But I can’t seem to find any data on actual Spotify viewership to pin these numbers down to be able make some apples to apples comparisons.

There are several third party research firms, most notably Edison, that compile their own data from the client side, akin to how Nielsen produces cross-platform numbers for television and streaming. And others compile data from different sources, including published ordinal rankings and publicly reported view counts, other metrics like mentions/shares on social media.

Podcasting historically predates always-online devices, so a lot of the interfaces count downloads rather than listens, as the tech companies try their best to push things towards data-tracking proprietary client apps. So it’s a non-trivial effort (usually requiring lots and lots of paid survey participants, which also introduces some statistical skew), to get listener data.

So there is data out there, almost all behind business-to-business paywalls/subscriptions. Those closely guarded datasets are what advertisers use to price ad campaigns on these channels, for example, where they have to decide whether and how to spend on one particular type of medium versus another (e.g., product mentions on podcasts versus YouTube versus twitch versus traditional television or film).

Also do people not “watch” podcasts?

The NYT article I linked describes the issue somewhat, that there’s a difference between viewing as a first screen or second screen, or listening as primary, or listening as background, and that advertisers and publishers are aware of how different shows perform at different functions. They describe the example of the political podcast, Pod Save America, having stats showing that about 20% of their audience is through video rather than audio-only.

As I understand it, through my own personal experience, podcasts are popular during commutes, as a primary audio experience for people driving alone in their cars or wearing headphones on the bus/train/sidewalk. Those are functions in which video is not desired, so “watching” would be a strange way to describe how people primarily consume the content, through listening only. And while I know official music videos get a lot of watches on YouTube, I don’t think counting those watches are a good way to rank or analyze how people “listen” to music overall.

It’s also why many of the most popular podcasts simply don’t do video (NYT’s popular The Daily), and stem from radio roots (the NPR podcasts, a bunch of iHeart or Sirius-published podcasts). Video isn’t a good proxy, especially for the podcasts that are tied exclusively to a non-YT platform.

Maybe SiriusXM overpaid for their deal, at $40 million per year. Maybe Spotify overpaid for their previous deal, at $30 million per year. But those numbers alone aren’t anything to scoff at, and in my opinion are the best proxy for cross-platform comparison: Smartless got about $33 million per year from SiriusXM, Dax Shepard got $27 million per year from Spotify, etc.

And maybe you’re right that podcasting itself isn’t ever going to be as big as video or streaming. The South Park guys got $900 million for 6 movies on Paramount+. Apple TV dropped more than 9 figures each on Killers of the Flower Moon and Napoleon.

But for advertisers, that specific podcast is a valuable property. I can’t comment on the quality or cultural comparisons because I literally have never heard any part of it (or other huge genres like true crime podcasts or celebrity podcasts or video game reviews or whatever other things people consume), but I watch the business side of things because I’m interested in that.

And I’m not trying to give any commentary on the cultural relevance of this particular Harris interview any more than I’d give commentary on her appearance on Howard Stern (who I might not have heard about in like 20 years) or Walz’s appearance in World of Warcraft or something I don’t actually understand the logistics of. Politics isn’t really something I care about, but tech and media businesses are.

I thought we were having a conversation about tech/entertainment/media companies and their audiences, but I guess you were ready to turn this into something about parasocial dynamics and American electoral politics, neither of which is a particularly interesting topic for me, and honestly wasn’t even part of the conversation I thought we were having.

I guess that’s on me for commenting in a politics community I’m not subscribed to, but your original comment at the top of the thread was about something I am interested in.

Either way, you’re wrong on the audience metric stuff. I probably should’ve picked up on your grudge against podcasting as a medium when you kept using the verb “watch” to describe how people consume podcasts. Which also probably is why you insist on using YouTube as some kind of proxy for podcast reach or popularity. I disagree with your method of analysis, and I think I’ve made that pretty clear. But you do you, and go on believing that you’ve got your finger on the pulse of how all audiences consume content on the internet.

I really, really don’t get why you’re digging your heels in on this.

There are no viewership numbers available from spotify. If we use the YT channel as a proxy, its a mid-teir audience podcast.

So you’re going to ignore the published charts of the two most popular podcast apps (Spotify and Apple Podcasts), and the dominant market research firm in podcasting (Edison) to try to come up with your own proxy methodology based on a video platform? It’s a bizarre approach of “do your own research.”

And if you want to understand why video views are a poor substitute for actual audio stats, this article from 6 months ago does a deeper dive into the rise of video supplement to podcast audio, talks about the different approaches (and wildly different distribution/audience ratios depending on specific styles and audiences). It says that 16 out of the top 30 are publishing video now, an increase from before, but also obviously means that 14 out of the top 30 don’t do video at all.

I went to YouTube Music to browse its podcast charts, where Call Me Daddy was nowhere to be found on the charts. Digging further, it’s because the full podcast episodes aren’t even available through YouTube. Instead, it’s 7 minute preview clips. In other words, the SiriusXM deal bringing it out of Spotify Exclusive hasn’t even trickled over to YouTube yet (or SiriusXM doesn’t want to publish it on YouTube for whatever reason).

So digging into YouTube viewer counts is like trying to argue against published box office rankings based on trailer view counts on YouTube. It’s a bad methodology, and looks like someone flailing to try to confirm their feelings against what the mainstream media is reporting.

all the noise about podcasts and Spotify trying to control that media was a couple years ago

The $125 million SiriusXM deal to bring it back out of Spotify exclusive was less than 2 months ago.

Like, I get if you’re not the target audience, because I’m not either, but it’s strange to try to argue that it isn’t a huge audience or a heavy hitter in the podcasting space.

So your market research has been to ask two women who don’t listen to podcasts, and then look at the view counts on a video platform not primarily used for audio podcasts. Real solid methodology there.

Just, like, look at any of the podcast metrics ranking podcasts by listens or subscribers from the US: #2 on Apple, #5 on Spotify, #4 on Edison’s charts.

It’s a top-5 podcast in terms of popularity, and probably literally the most popular podcast among women. It was, for a time, the #2 podcast after Rogan’s.

Spotify paid $60 million to make Call Her Daddy a Spotify exclusive for 2 years, and last year SiriusXM paid $125 million for the ad/distribution rights for 3 years.

It’s a heavy hitter in the podcast space, by pretty much every metric.

So then they decide to hold Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress which is the only escalation they have in this position.

Also, Merrick Garland is the head of the DOJ, and only the DOJ can prosecute contempt of Congress as a crime. So if Congress says that DOJ is acting in contempt of Congress, they’re asking DOJ to prosecute itself.

Chavez Rodriguez outlined that abortion will be on the ballot in Florida, where the state Supreme Court issued a ruling that puts a six-week ban into effect May 1. Democrats see abortion as a winning issue for them in 2024 after experiencing better-than-expected results in the midterm elections months after Roe v. Wade was overturned.

That’s basically a key point here. Abortion is banned in Florida, but a state constitutional amendment protecting the right to abortion is on the ballot the same day as the presidential election.

That does change the electoral dynamic.