alex deherrera

I can understand the appeal of podcasts. I can understand that people like to download them and listen to them on their iPods while going to work/exercising. I can understand that it presents a new venue for authors and artists alike to express their sentiments. What I cannot understand is why no one ever provides a transcript of their commentaries so that people have the option of reading the dialog.

I can’t listen to podcasts for the same reason I can’t listen to books on tape and why I don’t listen to radio talk shows: I zone out too easily. When I listen to a podcast I just can’t sit at my computer without starting to read other websites. Inevitably the podcast will become ambient noise to my ears and I will miss key points. This is a personal problem, yes, but on an unselfish level, this practice discriminates against people that are hard of hearing (I am not trying to mask my personal grievances behind white knighting for the hearing impaired but I figured that my laziness and inability to pay attention isn’t worth of a post). It seems to me that these websites, and many others that I don’t visit, are missing out on a large number of potential readers (and revenue) because they don’t provide transcripts.

Two of the websites that I visit almost daily are Bad Astronomy and Bill Simmons. Phil Plait often answers questions from his readers as videos hosted on YouTube. While sometimes this is necessary because he models examples with objects and props, but not always. Bill Simmons is on hiatus while he writes his second book but usually has at least 1-2 podcasts up a week. On the blog for the movie I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell, they post interviews with various cast and crew members as YouTube videos. I’ve watched a few of them, and they were interesting, but I would still rather read it.

All three of these sites do not provide transcripts. It is hard to justify my right to complain about a free service because the people behind these podcasts are doing us, their readers, a favor by providing additional entertainment for no cost. My point is that they could increase their audience just by spending 10-20 minutes to write down what they just said. Providing multiple outlets for media can only expand the potential market of consumers for the content.

I know that in a chat on Bill Simmons’ site a reader once asked why he didn’t provide transcripts and his answer was the ESPN hasn’t/will not hire someone to do that. Why would you purposely choose to make a product that is ignored by a percentage of your audience? Personally, I would never have a podcast because my voice lies somewhere on the scale of voice quality between Gilbert Godfrey and the singer of Clap Your Hands and Say Yeah! That being said, if I did ever consider doing one, I would provide a transcript. Maybe someone can enlighten me but I really cannot see any value in refusing to do this. I am still going to continue to read all of these websites, and one day I may see the light and become a podcast addict, but in the meanwhile I’m content to listen to music while I do my daily perusal of the internet.