A thread about podcasts. Yes, I’d be interested in hearing recommendations, and comments about your favorites, but I also thought we could speak more broadly about podcasts. For example, I started this because I wanted to discuss different interviewers and their styles. This notion came up when because I recently heard Marc Maron’s podcast, WTF for the first time, and the differences between his approach and someone like Rick Beato (who does youtube interviews) really struck me. The former interrupted his guest a lot–I want to say more than any other interviewer that I can think of. On the other hand, the latter, at least in the Pat Metheny interview, allows the guest to talk a lot, with very little interruption. If I interviewed people, I’d likely be more guilty of interrupting the guest, but I actually prefer Beato’s approach in the Metheny interview. (Metheny was loquacious, so Beato’s approach worked well. Such an approach may not work as well with a less talkative guest.) There are also some hosts who talk a lot, especially when formulating a question. Ezra Klein does this, as did Charlie Rose. Again, I could see myself being guilty of this, but I prefer an interviewer who says as few words as possible, especially when formulating questions.
To shift gears, I would appreciate recommendations, as I’m looking for more podcasts–especially since I don’t listen to any sports podcasts now.
I’ve been enjoying listening to James “Mtume” Heath, a percussionist who played with Miles Davis in the 70s, and also created the song, “Juicy Fruit.” He has interesting anecdotes about Miles Davis, he’s an interesting guy, but most of all, he seems really cool. (Unfortunately, he just recently passed away.)
Anyway, I’ve been enjoying his interview on Questlove’s podcast. I must say that I’ve lost interest in this podcast–mainly because a) I don’t think Questlove is a really good interviewer. He takes a bit long to get to a question, and he interrupts his guest a bit much. But he comes across as a really nice guy, and the interruptions seem to stem from enthusiasm, more than just being a rude person. But what makes it really rough is that he has a group of people with him that chime in. Sometimes several are talking, and it’s hard to understand. It can be kinda annoying.
One of my favorite podcasts now is Conversations with Tyler. The “Tyler” in the show title is Tyler Cowen, an economics professor at George Mason University. Cowen seems very well-read and knowledgeable, in subjects beyond his field.
His style of interviewing is a bit distinctive in that he doesn’t have a style that creates a conversation. He’s asks questions, gets an answer, then moves on to the next question–which isn’t related to the previous question. In other words, there really isn’t a flow to the interview. What makes up for this is the quality of questions in my view and the answers his guests give. Admittedly, Cowen will ask about individuals (e.g., thinkers, writers, experts, etc.) or books I’ve never heard of, but the answers can still be interesting. He’s had some good guests on the show, which helps.
I just listened to the first episode of Devil and the Deep Blue Sea a Christianity Today podcast about the panic over Satanism in the 80s. After the first episode , the framework seems to be a contrast between two different incidents–one involving the oldest son from a reality TV show (17 and Counting, which I knew nothing about), and the West Memphis 3–the three young boys convicted of gruesome murders of children, based on the belief that they were into Satanism (because of the music they listened to, among other things). It’s pretty interesting so far.
Anyone have any podcasts they can recommend?
I enjoyed this New Yorker Radio interview of Brian Eno, which surprised me with several nuggets of insight on art, among other things.
Let me share one of these. Eno talked about the way people assume that the avoidance of punishment and pain often guides human behavior, but he suggests beauty, or things we find awesome or impressive, also guides human behavior as well. A banal observation, perhaps, but this lead to what Eno believes is one of the most important questions a person can ask themselves, and that is, what do you really like? I’m not sure about the number of people who would agree, but I tend to agree with Eno (and actually the question came from a friend and fellow composer, Jon Hassell).
Perhaps if we broadened the question beyond aesthetics more people would agree this is an important question. But even if we limit to man-made works that make one feel really excited, joyful, or even alive, I think that’s an important question as well. Why do I think that? Off the top of my head I would say, knowing the answer allows one to surround themselves and maybe even create, things that evoke these sensations, while also allowing one to avoid things that either don’t evoke these things or evoke the something close to the opposite. If one can do this at home or at work, is it going too far to say that this could actually elevate one’s life in a significant way? No, I tend to think not.
Conversations with Tyler
Tyler Cowen interviews Nobel laureate (in economics?), Joel Mokyr, who has a new book, co-written with Abner Greif and Guido Tabellini, called Two Paths to Prosperity: Culture and Institutions in Europe and China, 1000–2000. This was one of the more interesting and enjoyable podcasts I’ve heard in a long time.
If you like Jared Diamond’s Guns, Germs, and Steel, they ask similar type of questions. For example,
(On a side note, Mokyr has a bit of an accent and raises his voice in a odd times, all of which make him a little hard to understand at times.)
Do you guys feel like the personality and the way a person speaks on a podcast, everything from the timbre of their voice, the cadence of their speech, and word choice, matters a lot–to the point where it’s even a little more important than the insight and opinions they provide?
I think I first became aware of this listening to the GM Shuffle with Michael Lombardi. Even though he seemed irrational and even childish at times, I still found the podcast appealing. I think his way of speaking is what ultimately kept me listening.
In a way, this is a little disturbing, as the quality of the content should be the most important. An analogy would be watching a newscast because the anchor people are physically attractive and likeable, even though the substance of what they’re saying isn’t always on point.
Anyway, this came to mind again while listening to The Athletic Football Show, hosted by Robert Mays. For some reason, I like Robert Mays’s delivery. Same with the two guys that usually appear with him. However, unlike The GM Shuffle, I think Mays and his cohorts provide really interesting opinions and insights. It might one of my favorite sports podcasts now.
Are there any good sports podcasts that you guys are listening to?
As you may be aware (I don’t know what kind of sports media you consume), Pablo Torre did a show about Lombardi, and after Lombardi’s recent suspension at UNC, he did a follow-up. He appears to be a man who’s managed to move up in organizations despite not doing anything, and one reason seems to be how well he speaks and presents himself. At least, that’s what they say on Pablo’s show.
I don’t see how one can NOT be influenced, at least on first impressions, by a podcast host’s manner of speaking. Voice, intonation, pronunciation, all of that is part of communicating, and that’s what we’re talking about. I think I have a mostly open mind about these things: vocal fry, for example, irritates a lot of listeners — mostly older men like us — but either because I’m conscious of the inherent ageism and sexism of the irritation or because I’ve worked so closely with younger women for most of my late career, it doesn’t bother me much.
There’s a jigsaw puzzle influencer whose way of talking took a LOT of getting used to, and I think it’s the same thing: my old age and my being a guy. But she’s super good at what she does, and I also think she speaks the way she does because she’s suuuuper geeky, and that’s part of why she’s good. So I remind myself (less and less frequently, thank goodness) not to be that guy.
Because what it often comes down to is: we grew up with a certain way of looking and sounding that we equate with the right way to present. And while we were growing up, ESPECIALLY in sports, that way was white, midwestern, and male. There’s nothing inherently wrong about the way (for example) Mina Kimes or Katie Nolan speaks. There’s just the fact that we didn’t grow up hearing women speak about sports when we were growing up. Stuart Scott got a lot of this when he was on SportsCenter for the same reasons.
Robert Mays and a lot of the original Ringer (and Grantland) guys didn’t sound a lot like our sports commentors growing up either, and I think it’s because they were all hired as writers first. Mays has a real nerdy bro vibe that’s far removed from guys like Bob Costas and Mike Tirico. Mays almost sounds lazy. Costas and Tirico are broadcasters. Mays was a writer.
Bill Simmons is the same way, really. A writer first. It took a little bit of adjusting for me to get used to him, too, although he’s so funny it didn’t take that long.
Anyway. The sports (and sports-adjacent) podcasts I listen to are The Tony Kornheiser Show, the Mina Kimes Show, Pablo Torre Finds Out, SVPod, and Baseball Tonight. I’ve gotten off the Dan LeBatard show only because I just couldn’t keep up (and not because of recent changes). I also got off Poscast (with Joe Posnanski and Michael Schur) for the same reason, but I just listened twice to the audiobook of their new co-authored book Big Fan and remembered why I love those guys so much, so I’m going to rejoin that podcast. And one of the reasons I love those guys so much is because of the way they present, vocally.
I recently saw the Pablo Torre podcasts about Lombardi, but I lost interest in them for some reason.
There’s a likeable, chummy East Coast speaking style–something that would be appealing if you’re sitting around shooting the bull. At the same time, he has energy and earnestness that can make one take him seriously.
I didn’t mean to convey that one shouldn’t be influenced at all by the way someone speaks, but when your perception of a person’s opinion is rather low, partly because of their level of insight and also partly by their immaturity, I felt I shouldn’t really be listening to the guy.
Re: vocal fry
I looked it up and watched a video on it. I have no idea what it is. The examples shown were not irritating to me–but I don’t even know what it is.
OK, thanks. I’ve only heard Kornheiser in PTI. Maybe I’ll give that podcast a shot.
You’re not going to like it.