
There appears to be a minor controversy brewing in the podcast world right now, so I thought I would throw in my two cents on the matter and clear up our own current status with regards to it. I first heard about Stitcher Radio sometime last year when Kevin Smith started using it for his Smodcast network. It’s a free online streaming service that collects and serves up podcasts through their website and a variety of mobile apps, and it appears to be catching on largely because it provides instant access to podcasts without the need to download them first. In the U.S., where many people have unlimited 3G bandwidth for their smartphones, it makes podcast listening incredibly convenient and also facilitates 24 hour internet radio broadcasts.
A few months ago, comedian Chris Hardwick decided to pull his Nerdist podcast from Stitcher’s service and posted a lengthy explanation on his blog. He took issue with the fact that they cache content on their server (thus deflating download statistics from your own server), and also sell short ads on top of it that you don’t get a cut of. Now, to be fair, they do provide statistic tracking of their own, and they also have an affiliate program that allows you to earn money for getting new users to sign up with Stitcher. However, for some, this is still being seen as a somewhat sketchy business practice.
I can’t criticize Hardwick’s decision. If he is selling ads on his podcast, this could definitely cut into that, and if the ads are a significant part of how he makes a living, he has to protect it. But it’s not like Stitcher overwrites any ads you have in your own content, and I think what he’s overlooking is the fact that as a content provider, you shouldn’t try to dictate where and when people can consume your content. You shouldn’t try, because ultimately you can’t win. This is the exact same argument people were using against TV networks when they were pulling down popular clips from YouTube. I guess it’s a little different when someone is doing it to you instead of a big greedy corporation, right?
Podcast listeners want convenience, and they want to go where other people are. If you ask me, Stitcher improves on iTunes in a number of different ways. They give you instant access, and they also allow you to build a personal playlist of favourite shows and offer recommendations based on that. Apple still doesn’t even have any built-in functionality to “subscribe” to a podcast from your iPhone. It’s pretty ridiculous.
As far as Film Junk is concerned, we are currently available on Stitcher and have no plans to remove our podcast from Stitcher. Obviously, we are quite a bit smaller than something like Nerdist, and the exposure from being available on Stitcher is way more valuable to us. Also, fortunately for us, our monetization plans have focused on selling premium content instead of selling ads. I just hope that we don’t see a lot of podcasters following in Hardwick’s footsteps just because they think Stitcher is stealing from them. I think Stitcher is a good thing for podcasting in general, and even though I don’t really use it personally, I support anything that makes it easier for people to tune in on a regular basis.















While I think Nerdist is overreacting just a tad, he does have somewhat of a point. The least Stitcher could do is offer you the choice of allowing ads and getting a small cut (5 or 10 % sounds fair) or not allowing ads to be played over your content at all. That way Stitcher still earns a lot of money and content providers doesn’t feel ripped off.
I’m not saying that wouldn’t be a nice option, but people are using their network and to me that’s what the ads are for. Maybe eventually they’ll realize it’s in their best interest to work together with the content providers more directly.
I see this as sort of a YouTube-solution for podcast, and so they should try and follow in the footsteps of YouTube, giving you the option of allowing ads or not. Everything else is just stone age thinking.