Contrary to other readers, I listen to the podcast, and I think you guys do an incredible job. Rob and Andy have a great rapport, and you each have excellent "radio" voices (literally and metaphorically). I love the passion you guys bring to the podcast and share with your audience.
I'm bummed that other people won't listen to you guys in your element and instead demand you produce precisely the content they want to consume.
Keep doing what you're doing – I feel closer to the Cal sports community when I listen to the pod, which is more important than ever in the social distancing era.
Damn man. You about to make me and Andy cry. Chopping onions all up in this place. I appreciate the kind words. Really do. You have no idea how much that means to myself and to Andy as well. I think I can speak on his behalf and say we appreciate you fam if there’s any content you think we can do on the pod just let us know!
Now I feel inclined to comment--my first time ever on WFC. I would support a written summary. I don't have time to listen to a podcast, but I do have time to read a summary and would enjoy participating in a conversation.
Rob Hwang, your overreaction is off-putting. Nobody is asking you to stop doing the podcast. People are asking you to meet them where they're at--a lot of people prefer reading. Obviously we value what you're doing and what you have to say, otherwise we wouldn't be on here in the first place.
"We want people to listen to the podcast not just read a Wikipedia summary of the episode"--really, wouldn't you rather understand what your audience wants and give that to them? Do you want a broad audience? Or do you only do what you want to do? If so, just understand the consequences: a limited reach.
I'm in Brian's camp. I won't click on a video in various news sites that I visit. I want to read it. And I especially enjoy looking at the reader's comments. This is an outstanding site on things related to Cal football, and that's why I look at it almost every day. But I didn't go to the podcast.
That's totally fine--not every piece here is going to appeal to every visitor. The same way a post on Olympic sports doesn't appeal to each and every visitor who's here for football content. (Which is a shame because Ruey does killer work and because our Olympic sports and student-athletes deserve recognition too.)
Diversifying our content allows us to hit people who like to read news and people who like to listen to podcasts. No one is asking or forcing our audience to consume every piece of content we put out. If someone is, then please talk to Twist and he'll refund your WFC Premium subscription cost.
But if you couldn't tell from the short, short list of names we have generating articles, we are EMBARASSINGLY short-staffed right now and it doesn't make sense to have one of our few writers spend some even more of their precious free time summarizing podcasts. If we can ever find more applicants to donate their time here who are interested in such a task, then we can expand into that.
All that being said, thank you for your compliment and for spending your time here. We do appreciate the readers and do it for the community.
"Since people can't share their thoughts on your podcast subject or subjects within the podcast, the only way they can communicate their thoughts relating to it is writing them online in an article devoted to that subject."
I don't understand your point here. People don't have to reply to a podcast with a counter-podcast. We have a comment section that people are welcome to use to share their thoughts as you are now. Adding a summary isn't going to change the accessibility of the comment section.
We are diversifying our content streams and our audiences--some people prefer reading and others prefer listening. If people don't want to listen to podcasts, then we've clearly covered this story in two posts--one on DeRuyter's departure and one on Heyward's hire. We're not asking people to consume all of our content in all forms if they don't like that form of media. But at the same time, do people write to Hollywood and ask them to recut their movies into 22-minute episodes if they prefer TV to cinema?
It's also quite rude to say you assume we don't get listens. I can't fathom how someone would think it's appropriate to just outright say to someone "I'm assuming most people aren't interested in the content you invest a significant amount of your free time in". How would you feel if someone spoke of your work like that? Please choose your words more carefully.
Also I’m done here. Either listen to the podcast and write your thoughts or don’t listen and still write your thoughts. Either way. I think you need to know WHY people listen to a podcast to begin with and not how you interpret it. Because we’re the number 1 listened to cal sports podcast and I won’t have this disrespect to the work Andy I put into it.
I think it’s as simple as listening to it if you want to talk about what we’re talking about. We want people to listen to the podcast not just read a Wikipedia summary of the episode.
Contrary to other readers, I listen to the podcast, and I think you guys do an incredible job. Rob and Andy have a great rapport, and you each have excellent "radio" voices (literally and metaphorically). I love the passion you guys bring to the podcast and share with your audience.
I'm bummed that other people won't listen to you guys in your element and instead demand you produce precisely the content they want to consume.
Keep doing what you're doing – I feel closer to the Cal sports community when I listen to the pod, which is more important than ever in the social distancing era.
Damn man. You about to make me and Andy cry. Chopping onions all up in this place. I appreciate the kind words. Really do. You have no idea how much that means to myself and to Andy as well. I think I can speak on his behalf and say we appreciate you fam if there’s any content you think we can do on the pod just let us know!
Now I feel inclined to comment--my first time ever on WFC. I would support a written summary. I don't have time to listen to a podcast, but I do have time to read a summary and would enjoy participating in a conversation.
Rob Hwang, your overreaction is off-putting. Nobody is asking you to stop doing the podcast. People are asking you to meet them where they're at--a lot of people prefer reading. Obviously we value what you're doing and what you have to say, otherwise we wouldn't be on here in the first place.
"We want people to listen to the podcast not just read a Wikipedia summary of the episode"--really, wouldn't you rather understand what your audience wants and give that to them? Do you want a broad audience? Or do you only do what you want to do? If so, just understand the consequences: a limited reach.
I'm in Brian's camp. I won't click on a video in various news sites that I visit. I want to read it. And I especially enjoy looking at the reader's comments. This is an outstanding site on things related to Cal football, and that's why I look at it almost every day. But I didn't go to the podcast.
That's totally fine--not every piece here is going to appeal to every visitor. The same way a post on Olympic sports doesn't appeal to each and every visitor who's here for football content. (Which is a shame because Ruey does killer work and because our Olympic sports and student-athletes deserve recognition too.)
Diversifying our content allows us to hit people who like to read news and people who like to listen to podcasts. No one is asking or forcing our audience to consume every piece of content we put out. If someone is, then please talk to Twist and he'll refund your WFC Premium subscription cost.
But if you couldn't tell from the short, short list of names we have generating articles, we are EMBARASSINGLY short-staffed right now and it doesn't make sense to have one of our few writers spend some even more of their precious free time summarizing podcasts. If we can ever find more applicants to donate their time here who are interested in such a task, then we can expand into that.
All that being said, thank you for your compliment and for spending your time here. We do appreciate the readers and do it for the community.
I had never listened to the podcasts before but with all the stuff going on in the comments this time, I actually listened and really enjoyed it.
But I also feel that we've already been enjoying discussing TDR and Heyward in the comment section of the other post.
You know you could just listen to the podcast.
Do you feel that not having a summary discourages people from commenting or sharing their thoughts on the subject?
"Since people can't share their thoughts on your podcast subject or subjects within the podcast, the only way they can communicate their thoughts relating to it is writing them online in an article devoted to that subject."
I don't understand your point here. People don't have to reply to a podcast with a counter-podcast. We have a comment section that people are welcome to use to share their thoughts as you are now. Adding a summary isn't going to change the accessibility of the comment section.
We are diversifying our content streams and our audiences--some people prefer reading and others prefer listening. If people don't want to listen to podcasts, then we've clearly covered this story in two posts--one on DeRuyter's departure and one on Heyward's hire. We're not asking people to consume all of our content in all forms if they don't like that form of media. But at the same time, do people write to Hollywood and ask them to recut their movies into 22-minute episodes if they prefer TV to cinema?
It's also quite rude to say you assume we don't get listens. I can't fathom how someone would think it's appropriate to just outright say to someone "I'm assuming most people aren't interested in the content you invest a significant amount of your free time in". How would you feel if someone spoke of your work like that? Please choose your words more carefully.
You REALLLLLLLY don’t understand the concept of a podcast.
Also I’m done here. Either listen to the podcast and write your thoughts or don’t listen and still write your thoughts. Either way. I think you need to know WHY people listen to a podcast to begin with and not how you interpret it. Because we’re the number 1 listened to cal sports podcast and I won’t have this disrespect to the work Andy I put into it.
I think it’s as simple as listening to it if you want to talk about what we’re talking about. We want people to listen to the podcast not just read a Wikipedia summary of the episode.