I started trying to build something like
Speaker:that myself, and then podcast standards project came along. That is a
Speaker:great place for this kind of thing because I'd love to see
Speaker:PSP, podcast standards project, set these
Speaker:standards influenced by the community and other
Speaker:people in the space, but set these standards and they be open
Speaker:standards that everyone knows this is the
Speaker:standard way to measure a download, and we could have our own
Speaker:2.0 and 2.1 and 2.2. There could be some
Speaker:certification processes. But here's the thing that I've thought about. Ever since I
Speaker:built that bot system that would measure the download speeds of the
Speaker:hosting providers, I thought, why can't we have that same
Speaker:kind of thing where we have an app
Speaker:that all you have to do to test someone's compliance
Speaker:in order to certify them is you run this app that has
Speaker:secret algorithms inside so that way no one can try to game the app
Speaker:and illegitimately count and block things. But the
Speaker:app can then do its special magic to
Speaker:test all of these things and then compare that
Speaker:with what does the actual analytics show to
Speaker:see, does it show this? Like, we expect the number to
Speaker:be 2. Is the number 2? No. It's 3? Alright. If it's not 2,
Speaker:if it's anything other than 2, then you failed on this mark. You need to
Speaker:change something here. And then the app could maybe reveal. But all
Speaker:of that can be done with an app, I I think I mean I have
Speaker:not gone through the certification process But in my mind
Speaker:that it could come down to it being that simple and that could be something
Speaker:that maybe, yes, there is because this kind of thing requires
Speaker:time. Time is money and people are worth
Speaker:their time. That's the other very important thing to keep in mind. There is a
Speaker:limit to the community's free will.
Speaker:So to have some kind of certification of a
Speaker:standard, there does need to be some kind of payment
Speaker:just to cover the expenses Right. Of the value,
Speaker:anything like that. Because somebody's gonna have to you know, if
Speaker:whatever the technology is behind it, updating
Speaker:any kind of lists, anything like that, and just and then the whole
Speaker:if you think about it, if that became a standard, you have to have somebody
Speaker:so that when Bill opens up Bill's house of podcast
Speaker:hosting that they go over, make sure Bill's, you
Speaker:know, certified or not or whatever or checks to make
Speaker:sure who is you have to maintain the list of who's certified and who isn't.
Speaker:So there is some overhead to it. But my question is
Speaker:and again, I know nothing about any of this, but I is
Speaker:it more or less or the same of what you're paying to the
Speaker:IAB right now? Right. And the other thing I I
Speaker:wonder because if you think about it, if we had and this would never happen,
Speaker:but it'd be great if there was some sort of what if we had a
Speaker:universal stat system that somehow every time you hit you
Speaker:know, how we have those redirects. Right? The little prefixes. What if
Speaker:everybody use the same prefix so that everybody was literally using the same
Speaker:stat system? That will never happen. But, you know, to
Speaker:dream the impossible, you know, because then you would You're talking about
Speaker:the Tower of Babylon solution, basically. Yeah. That is when the
Speaker:Lord will come down again and say, uh-uh. You gotta stop this. You
Speaker:got you got one tracker. And when you have only one tracker, there
Speaker:is nothing that you will not be able to do. And so, therefore, I'm going
Speaker:to confuse your tracking and Yeah. Create all of these other
Speaker:trackers and spread you across the world. That's it. Yeah. So I
Speaker:know that's never gonna happen, but it'd be neato. It would be doggone neato if
Speaker:it would. So we'll see. And I think that's where it's
Speaker:really awesome the initiative that John Spurlock has with 0p3@op3.dev.
Speaker:I can remember that site, but I can never remember his other
Speaker:site like livewire. I don't I don't
Speaker:remember that what comes after the dot. It's not dotcom. It's not dotfm. I don't
Speaker:think it's dotio. Anyway, but his thing, he's
Speaker:made it completely open source. So you can see exactly how he is
Speaker:tracking things. You can use it on any podcast. The thing
Speaker:that podcasters might not like is that it does make their
Speaker:stats open. Now maybe there's a monetization opportunity there
Speaker:for John or any kind of business to say, alright. You use this.
Speaker:This is this open standard. If you don't want your stats to be
Speaker:public, then subscribe for $5 a month or
Speaker:whatever. But the thing is, that service,
Speaker:OP 3, while it's free for everyone to use, it
Speaker:is costing John Spurlock money. Yeah. The last I saw, I think it was
Speaker:costing him a few $100 per month Oh. To run that. Mhmm. He
Speaker:has some sponsors, which is great. But at some
Speaker:point, that's gotta cover at least its expenses, let
Speaker:alone, I think, pay the people for the value of
Speaker:their time. Right. That's just for the hosting and, you know, the
Speaker:hardware and stuff. Poor John's not getting paid for his
Speaker:time for maintaining it and writing in the first place
Speaker:and everything else. So, yeah, that's one that in
Speaker:theory, when he comes along and says, okay, it's time. You you need to pay
Speaker:for this. I personally wouldn't have a problem going here, whatever it is, you
Speaker:know, because he's earned it. Value for value. Yeah.
Speaker:And he has made it all open source, and I think he's
Speaker:even said anyone else can take this and use it if they want
Speaker:to. So while his code could be,
Speaker:like, let's imagine this, that o p 3 could be the standard.
Speaker:Then his code is open source. Anyone can copy
Speaker:it. They copy it onto their system
Speaker:and maybe even John has some kind of integrity check
Speaker:to make sure that the the version is up to date or something like that.
Speaker:There, you know, any sort of thing like that that verifies that they haven't
Speaker:tweaked the stats to their own manipulations.
Speaker:But that could be something where we're all following the same code base
Speaker:to measure downloads, or there could be the multiple companies out there
Speaker:providing whitelists and blacklists that companies could subscribe
Speaker:to. Although I know there's the thing of its proprietary data. Like
Speaker:for Blueberry, they've built this list pretty much themselves
Speaker:over the decades now that they've been doing this.
Speaker:And that's not something that they wanna just give up. That is
Speaker:part of their unique selling proposition, their
Speaker:USP. So there needs to be some openness, but there also
Speaker:needs to be some exchange of value. And in all of this, there needs to
Speaker:be the respect for the audience, their privacy.
Speaker:While I would like to know certain things about my own
Speaker:audience, like their age, their sex, their
Speaker:device, like how many people are on iPhone versus Android, what apps are
Speaker:they using, what country are they using, Or what country are they in?
Speaker:What state are they in? Maybe even what
Speaker:local metropolis they're near. I don't need to know their
Speaker:exact city, you know, if they're in Waka Hockey, New York or
Speaker:whatever. I I don't need to know that. I just wanna know, are they near
Speaker:New York City? So maybe I could plan that for if I'm
Speaker:doing a live event somewhere, I could say, hey, everyone. I'm gonna do
Speaker:an event in my biggest cities and that's New York City, Los Angeles,
Speaker:Cincinnati, and whatever. But I don't need to know
Speaker:where they live. I don't need to know where they
Speaker:shop. I don't need to know what other podcasts they listen
Speaker:to, although that can be kind of interesting, but I don't need that.
Speaker:I just need to know, do they consume my podcast,
Speaker:and how do they consume it? I don't need to know who. I
Speaker:just need to know how. Yeah. I was looking at John's site.
Speaker:The April invoice for the month was $791.97.
Speaker:So 7.92. You can sponsor,
Speaker:there's a $500 gold sponsorship, a $100, and that's a month.
Speaker:Then there's a $100 a month OP 3 sponsorship. And if you
Speaker:are using either one of those, apparently, you're listed on the home
Speaker:page, which is great now. If you're like, well, that's a little rich for my
Speaker:blood. There is a $10 a month early supporters sponsorship.
Speaker:Now you're not on the front page, but it is a way to say thank
Speaker:you. And and right now, it's Podnews, FlightPath, Refonic,
Speaker:Transistor, Podium, and Captivate, our sponsors. Because I
Speaker:looked at him, like, why can I give John $10? Holy cow. $10.
Speaker:So that's, interesting. But he spent for
Speaker:the year so far, just 2024, he's at $2,943.
Speaker:So about every month, it's like 7 30, 740
Speaker:ish, 700. So and that's him
Speaker:again looking for ways to improve it. Keep it running.
Speaker:Everything like that. So it's one of those things that, you know, I still wonder
Speaker:how Albie is staying in business because I don't see any
Speaker:business model over there yet. You know, they have said at some
Speaker:point, I thought it happened by now, that they would be
Speaker:charging a fee or taking a fee, which I can understand that. And I think
Speaker:that's reasonable if they say something like, alright, you can receive
Speaker:as much as you want, but for anything you're going to withdraw Right. There's a
Speaker:4% charge. Maybe they say anything you send, there's a 4%
Speaker:charge, or maybe they say only if you withdraw
Speaker:back onto chain, which is just the technical Right.
Speaker:Way to describe, basically, like, getting your Bitcoin from Albi
Speaker:into, for example, Coinbase, and then Coinbase,
Speaker:then trading it for dollars and then withdrawing the dollars, that kind of thing. That's
Speaker:what you have to do. You have to get that Bitcoin back onto the chain,
Speaker:the Bitcoin chain. It can't just stay on the lightning network.
Speaker:But, yeah, at some point, they'll do that, and I think that's reasonable for them
Speaker:to have some kind of small fee like that. Yeah. Because we want them to
Speaker:stay in business and free is not a good business model. We've said that
Speaker:before. Well, you know, there's there's an interesting thing about
Speaker:that. So the whole value for value concept, there's
Speaker:a huge risk to that. And it's
Speaker:working for some people, not working for
Speaker:others. Right. In that information you saw about John
Speaker:Spurlock and what it's costing him, did it show how much of that is
Speaker:being paid for? Let me see. Like, is he running
Speaker:in the red or is he in the green? Because when I look at
Speaker:op3.dev, you can scroll down to the bottom and
Speaker:see the icons for the sponsors that he has. Now we don't know
Speaker:how much these companies are paying. We just know they've paid that threshold
Speaker:to be on the front page. So Podnews, FlightPath,
Speaker:Refonic, Transistor, Podium, and Captivate.
Speaker:Some of these are radically different companies. Right. Like, Transistor,
Speaker:Captivate, and Podium are hosting companies. Pad News is
Speaker:not a hosting company. Right. That's a news company, although it does a lot
Speaker:of stuff in the podcasting industry. Refonic does a lot of stuff
Speaker:with industry data and is in the podcasting industry.
Speaker:And this is a nice collection, and I'm not sure if you'd get this
Speaker:kind of good collection of sponsors if you just
Speaker:told everyone this is what it cost to use the service. I recently
Speaker:spoke at NRB, which is the National Religious Broadcasters
Speaker:Convention, and I was sharing a stage with
Speaker:someone from Focus on the Family. And if you've ever listened to a
Speaker:Focus on the Family broadcast where they have a guest who has a
Speaker:book or they're talking about a book, they frequently say something
Speaker:like this. They'll say, we'll send you this
Speaker:book for donation of any amount, and they mean
Speaker:that. Mhmm. And the gentleman from Focus on the
Speaker:Family on stage said that they knew they were
Speaker:taking a risk. And sure, some people call in and they
Speaker:say, I want the book. I'm not sending a donation. So
Speaker:focus on the family loses money on that. Some people call
Speaker:in and they pay about what the book would sell for. And some
Speaker:people, the value for value thing, they call in and they give a
Speaker:$100 or $200 to get a $10 book. Right.
Speaker:There is a risk to that though. And that
Speaker:risk is mitigated when there's a relationship, I think,
Speaker:but you have to build that relationship first. Yeah. And how do you
Speaker:build relationships within the podcast
Speaker:measurement industry where there's so much competition.
Speaker:That's where I think you have to have the structure of something like
Speaker:podcast standards project to help with that. And
Speaker:a standards body that can ratify standards
Speaker:across many aspects of podcasting, not just measurement, not just some
Speaker:of the technical stuff of this is what goes in an
Speaker:RSS feed, but also these are standard advertising rates to
Speaker:pay for this certain things like that. I think that's what I've
Speaker:always envisioned for a podcast standards board and why I've predicted that standards
Speaker:would emerge in podcasting, and we're finally seeing that. I don't
Speaker:like that our measurement guidelines are basically
Speaker:influenced by a company that's only interested in advertising. Right. I'd
Speaker:rather any such standards come from an a company
Speaker:that's interested in the privacy of the audience, providing
Speaker:only as much data as podcasters need and the same
Speaker:thing for podcasters to take action on too. That's the big thing.
Speaker:Data that they can use and giving
Speaker:advertisers only as much data as they actually
Speaker:need. Yeah. As opposed to when was the last time I
Speaker:washed my right foot? Right. Just don't need all that stuff.
Speaker:Statistically, people who wash their right foot within the last 24 hours are more
Speaker:likely to buy our products. I mean, they've got crazy statistics
Speaker:like that. Yeah. And some of that I just kinda wonder, like,
Speaker:really? Yeah. Why? What does that matter?
Speaker:Who funded that research? Yeah. Exactly. Doctor Scholes.
Speaker:So Daniel, any
Speaker:boostograms from, our last episode from now till
Speaker:then? We did. We got a boostogram from Sam Sethi from
Speaker:truefans.fm. He sent 41 100 sats. He didn't include
Speaker:a message with that, but we are very grateful for that. Now 41100,
Speaker:do you know any significance to that number? No. Only going back
Speaker:to my days as a copier technician. There was the Minolta 41100.
Speaker:It was an old machine. It was a good machine, but I think, really, Sam
Speaker:just wants to cement his on top of the leaderboard
Speaker:when we log in to, whichever one we're using, get Alby
Speaker:or Conchax or one of those Saturn. One of those has
Speaker:a a list of top contributors. So thank you, Sam. We deeply appreciate that. And
Speaker:I will say, not that he bought a plug, but the
Speaker:ability that he's made to where you can just take a credit card and it's
Speaker:$10 US and it fills up your wallet is so
Speaker:ridiculously easy now. You can only buy $10 right now. It's in
Speaker:beta. So that's like, as I record this, it's like $14.
Speaker:And so that'll last me a couple weeks and then it runs out. But I
Speaker:just go back to Truefans and hit okay. Fill up my wallet. Here we
Speaker:go. And, so that's working very, very well because that's not
Speaker:an actual app. It's a, what is it? P was it web
Speaker:app based? Progressive web app or PWA, which no one
Speaker:knows what that stands for or even what it means. It's just fun to say
Speaker:pois, you know, so that's always fun. But, speaking of
Speaker:peas, we also have the podcast positivity
Speaker:point of the show. So, Daniel, are we, pointing
Speaker:positively at someone with a podcast? Yeah. I know that sometimes we
Speaker:complain about some of the stuff happening in the podcasting industry, so it'd be nice
Speaker:to end on some positivity. And for this episode, I
Speaker:want to highlight Podcast Guru. I know I mentioned them previously,
Speaker:but I noticed something neat that they do since I've been using them
Speaker:a little more steadily for some of the podcasting 2.0
Speaker:featured podcasts. And I noticed that just like an
Speaker:Apple Podcasts, you get that beautiful thing that happens based
Speaker:on some podcast cover art where it changes the color
Speaker:of the whole interface to match that podcast cover. Podcast
Speaker:Guru does that too even at the chapter
Speaker:image level. Oh. So as the chapter
Speaker:image changes, if you're looking at the app,
Speaker:the whole app interface changes to
Speaker:complement the colors within the podcast chapter
Speaker:image. And I thought, oh, that's that's
Speaker:a nice little thing. That's like icing on top of the cake. I like that.
Speaker:That's it. So that reminds me, Daniel, as you brought up podcast
Speaker:guru, Oscar from Fountain sent out
Speaker:a survey that said, hey. How can we make Fountain better? And, of course,
Speaker:I said, I love me smart playlists. I want to be able to say
Speaker:that. And I explained what it was and I said, I can almost do it
Speaker:in fountain with tags. You can tag a show so that when a new
Speaker:episode comes from whatever podcast you want,
Speaker:you could say tag this as say health. Then you can click on
Speaker:the tag, and anything that's been tagged as health, there it is. And
Speaker:I said the problem is I'll listen to the 1st episode in that list,
Speaker:and then it will go to that queue. So maybe in my queue, I was
Speaker:listening to David Hooper or somebody. I'm like, no. I wanted to go to the
Speaker:next health tagged 1. And he's like, I think we can do
Speaker:that. And he he seemed pretty sure that that was possible. So
Speaker:if he does that, then Fountain would have smart
Speaker:playlists. And I was like, oh, because I know that's the one feature. I
Speaker:know Podcast Guru has said they're working on it, so
Speaker:it'll be interesting to see, you know, who can get there first. But that was,
Speaker:I found that very encouraging that they they could do that because that's really my
Speaker:the one feature that I like. I really need that. And I know, Fountain has
Speaker:done some things to make it easy to, you know, fill your wallet over
Speaker:there. And they have a whole there. The boy, if you love stats, Fountain is
Speaker:the app for you. They have all sorts of community things going on over there.
Speaker:But, so a positive shout out to both Podcast
Speaker:Guru and Fountain for, keeping up and and making
Speaker:your apps better and making them do more things. We appreciate that. And with
Speaker:that, I think we're gonna call it a day on this episode. So
Speaker:thanks so much. If you enjoyed this show, if you could do us a favor,
Speaker:share it with a friend if you want to. If you feel so inclined, you
Speaker:could always send us a boost to gram, and we appreciate everyone who's been streaming
Speaker:the sats to us. We deeply appreciate it, and, we'll be back real soon with
Speaker:another episode of the future of podcasting. Keep boosting
Speaker:and keep podcasting.