Audible announced a new product on Friday that allows podcast publishers significant control over their product. Ad insertion, monitoring of downloads and listening attention, DRM and more. There are some interesting features that add to the podcasting discussion and normally I’d write about it over at TechCrunch. For instance, Much of what Audible is doing is goes way beyond what Fruitcast (TechCrunch profile) is allowing publishers to do. While Fruitcast allow insertion of ads into podcasts and tracks downloads, Audible is able to pingback listening metadata as well (albeit via a closed file format and crazy prices), something that will be very interesting for publishers.
But wow, did they ever screw up the follow up to the announcement. And it sure was entertaining to watch everything unfold today. There is no way I’m going to point TechCrunch traffic at Audible’s new product, given how they’ve handled themselves.
Instead of embracing the bloggers that would normally talk about this, Mitch Ratcliffe (an Audible consultant) went on an unmitigated, unprovoked character assasination romp (with follow up attacks) against Dave Winer (“he’s willing to steal”), Om Malik and others. This sure is an interesting way to engage the sneezers. As Om puts it, Mitch “goes after the dissenters with a verbal baseball bat”.
You can read all of the drama over at the Meme.
My advice to blogging consultants when they find their product under attack is this. First, talk to the guys who care about this stuff first, before the annoucement, to get their input. Second, try to engage in intelligent, constructive dialog, not ad hominem attacks. Realize that you are speaking on behalf of your client, not just yourself. And if you do start a flame war, and pick the kind of opponent who can defend himself, well, I guess you better feel confident that you can come out of it all without losing your head.
One final note. If you find yourself on the other side of a debate with Dave Winer, Om Malik, Doc Searls, Jeff Jarvis and others, maybe you should rethink your position. Because it is very likely you are wrong.
As an aside, The most interesting idea I read about today was Jeff Jarvis’ call for a new, open audio standard that pings the publisher when a listener opens the file.
“One final note. If you find yourself on the other side of a debate with Dave Winer, Om Malik, Doc Searles, Jeff Jarvis and others, maybe you should rethink your position. Because it is very likely you are wrong.”
So weren’t you mentioning in your last CrunchNotes about accusations of “groupthink”?
Paul, that’s a big stretch. What I really don’t like about the blogosphere is the tendency for people who can’t support their positions with logic and rhetoric to engage in ad hominem attacks. It’s ugly and emotional.
WRT to the hackgroup, I think it’s funny and all that, but I think that the underlying story involved a bit of a witch hunt that really hurt someone who, possibly, didn’t deserve it (I say possibly because I wasn’t there, but there didn’t appear to be sexism invovled). In this case we have a paid consultant who decided to come out swinging at everyone who didn’t like what his client released. It was and is entertaining, but I question whether or not it’s good for his client.
There is more than one thing to dislike about the blogosphere. One other thing is the tendency of groups of like-minded bloggers to form attack coalitions to gang up on any of their peers who dares to question the consensus of the mini-clique. You see that much more often on http://www.memeorandum than tech.memeorandum, but this is an example of the same thing. This isn’t a left/right thing, it’s a cluetrain/capitalist thing, but as usual the truth gets lost in the middle while the two sides fight.
It started with Dave and his face-to-face argument with the Audible guy. That is, it started with a simple misunderstanding which could have been solved very easily if egos had not been deployed at ten paces.
As to whether it’s good for Mitch’s client, it really doesn’t matter. The real test is how Audible’s pitch went across to actual podcasters at that trade show on the weekend, not what members of the OFGN argue about on blogs few podcasters ever read.
Dave has a right to speak his opinion about Audible and it’s DRM, but Mitch makes some good points. The problem is that everyone thinks Dave, Doc and OM are gods in this space. They only get the attention of the geeks. Do you think the average person who uses Audible cares what Dave, Doc or Om thinks about the product. There is a focus on technology but the focus should be on the consumer. The elite bloggers don’t get to decide how podcasting is going to be controlled. You are better off having a big circle jerk with yourselves because at the end of the day you are not the influencers.
Hmmm, you are complaining about a “character assassination” of Dave Winer, and do that in a post titled “Audible’s Clusterfuck”?
Pot. Kettle. Black.
The average podcaster doesn’t know, read, or care who Dave, Doc, Jeff, are so their attack will probably not have much affect except for the really geeky podcasting crowd. It is unfortunate though that they had to go into pitbull mode.
Do I think the Audible program is the cat’s meow, no, but at least it’s a thought in a different direction, a direction some could use.
Mike,
OK, so Mitch can be pretty abrasive sometimes and all these personal attacks (on both sides) are unnecessary. But the fact is that there are some pretty crucial issues being discussed here – for instance, the limitations of MP3 when it comes to tracking podcasts. Using Feedburner and my stats program, I can tell exactly who has visited my site, subbed to the feed, clicked through from the feed to read a post etc. This level of detail is useful for a whole range of reasons. The same thing isn’t true of podcasts – Fruitcast, for instance, can only track downloads. What happened to the podcast after it was downloaded? Was it listened to? Was it passed on through file sharing networks? Audible attempts to answer some of these questions – but whether it’s a good thing to use a proprietary format is another question.
More here:
http://mashable.com/2005/11/13/does-podcasting-need-better-measurement/
BTW: I don’t want to be pedantic or anything, but it’s spelled “Doc Searls”, not “Searles”. You’re not the only person who made this typo, though.
Michael—Because Om, who said Audible was “subverting podcasting” and incorrectly reported the facts said I go after people with a verbal baseball bat, it’s true?
You use the term “blog consultant” like “PR flace,” which I decidedly am not. I helped build the product so, like Dave Winer, I do feel some personal investment in the thing. I want it seen accurately, so people can judge for themselves. But please don’t imply that my job was to attack critics—I care about this thing because I think it is a step in the right direction. Accusations I made this personal miss the essential point that with Dave, who dished out attacks on me and Audible first, everything is personal. There is no line between business and technology, it’s just Dave, so responding to him is ineluctably personal.
As for botching the announcement, how is getting people to talk and talk about facts, not the constructive thing to do? You’re right, the discussion is cooking. Jeff’s suggestion is a good one for desktop players, but it doesn’t work for portable players and we need a way to do it across both to make advertisers pay for the shows that want to be paid for.
I agree that Mitch could have been more delicate with his responses, but Om, Winer, Searls et al. are less interested in discussing the situation rationally than taking a knee-jerk reaction on protecting MP3. A perfect example is Om saying “as if trying to thumb the noses of podcasters, the company has come up with their own moniker, Wordcast.” And yet in the same article he recommends a service called “Fruitcast.”
Some of the outrage over the pricing fails to mention that the charge also provides hosting. It may be that the current pricing is too high, but if that’s correct, Audible won’t get many takers and will have to revise the pricing down. I could see some industries, like Wall St or Pharma-financed MD training, using the Audible solution. It’s a big podcasting world out there.
>One final note. If you find yourself on the other >side of a debate with Dave Winer, Om Malik, Doc >Searles, Jeff Jarvis and others, maybe you should >rethink your position. Because it is very likely >you are wrong.
Well, Google seems to be doing OK despite much gnashing of teeth by all these guys.
“Wrong” is pretty open ended — but all of these guys have a pretty obvious point of view around “open” that’s *open* to a lot of disagreement.
Having a public flame war with Winer is more entertaining than indicative of being incorrect. I give Mitch big points to standing up for something he’s helped to build.
And — the proof will be in the pudding. If Audible gets a lot of traction around a product (even an EVIL product…one that empowers THE MAN), then they will have been right. Look at iTunes. Open doesn’t always win. What wins isn’t always open.
I’ll make the claim that being *Right* is about tearing market share out of the hands of the universe. It’s often bloody and messy and a product of compromise.
I’d come back to this in six months and see what happened — could go either way in my opinion.
-CST
(Full disclosure — I met Mitch at a conference, and thought he was a swell guy. I’m having a public argument with Om on his blog, and I read Buzzmachine every day, despite Jeff’s poor taste in online news sites. So there.)
I’m going to weigh in here and say that it is unfortunate that you’re not going to cover Audible’s new service on TechCrunch. Your blog, your choice, but I think this is a service that many people struggling to make a living via podcasting would find valuable.
In any event, kudos to you for saying exactly what’s on your mind. You’re in a tough position because, whether you like it or not, you are perceived as being a news source (TechCrunch) and an opinionated person (CrunchNotes). I don’t think people like it much when opinions impact the news so transparently.
Finally, it strikes me as funny how the entire argument is about the value derived from being “open” (at the format level) and yet there’s a bit of a “closed” feeling to your reaction — an implied “if you’re not with us, you’re against us” and yet we’re all not invited to be part of the “us.”
My two cents. – Scott
Scott and others, Thanks for the feedback.
As I said, I found all of this highly entertaining. The part that troubles me is that Mitch works for Audible and therefore speaks for Audible. Companies need to be more mature in their communications. If Mitch had taken a deep breath and simply responded without emotion, he would have done a better job for his client.
I ripped inform.com apart in a post on TechCrunch a few weeks ago. They contacted me privately and gave me more info on the product, and I wrote an update. I shredded odeo later on, and at least they kept quiet instead of attacking back. In this case, Audible did pretty much exactly what Om and Dave hoped – make them the center of the debate instead of Audible. So…that’s my opinion. If Audible is relying on guys like Mitch to spread the word, they are going to have a hard time being successful.
Mitch – If I read your comment right, you are basically saying that bad pr is still good pr because it gets the word out. I guess in one sense you are accurate, but I think that this whole situation could have been handled in a much better way and without the personal attacks.
Mike—You assume, incorrectly, that my role is to talk about the product. Like Dave, I helped build the thing. I’ve responded to your comments and others about the “personal” quality of this discussion at length at my blog.
http://www.ratcliffeblog.com/archives/2005/11/ineluctably_per.html
But, frankly, I think the wide discussion of the topic—all sides of the topic—belies the idea that relying on “guys like Mitch” is a pretty successful way to get conversations going. It’s at least as successful as talking to TechCrunch!
Hey, you got in under me…. No, Mike, I’m saying that if you read the comments about the discussion, this isn’t bad PR. The response has been open-minded and positive, especially when we got past the mischaracterizations of the Audible announcement.
It got a conversation going, at least, which is a Good Thing. I’m certainly spending a lot less time damning other people than most of the people who have posted about me.
I have to say Mike, you are way off base here.
For better or worse, an announcement that wouldn’t have rated a blip on my personal radar screen is now the top item on tech.memorandum.com. I would call this a marketing coup for Audible.
Even if you think Mitch was a jerk (I personally don’t, but to each their own) the question is, if you’re a podcaster interested in using this technology, are you really going to care about all the egos flying around here? I doubt it, and that is what makes this a win for Audible.
Is Mitch a jerk? I am comfortable with people asking this question. ;^>
OK, a follow-up post:
http://mashable.com/2005/11/14/if-mp3-wont-do-what-next-for-podcasting/
The point here is that Audible is doing something that MP3 simply can’t do. Whether you think proprietary systems are evil is another matter. Perhaps we simply need open systems for measuring podcasts – but the point Mitch is making is that Audible is the only service that can do this right now.
Pete – You should be working for Audible. Clear messaging, no swings.
Mike—Couldn’t resist another swing, eh?
Sorry Mitch. I’m done now.
I realize this is your blog and that you can name things whatever you want, but I personally feel that “Clusterfuck” is crossing the line for what’s acceptable on a generally very classy website.
You are probably right.
I have long spoken about the fact that technologists often make bad story tellers. Truth is, they often make bad debaters as well. It seems that most of the people involved simply need to learn how to fight/discuss an argument on the point of facts instead of making things so personal as is oft the case. This is especially so in the ‘air up there’ where the innate nature of the alpha male is what has propelled said male into such heights in the first place.
I would bet that many of the people against Audible’s attempt to solve this high value problem are also against Apple’s AAC, Microsoft’s WMV, Adobe’s PDF and other proprietary formats – which at least shows some consistency, depsite the fact that these proprietary formats persist to this day in a world dominated by MP3 and MPG. I am totally behind open source, the commons, MP3 format and open data exchange, but at the same time, I am practical in regards to the realities of the world around us. The fact is that most people do not see the world as black & white in regards to these sorts of issues. Most just want it to work as they require for their specific needs as we have discussed time and time again.
A well worded, persuasive argument regarding why Audible should adopt an older format of MP3 which did not account for podcasting might go a long way to convincing them to change their minds. The trouble is that I dont think any of the points that could be made (at least what I have seen) present a solid business case for such a decision.
Not everyone can afford to give away everything for free and continue to exist despite what many would like to believe. Kudos to Audible for trying to solve the problem and taking the risks involved with promoting the new format. My guess is that the consumers will vote with their wallets and Audible will survive the day as they focus on what comes after the chasm is crossed instead of those of us on this side of the precipice looking across wondering what the mass market will do.
It is kind of funny and kind of sad that eventhough I choose not to attack or support any one person, several people will probably dislike me for stating my opinions. Such is life in silicon valley and having conversations with other smart people who are passionate about what they do… For this I am thankful, and to Mike’s point, very entertained.