Ok, there has been comment on one of the other threads I started about the TGO podcast and how "the good stuff starting to get a little hidden away"
I listen to a lot of podcasts, some of which are non outdoors related (well a lot actually - shocking I know), one or two are even there as companions to magazines.
And their formats differ big time to the TGO podcast. And for me actually work better with the magazine.
So I'm interested in what people think of the current format and what they think needs changing.
And if we are lucky TGO may take some of our feedback on board.
For myself I feel the podcast should provide extra content to that in the magazine, and not just repeat what is in the current issue.
I'd agree the TGO p/cast needs to compliment the mag, not be a trailer, or in most readers case I suspect - a spoiler.
BobC's p/casts work better for me because they go into detail on typically a single subject. They entertain and inform. the TGO ones are still falling inbetween these two camps.
How to improve - now thats the hard bit. Its easy to knock these attempts, even unintentionally, and I do appreciate the fact they exist at all, and that people spend their precious free time to produce them. Personally i'd like less articles, more detail, and less reading the mag out loud (Mike Harding/Jim Perrin pieces for example) There's my starter for 10
But yes I also appreciate the amount of effort that is going into creating these. And also don't want to be be seen as knocking what has been done but try and pass constructive comment that hopefully will be found useful.
Personally I like the articles, but would love to see them expand on the content of the magazine as opposed to just act as a trailer. Page space is at a premium, but a podcast has more flexibility. The problem is of course, podcasts don't bring money in and are time consuming to make. It's hard to get the right balance and of course TGO podcasts have Bobs to be compared with - but Bob has all the experience and equipment for producing his.
Colin Prior - good interview. Background to the photos, rationale for new book.
UK Triple Crown - good the hear about the differences between US and UK trails.
Bothies v campers. Good debate. Made me feel guiltyabout not using bothies - the one I was going to stop at in the summer was packed with a family, who had tents outside too.
Mike Harding - performing his article. Brings back memories of his BBC show.
Cameron's epitaph to Sid Scroggie. Interesting, as I hadn't heard of the gent before. Very good.
Bob's introduction (and editing) - very good.
Frankly, I think the interview style is good, and the 'solo' sections (Mike and Cameron) are well done.
I just avoid listening to the podcast until I've had a read of the substantial parts of the magazine.
You make good points (this type of feedback always welcome) and I feel Cameron and co are doing their best to compliment the contents of the magazine.
Editorially the productions are under Camerons control and I don't think he'll mind me telling you that he is very aware that the podcast should add value to the magazine contents. Therefore he is endeavouring to make them work each in their own right as well as directing people towards the magazine hard copy for written detail.
Also you must give TGO peeps some time to get used to using the new shiney gear and the art of interviewing people, to get the juicy nuggets of information out of them, which you must agree works better in audio than in written format.
Personally I think the recording of people 'out on the hill' doing whatever, adds real colour and passion to the interview. It spurs the imagination and brings the written word in the mag alive.
As you rightly say, everyone is doing this all in their free time 'as well' as doing their real jobs. However I don't feel (minor technical issues aside) that a 'paid for' production would be that much different, such is the standard we are working to.
There is the option to expand on a magazine article for a solo topic and I think this might be fascinating to listen to - Chris testing gear and muttering to himself, or one of Cameron's lightweight trips. However one mans food is anothers poison, and this may turn people off.
It's all about balance and treading a fine line to keep as many people happy as possible.
I'm sure they will read this thread with interest, so any comment which can help them please 'more readers more of the time', I'm sure would be welcome.
There are a few points which, as a journalist, I want to pick up on with my "John Manning" cap on rather than my "TGO" cap.
What I feel you get from the audio that's going to be lacking in much of the printed word is the feeling and evocation the subjects put into their words. That's something that's very hard to get across on a printed page (unless you're the likes of Jim Perrin or Andrew Terrill) and it's a great way of spreading some of the magical feeling the outdoors inspires in all of us.
A few folk are suggesting that the PodCast could expand on what's in the magazine and while we're hopefully succeeding with elements of that it that's not strictly speaking possible to go far, for the following reason:
Sit down and record yourself reading a couple or three features the magazine out aloud. Now, play it back and time it. There, you see, you can actually get a heck of a lot more words on the printed page than you can into five minutes of audio. In that respect it's hard to go beyond what's in the magazine. Often in fact you can read the printed word a lot faster too than it takes to listen to it being read aloud. Printed words have an in-built efficiency that I love.
The PodCasts have to be stand-alone items as not every listener (though we might wish they were) will be a regular TGO reader. That means there has to be some context-setting to accompany every item in the show. Hopefully everyone who listens to the PodCast will become subscribers but that'll take a week or two!
And the last thing we want to do is usurp the printed mag – as Bob rightly points out, we do the PodCast side of things in our own time, while the mag pays our wages; we'd be cutting our own throats if the PodCast was much more than a tempter to buy the mag.
One of the reasons we do it though is because we believe in the mag and believe that, for all the hairy edges that folk occasionally seem to love to knock, it's the best outdoor mag available in this neck of the woods. We want to spread the word and share the excitement we get from putting it together with like-minded folks who'll hopefully get a kick out of it too.
While we're part of a huge company and some aspects of the business side of things are beyond our direct influence (brrm brrm) this is a hands-on mag produced by enthusiasts for enthusiasts. The PodCast's a bonus, a bit of a hobby and we're chuffed that folk are enjoying it and getting inspired to debate it.
Boy do I ever waffle when I get going...
Would love to hear what people think of some of the other outdoorsy PodCasts out there - I've heard of some 45-90 minute interviews (usually featuring US trail hikers) but I've never listed to a whole one on my iPod cos I don't to break off from the Beach Boys, The Doors or Neil Young or more than half-an-hour at a time... guess I've got an attention-span deficit! Personally I think shorter interviews focussing on the most important issues are the way forward, but I'm open to suggestion.
Hopefully, too, some of the issues in the PodCasts will generate some debate here. For example the interview in the latest PodCast with the two Triple Crowners, Andy Helliwell and Rob Adamson, is only loosely connected with the magazine's content, as the up-coming North Sea Trail feature (by Roger Smith, December issue) made us wonder about the prospects for a UK Triple Crown. At this stage we've no plans to run a UK Triple Crown feature in the magazine itself. (Does that make it a bonus track?). I think I should start a new thread to debate that!
John, feedback on the other podcasts: Wildebeat, may have interesting stuff, but I've never managed to stay awake long enough to find out as the presenter has a voice that sends people to sleep. Even tried listening on the way to work, next thing I know people are standing over me asking if I'm all right. But seriousily I feel this podcast is too short 7-8 mins typically, and the fact he has to split some subjects into a couple of episodes he knows it as well deep down inside. Pratical Backpacking, I like. Duration is anything from 20 mins to over an hour. HAs had some good informative interviews on there. Trailcast when it was active (hasn't done anything for 6 months or so now) was also a longish podcast usually in the 40 min - 1 hour duration , but once again interesting interviews.
There are a couple of others that started but didn't really go anywhere, 4 or 5 episodes and then died.
By far the best and most professional has been the output from Bob and yourselfs.
John, I would suggest listening to some other podcasts to get an idea on formats etc.
I would prefer each subject in a podcast to be a seperate podcast, so that each month there might be half a dozen small podcasts to download instead of one big one.
Why?
i)....In order to listen to the podcast at present I need to find thirty minutes or so of free time. I find myself doing something else if I've got that much free time. It would be great to have six minute podcasts to fill in small gaps during the day. You need a certain amount of commitment to give thirty minutes to a podcast - I'm a subscriber and keen to listen, but casual browser thinking of subscribing might not listen.
ii)....I'm personally not keen on the linear radio style "show", and think it a waste not to let the internet give the listener the choice of which bits they listen to and when. Whilst I admit that this is a personal view I would add that I think the "show" style a bit dated and not in the spirit of the internet.
Interesting point about the length of the podcast, JH. A lot of podees (listeners? is there a term?) know how much time they have to listen to a podcast, and know how long the podcast is. Whether to/from work, train to a meeting, or lunch-break, or even winding down on a solo pitch. I like having a choice. Some short, some long, and some just right.
I like the idea of the segments as separate files for you to pick and choose. Actually makes it a bit more like how I read a magazine, I normally read everything but probably not in the order they are on the paper. Or at the same time.
I quite like the way some of the computer mags include more detail and maybe coding examples on the included DVD so maybe the podcast could work like this to some extent.
One particular example is interviews. On paper there's two solutions. The first results in a set of short questions followed by formal answers, which generally have to tidied-up versions of the real life answer. The journalist is unable to embed any of their views into the text without either changing the interviewee's words or asking very pointed questions. The second method involves the journalist writing a narrative on the interview, look at the Sunday papers for interviews that stretch over three pages of dense text.
A podcast is a far better medium for interview (in the same way that radio is) in that you can vary the style so much more. You can get anything from a cosy fireside chat to a full-on Paxman grilling, neither of which would come across well in print.
I'd have thought the ideal type of TGO link would be a well thought out article followed by an appropriate interview in the podcast. Each would complement the other. People who bought the mag would get additional depth, those who listened to the podcast might be interested in finding out more and buy the mag.
Another example would be if Colin were to talk about some photos but the photos only appear in the printed form you could end up with a true multimedia experience. Perhaps this could even be done in the context of him looking at other peoples photographs and commenting on them.
