Podcast Audience Strategy: What Your Downloads Can’t Tell You

Tom Webster
Oct 31 · 5 min read
The original uploader was Brandon Dilbeck at English Wikipedia. [CC BY-SA 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)]

Edison is on the eve of releasing our first quarterly Podcast Consumer Tracker report, the industry’s only all-inclusive measure of the reach of the leading podcast publishers and their audience composition. While that data is necessarily confined to our subscribers, I wanted to pass on a general observation about something I don’t really hear talked about in podcasting: reach.

Certainly, we talk a lot about the reach of podcasting in general, and we put a lot of effort into a credible estimator of that reach in our Infinite Dial research series. But when it comes to individual networks, publishers, or even shows, the dialog shifts to downloads, not reach. And I’m not even talking about counting the number of listens — we certainly aren’t there yet, but we are approaching it. No, I’m merely talking about the percentage of the podcast listening audience that has listened to programming from a given publisher.

The industry has been very focused on downloads, and the two levers that most manipulate that number — frequency of release, and cross-promotion. In other words, if a network wants to move its download figures to a significant degree, it can either increase the frequency of release (from weekly to semiweekly or daily) OR it can relentlessly cross-promote new network Show B to the already established network Show A.

Those levers are satisfying to pull because they work, and they respond very quickly. But they are one-dimensional levers — the levers of frequency. They do not move reach to anywhere near the same degree. And I think it’s time for podcasting to think very hard about reach.

It’s been fascinating to look at our new reach rankings — apologies for the tease, but I’ll just say that it both does and doesn’t look like a ranker by downloads might. The big winners are largely still the big winners, but some other publishers find their fortunes improved or impaired depending on the robustness of their total audience.

To tell you why all of this matters, we gotta get back in time.

A little over ten years ago, major market radio stations were measured by a company called Arbitron that asked a sample of people in a given market to fill out a weekly diary of what radio stations they listened to, and when. They totaled all of that data up every week to determine each station’s share of total radio listening. There are two dimensions to the determination of that share: cume (which is reach — the percentage of the market who listened even for a little bit to a station) and TSL (Time Spent Listening, which we can use here as a proxy for frequency — how long someone listened to a given station.) A well-rated station could achieve that position in three different ways: dominate cume, dominate TSL, or do pretty good in both.

Imagine a neighborhood — maybe your neighborhood. There might be a pop station (the one that plays Taylor Swift) that most everyone you know listens to for at least a few minutes a day so mom can get her Cardi B on while driving to work. There might also be a smooth jazz, or a classical station, that most people don’t listen to. Except for the Kupferschmidts across the street. They listen to that stuff 40 hours a week. No one trick-or-treats there.

In the days of the Arbitron diary, both stations found success. But today, in those same major markets, the diary has been replaced with an electronic, passive measurement system called PPM (Portable People Meter.) In the months following PPM’s adoption, the Taylor Swift stations did fine. But the smooth jazz and classical stations? Pretty much wiped off the face of the earth. There are a number of reasons for this (including some people who believe that those formats were too “quiet” to allow for proper PPM encoding — I don’t have a dog in that fight) but the most salient one to this argument is this: though PPM technology might be superior to a pen and pencil, the sample sizes used for ratings declined significantly.

Think of every neighborhood as a jar full of different colored jellybeans. The Pop station households were green jellybeans, and the odd smooth jazz households were red jellybeans. In the days of the diary, the samples were large enough that if you dipped your hand into that jar, you would reliably pull out at least a few red jellybeans. With the smaller samples of PPM, that handful of jellybeans became considerably smaller, and as a result, some months didn’t find the Kupferschmidts and their ilk at all. That made stations built mainly on TSL unstable, and ultimately untenable in a post-PPM world. And this is why we have so much Taylor Swift.

OK. Back to the present.

Today, podcasting networks are built on a lot of red jellybeans. And in the download economy, that works. Love True Crime Weekly? Then you’ll really love our new show, True Crime Hourly, or coming this fall, We Will Straight Up Murder You. Give the red jellybean people more red jellybean content, more frequently. And don’t get me wrong — this is what built podcasting into what it is today. A show about everything is a show about nothing, after all, and it is the niche that keeps podcasting alive and vibrant.

Steven Carter from Northern New England, USA [CC BY-SA 2.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0)]

But at the network or publisher level, relying on frequency manipulation alone is akin to putting all of your eggs in one basket. And that’s a dangerous thing, today. I listen to a lot of podcasts on The Ringer network. If, someday, Bill Simmons finally snaps and says something awful (like, “Larry Bird was overrated”), I am out, and his network is down one human — but about ten downloads per week. The same is true for the daily news podcast game. Right now, I listen to two of these. The day is coming when I only make time for one. The other? Down one human audience member, but also down a few hundred downloads per year.

None of this is to say that podcasters should stop doing these things. There is no “wrong” here. But, in 2020, it is probably time for podcast networks to spend as much time on increasing their reach as they do their downloads. Or for some to focus more on reach than they do frequency. But ultimately, my message is to look beyond the download counts and top charts, and instead focus on the health and sustainability of an audience. Disruptions happen every day, in every industry. Podcasting will have any number of meteors striking it over the next several years. And the key to surviving those meteors is a diverse, thriving population of humans, not downloads. Otherwise, if that meteor hits the Kupferschmidts, you’re screwed.

The Startup

Medium's largest active publication, followed by +527K people. Follow to join our community.

Tom Webster

Written by

SVP, Edison Research. Co-author of The Infinite Dial, The Podcast Consumer, The Social Habit, and other widely cited studies. Other half of @tamadear.

The Startup

Medium's largest active publication, followed by +527K people. Follow to join our community.

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade