Canadian Marketing Blog

Podcast: Worst Term Ever

It's no secret I'm a huge proponent of podcasting. What may come as surprise is that I think the term "podcast" is a horrible name for this new medium.

Although I've since left MacLaren MRM to take on a new role at a different company later this month, one of the projects I'm most proud to have worked on during my time at the agency is a podcast series for the Buick division of General Motors of Canada. Aesthetic Intent quietly launched during my final week at the agency, and to the best of my knowledge is the first ever podcast by a Canadian automotive manufacturer. Even more noteworthy, in my opinion, is that this podcast is not about cars.

As proud as I am of this initiative, one thing that became glaringly obvious during its production was how problematic the term "podcast" is.

First there's the "pod" part of the word, which to many people implies an association with Apple's popular iPod MP3 player. I can't begin to tell you how many people I spoke with during the course of this project thought you needed an iPod, or some other portable MP3 player, to listen to a podcast. I don't blame anyone for this misunderstanding - I used to think that as well - I blame the word itself.

Then there's the "cast" part of the word. When I mentioned to Canadian artist Jane Martin, one of the people interviewed for Aesthetic Intent, that the podcast had launched, she remarked to me that she was away that week and would therefore miss it. I was puzzled by her comment at first, and then I realized that the "cast" part of "podcast" had given her the impression that the podcast episode was like a traditional radio broadcast that is aired only once at a particular date and time. Once again, nothing could be further from the truth (podcast episodes are available anytime, on-demand), yet I completely understand how someone might get this (wrong) impression.

There's probably no point in me griping about the term "podcast" since we're stuck with it. And I don't have any suggestions for a better word (yet), although when I find myself explaining podcasts to people I usually end up saying something like, "it's an on-demand audio-visual program delivered via the Internet." I do sometimes wonder, however, how much the growth of podcasting has been hindered by its confusing name.

As with any new technology, its just going to take a bit of time for people to catch on. For the moment podcasts are probably just reaching the early adopter market, but that market is probably the coveted 18-34 year olds.

The only thing worse than a bad name is more than one name.

Yes, Bill, it's a lousy name, but I think we're stuck with it! I've heard a few other terms bandied about (nanocasting comes to mind - it still contains the dreaded "cast"). I start every presentation or webinar about podcasting by defining the term and explaining that you DON'T need an iPod, despite the name. Sigh.

"A rose by any other name would smell as sweet" - Shakespeare

The thing that excites me about the 'channel' is the ability to tell the product STORY- stuff we have all drifted away from over the years as the time slots got narrower and attention spans virtually dissappeared.
Story's are the foundation, "the truth well told" that refocusses people on the things that are more important in the brand value proposition.

These new channels - (or should I say touchpoints) will come to prove once again that if you have something meaningful to say - people will listen and tell their friends who'll tell their friends...pull vs push marketing.

So I am excited by the renaissance and really not concerned by any of the 'monickers'. People are smart - they'll figure it out.

My $0.02
Miro

I just blogged about this recently - as long as you can tie it to other behavioral patterns, you can make quick progress in explaining.

http://www.christopherspenn.com/2007/08/01/describe-the-pattern-of-usage/