Should auto-inserted ads be drowned at birth?

[Podcastmatters]

As many of you who've known me for a while will remember, one of the reasons I requested my producer contract with Podshow be terminated was because they wanted to auto-insert ads into the tartanpodcast (the fact that these ads were for other podcasts isn't relevant to this discussion).

I stressed to them, and I'm still convinced of this, that host-endorsements are the way to go if ads are to be run on a podcast. And here's my reason. Listeners develop a relationship with the podcaster. Is it a relationship of trust? Perhaps. Perhaps listeners trust the judgement, opinion, tastes and so forth of the podcaster. So if a podcast was to endorse a product on their podcast surely that would carry so much more weight than a generic ad auto-inserted into the podcaster's production?

But what do you think?

- Auto-inserted?

- Host endorsement?

- Simple 'brought you by...' ads?

[Mad Bouncy Dogs]

I think there are 2 issues here. The first is auto inserted ads at the beginning and end of your show (a la Podshow) which I believe are a fair compromise for free hosting and bandwidth. ( so shoot me - I'm tight!)

The second issue I think you have nailed exactly right. Promos or ads for other podcasts or services/products within the body of a show that are auto inserted are at the very least bad and at worst misleading the listener into some sort of implied endorsement

If a company insisted on auto inserting ads into your show why not give you a list that you could choose from with a row of tickboxes or better still just let you download the damn ad and insert it yourself in a place that doesn't interrupt the flow of your show.

Even better, as you point out, host endorsements carry much more weight in the podcasting areana where the listener/host releationship is so much closer than in any other form of media I know

That's my tuppence worth. I'll get back under my rock

Nigel
[e-mail]

[Frank Petrie]

If you have to choose one of the three, I'd go with host endorsement. I like how Laporte does it in TWiT. He weaves it into the conversation, not reading some hack's copy. It can actually b entertaining.

[David Noble]

Used 'brought to you by...' ads by Elluminate for a couple of months. They didn't seem to get in the way and there was no negative comment from listeners.

[Frank Petrie]

I don't know your demographics,David, but I assume that they are somewhat accustomed to that through that business model is used o TV.

Frank

[Paul Hutchinson]

Auto-inserted - bad.
Host endorsement - good.
Brought to you by - good.

Anything that interferes with the 'relationship' between show host(s) and audience is a no-no, imho.

[Tim Coyne]

The one company that I think has been really smart about their advertising is AUDIBLE. I'm not a big fan of this company or their DRM but they've been really smart about advertising in the podosphere. The ads are always host endorsed (as fas as I know) and they're totally dependent on the host/audience trust relationship. I've noticed that they also advertise in NEW YORKER magazine. People who listen to podcasts enjoy audio content. People who read the NEW YORKER enjoy "reading" books probably.

So, host endorsed is great if it works with the format.

Otherwise, I like the host doing a "brought to you by" at the beginning or wherever.

[Tim from Radio Clash]

I hate ads. Full stop. i'd rather they not be there.

So moving on from that position, If they are there, I'd prefer them to be at the start or end; that's to ignore them. To be annoying for me enough to listen to them, then the traditional answer is host endorsement - but STOP RIGHT THERE.That technique usually backfires and can totally fry your integrity with your listeners - I've stopped listening to certain podcasts, some now big with Podshow and other companies, because their host endorsements pissed me off. And I felt cheapened that they had sold their integrity. So they lost me as a listener - is that worth the price?

Brought to you ads is a good compromise though, integrity is not too damaged, it's saying 'OK these people support me, I need the money, but hey I know it's pain so won't pretend to be your friend or insanely happy about it' but is less plonked there than ads and not too much integrity prostitution.

And ironically the more simple, plain and less shouty and respectful to the programme the ad is, the more likely I'll grow respect for the sponsor and might even buy from them. I hate intrusive ads, be they entertaining or not - you can smell the money however you try to paper over it (in green) and I find it insulting, tbh.

It's like the difference between Orange and Cillit Bang, really.

So I vote brought to you ads (homemade), then plonk-u-ads, then last most definitely is endorsements. I'd rather not have to wonder about which is paid-for endorsement and which is actual opinion, it scarily becomes like payola.