Top 100 Ranked Podcasts Rated

[TheCritic000]

http://top100rankedpodcastsrated.blogspot.com


We are working on an official site. Until then we'll release 7-10 reviews a week.

[retrocrush]

I find your premise confusing.

You write, "Hopefully this review will be a sign of what's to come in future reviews. My reviews are intended to help mainstream podcasting beyond the podcasting community. I feel that podcasters themselves are responsible for the majority of the ratings on other podcasting ranking sites; not typical internet users and iPod owners."

If I convince listeners to vote for my podcast, how is that translating to podcasters themselves are responsible for the majority of the ratings? And how does your opinion of that podcast provide a more useful evaluation than large groups of people who listen to and love a podcast?

Also your review of Adam's podcast seems rather bitter, as if you're upset he's not reviewing podcasts you deem more deserving of coverage. His show is clearly aimed at folks new to the podcast experience. I agree if there's a podcast being discussed that you have no interest in, you get the "fast forward" urge, but he seems to do a pretty good job with a diverse array of casts. Ultimately, Apple is producing that show, so it's not going to get too underground.

That being said, I like the idea of a podcast review site. But I can't say I'm eager to trust your opinion on them yet without reading more (as would be true for a critic of any medium).

[Craig]

Also, "Top 100 Ranked Podcasts" is somewhat misleading since you're basing the ranking on FeedBurner stats. A large number of podcasters (I suspect the majority) don't use FeedBurner.

Craig

[TheCritic000]

Also, "Top 100 Ranked Podcasts" is somewhat misleading since you're basing the ranking on FeedBurner stats. A large number of podcasters (I suspect the majority) don't use FeedBurner.

Craig

Your suspicions are wrong, the majority of podcasters do use feedburner. I think they represent around 80% of independant podcasts. If you have figures disproving that please, share them.

On another note, I have no reason to be upset with, and hold no grudge or ill will towards Adam Curry. That's how I write, and that was my review of his show. You have every right to disagree with it. It makes no difference to me if you have good or bad taste.

The large groups of people who listen to and love podcasts right now are early adopters, and do not reflect the listening habits of the typical mainstream listener. If I asked 100 random people with iPods, in Manhattan, who were between the ages of 13 and 35 if they knew what a podcast was, most wouldn't be able to tell me. If you asked those same people to listen to the recommended shows on Podfinder, most would be turned off to podcasts for life.

[Craig]

Your suspicions are wrong, the majority of podcasters do use feedburner. I think they represent around 80% of independant podcasts. If you have figures disproving that please, share them.
Actually, I'd be interested to know where you get that 80% figure from. Only 30% of the current Top 50 podcasts here at Podcast Alley use FeedBurner, as do 20% of the Top 25 at Podcast Pickle, 40% of the 25 newest podcasts at Podcast Pickle, and a mere 3% of the last 100 updated podcasts at audio.weblogs.com. Obviously these numbers are all over the place but it doesn't do anything to suggest 80% or even a majority, so I stand by my claim that the majority of podcasters don't use FeedBurner unless you can prove otherwise.

Incidentally, I think a Top 10 review show is a great idea too...just call it the Top 10 FeedBurner Podcasts Review Show!

Craig

[TheCritic000]

I put the new site up. www.PodSpank.com I still have a ton of work to do on it. I rated The Radio Factor on BillORielly.com to tide some of you over till I get more reviews up.

[TINKOFF RADIO]

It would be nice to have a visual cue to your ratings, even if it's only a change in color of the header text (green good, red bad) or a thumbs up/down icon. This would give me a quick read on the page. I can imagine when you have 100 podcasts up there, asking the visitor to read all that text to determine if it's good or bad is a large request.

Good luck and I look forward to checking it out when it's more filled out.

Adam Tinkoff
TINKOFF RADIO

[radiofilibuster]

I agree with Craig.

The sentences he quotes are actually a bit disturbing:

I think they represent around 80% of independant podcasts. If you have figures disproving that please, share them.

"I think they represent" is a lot different from knowing. It's a guess... and it's incorrect to support or justify this figure as fact with a phrase like "If you have figures disproving that [...]".

In my eyes, the credibility of the endeavor takes a substantial hit based on this alone.

Here are a few other phrases which raise question marks.

The large groups of people who listen to and love podcasts right now are early adopters, and do not reflect the listening habits of the typical mainstream listener.

We can accept the first phrase without specific data, if we embrace the assumption (and I think we can for the time being) that podcast listenership is increasing exponentially much like podcast authorship. We can also accept that there MAY be a difference in listening habits, insofar as the sample populations are different... but until definitive research is performed to differentiate the two populations, we cannot truly make an assumption they are different. In addition: popularity is popularity. No one at AC Nielsen or Arbitron filters households by asking how long they've owned their television. Podcast research should reflect true popularity with NO biases... and where biases are embraced and sustained, these biases should be inherent in the title (e.g. Top 100 Podcasts Using Feedburner As Enjoyed By Non Early Adopter Listeners... not very marketable, but certainly accurate); if not, the research becomes inherently misleading regardless of overall rigor.

If I asked 100 random people with iPods, in Manhattan, who were between the ages of 13 and 35 if they knew what a podcast was, most wouldn't be able to tell me.

Have you asked? Until you have, why don't we stop speculating, and start researching? A sample size of 100 may not be statistically significant, but it's a start.

[TheCritic000]

Have you asked? Until you have, why don't we stop speculating, and start researching? A sample size of 100 may not be statistically significant, but it's a start.

At least that many. I live in New York and have asked at least 100 people if they new what a podcast is, and about 5 said yes. The next question I asked was "what is it?". The answers I recieved were all similar to "Well, I heard of a podcast, but I'm not sure exactly what it is; what is it?"

The other thing I'd like to clear up, is the feedburner statistic. Around a month ago I read a newspaper article about blogging and podcasting. They stated that there were an estimated 20,000 total podcasts. At the time feedburner managed over 16,000 feeds. So I came up with 80%., based on those two figures. I've been trying to find information online, giving figures on the total number of individual podcasts to date, but can't find any. I would have to imagine that feedburner manages at least 80% of the feeds since they now manage feeds for 20,300 podcasts( www.feedburner.com ). I don't think there are more than 4,000 podcasts managed by individuals. I could be wrong, but I'm probably not.

[radiofilibuster]

"About" five? How do you get a number like "about" five?

"I would have to imagine [...]"?

Phrases like this, again, make the statistics quoted dubious at best. If you're presenting numbers with room to question, people will only question them.

Every newspaper article I've seen quotes statistics based on numbers which, when researched, quotes data published six months ago or more. Using things you've read as a reference is a great idea, but a little drill-down needs to be performed to put these numbers in context demographicallly, geographically, and based on a function of time... or else everything based upon that research is guesswork.

I'm not trying to shoot the idea down... but I'm trying really hard to believe the ranking will have merit, and there are too many red flags. The 80% claim still sounds incredibly dubious, but let's assume for the moment it's correct: in that case, you're still excluding 20%, and your "100 Best" is based on a smaller population than "all podcasts". If you want to base your statistics off Feedburner, you simply have to put Feedburner in the title of your list. This shouldn't be difficult if there's nothing to hide... and to hide this fact would certainly compromise credibility of the list.

[RED BAR RADIO]

Your suspicions are wrong, the majority of podcasters do use feedburner. I think they represent around 80% of independant podcasts. If you have figures disproving that please, share them.

I know of at least 6 BIG shows that don't use feedburner. My show for one doesn't, and would never.

Lemme tell you something - Not every show that is AVAILABLE as a podcast, is a quote on quote "PODCAST". Not every show gives a **** about the "podcast community". A lot of shows just use podcasting as a tool to obtain a few more listeners. So beleive me, 80% of the shows ARE NOT using "feedburner" ok - not everyone cares about it as much as the whiney bitches who frequent these forums.

And come on, do we really need another directory/ranking system? If you want some attention, start up a podcast and make it good.

You've got all these people now making sites to rank podcasts - they're like failed athletes that have become gym teachers.

I hope some kind of terror attack or natural disaster hits at the podcast expo. It would get rid of all the wanna-be's and liars.

[RED BAR RADIO]

Oh yeah - for all of the people in this thread:

Why even argue with this guy? Hi site blows anyway. Has anyone even gone to it? Look at it!

It's just another garbage blog. He's just another looser who gives credit to the crappy podcasts, and bashes on the professional ones that have become very successful.

[TINKOFF RADIO]

It's just another garbage blog. He's just another looser who gives credit to the crappy podcasts, and bashes on the professional ones that have become very successful.
Nice display of compassion to your fellow podcasters, Redbar. Have you ever considered that we are all "just another loser"? Does hit and run bashing like this help this guy (or any of us) in anyway? I appreciate your freedom of opinion, but unfortunately have to disagree with your tactics.
You have such a great show and audience, why would you kick a guy who is no threat to you? Maybe he'll learn something from a bit of constructive critisism and come up with a winning site. He could be any of us.

Peace be with you my brother,
TINKOFF RADIO

[cdoelle]

Anyone that believes that most of the podcasts use feedburner is WAAAY wrong. Great job of compiling the Top 100 Podcasts that use Feedburner.

[joelthecomic]

Feedburner is no way to judge who's the top.

Use PCA or iTunes, but really who cares.

Actually, I do. Review our show. We're not on Feedburner, but our internal numbers show 8,000,000,0000 downloads.

What's weird is that it's from only 3 unique IP addresses all in French Guyana. What's even weirder is that our show is in English except for one show Corey and I recorded in Afrikaans because that's how we like to roll sometimes.

Also, it might be difficult to review though because our show ranges in length from 60 seconds to 13 hours in length depending upon what's going on that week, and how many phony phone calls I can download from eDonkey and whichever promos for our favorite podcast "Voicemails from Adolescent Boys" happen to be available. Also, it's only available in DTS 6.1 channel surround because we're trying to prove just how good our sound quality is versus all these 56k mono MP3s floating around, those sound like crap. I know you're saying how can I listen to 6.1 surround on my iPod? But it's very easy if you flash your iPod firmware, install Linux and the DTS codec, then stick three pairs of those white earbuds in each ear. You'll then be officially 3 times cooler when you're hanging out at the Quad, college kids.

So yeah, good luck with your reviews. It sounds like what the world has been waiting for.

[Hittman]

I put the new site up. www.PodSpank.com I still have a ton of work to do on it. I rated The Radio Factor on BillORielly.com to tide some of you over till I get more reviews up.

It might help if you knew what a podcast was. This isn’t one. It’s a radio show available for download – there is no original content in it.

However, I did find your comment about anyone who listens to O’Rielly most telling: “You are probably illiterate, too stupid to read this and don't realize that I'm intentionally misspelling his name.” You betray such a vast amount of ignorance in that short sentence that it’s unlikely that anything else you have to say is worth reading. But I read on anyway, and that confirmed my suspicion. I didn’t see anything there that would make me want to return.

When I want a real reviews, I listen to Vox Monitor. They go through the trouble of actually listening to something all the way through, and offer comments more useful than “Everything I can say about TWiT has been said already.”

Yawn.

[Patrick]

Actually, I do. Review our show. We're not on Feedburner, but our internal numbers show 8,000,000,0000 downloads.

A) That's not a number.

B) Even if you did mistype 8 billion, you're full of ****.

[Patrick]

This site (podspank) is pointless and usless.

Even if people do use feedburner, which Craig has correctly told you most don't, some have their stats disabled like we do. We would be inthe top 5 according to feedburner number if we had our feedburner API turned on.

[SFEley]

I really don't understand why everyone is jumping on this guy just for doing what he wants to do. Yeah, the Feedburner idea was somewhat confused, but does that justify this level of snideness? Whether you like the reviews or not, the idea of a review site doesn't need to be trashed.

I personally think there aren't enough sources out there for honest podcast reviews. Sure, I listen to Vox Monitor and I enjoy it (when they aren't sending me 20 files of music jams in one day) but I think it's a fair statement that their style won't be to everyone's taste. Some competition in that market is a healthy thing. You can like these reviews or not, but don't bash the guy just for trying.

[joelthecomic]

Actually, I do. Review our show. We're not on Feedburner, but our internal numbers show 8,000,000,0000 downloads.

A) That's not a number.

B) Even if you did mistype 8 billion, you're full of ****.

Wow. You're bright, Patrick.

It looks silly when a podcaster puts out a number with all those zeros behind it doesn't it? Where have we seen that before?

Anyway, a BS topic, deserved a BS response, I think. Only the humor-impaired missed the point.

The kid can review our show, though. Good luck.

[SFEley]

It might help if you knew what a podcast was. This isn’t one. It’s a radio show available for download – there is no original content in it.

Oh, and this is rather a non sequitur, but I disagree with your assertion that redistributed radio shows can't be podcasts. According the closest thing we have to conventional wisdom (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Podcast), a podcast is any audio or video file published on the Internet and enabling subscription via a feed. The nature of the content is not part of the definition.

If you were to arbitrarily exempt content that was originally created for radio, you wouldn't just be cutting out Bill O'Reilly -- you'd also be cutting out things like Jesse Thorn's The Sound of Young America (http://www.splangy.com) or Mike & Evo's Dragon Page Cover-to-Cover (http://www.dragonpage.com), both active promoters of the podcast community. But both are also radio shows.

Heck, Cover-to-Cover's in the Podcast Pickle Hall of Fame. Would you make the case to Gary that it should be removed because it isn't a podcast?

[Big Mike]

I hope some kind of terror attack or natural disaster hits at the podcast expo. It would get rid of all the wanna-be's and liars.

Nice.

[Version3]

I hope some kind of terror attack or natural disaster hits at the podcast expo. It would get rid of all the wanna-be's and liars.

Nice.

Wow, I completely missed that the first time through. :shock:

[SFEley]

I hope some kind of terror attack or natural disaster hits at the podcast expo. It would get rid of all the wanna-be's and liars.

Nice.

Wow, I completely missed that the first time through. :shock:
I saw it, and immediately dismissed Red Bar Radio as a buffoon. Trolling like that isn't worth a response, so let's not waste time by arguing with him or treating him as someone who thinks.

[TheCritic000]

The joke here is that some of you take yourselves way too seriously.


www.Podspank.com

[Hittman]

Oh, and this is rather a non sequitur, but I disagree with your assertion that redistributed radio shows can't be podcasts. According the closest thing we have to conventional wisdom, a podcast is any audio or video file published on the Internet and enabling subscription via a feed. The nature of the content is not part of the definition.

The jury’s still out on what we define as a podcast, so we’ll be spared the boredome of a dictionary arugment. But I don’t consider something a podcast just because it is an audio file being distriubed via RSS.

Glancing at my podcatcher, I see three radio shows: The Dave Ramesy Show, Le Show, and FTL. Although I listen to all of them along with all the other podcasts, I only consider FTL to be a real podcast. The other two are radio shows that, as an afterthought, are turned into “podcasts.” Dave Ramsey or Harry Scheer don’t sit down and say “I’m going to do a podcast now.” They do a radio show, which is then distributed via RSS. FTL is different in that Ian creates a Podcast and a Radio show at the same time. He is thinking “podcast” when he does it.

If Escape Pod gets picked up by a radio syndicate, I’d still consider it a podcast, beucase it’s a podcast first, that happens to get played on the radio as well.

It’s a gray area, and always will be. And you can argume about shows like FTL. But I don’t think you can assert that The Radio Factor is a podcast. Even the name says otherwise.

As for critiquing a critic – everyone who performs anything, anywhere, is fair game for a critique. Love it or hate it, that’s part of being a performing artist. And that goes double for anyone who decides to be a critic themselves. A good critic better know what they’re talking about. They need to be well informed. They need to have a minimum of bias. This clown fails on all counts.

[TheCritic000]

Even if people do use feedburner, which Craig has correctly told you most don't, some have their stats disabled like we do. We would be inthe top 5 according to feedburner number if we had our feedburner API turned on.

I seriously doubt that, since Nobody likes Onions isn't listed on iTunes. I tried searching for it to conveniently download an episode. I then went to the site and tried subscribing from there, but it failed. I had to download an mp3. You should check that out if it was working at some point.
Also, you telling me Craig correctly told me something, doesn't make it true.

Anyway Nobody likes Onions was listed in the top 10 for October on Podcast Alley, and was pretty visible on Yahoo and other sites so I decided to rate it. I like the name you chose for the show, and understand that other people work on it with you so I gave it a fair review. Despite what anyone may think, even if you weren't the *** you are I would have given it the review it got, just maybe not as soon.

www.PodSpank.com

On the Bill O'Reilly Pod. It was a joke meant for the three people who were smart enough to get it; not a real review. I do not consider AdCasts Podcasts. Samples of shows that are intended to direct me to the actual show( Simpsons, Family Guy, etc..) are ads that take up space on the iTunes rankings, and make real shows less visible and harder to find. I see it as advertising they don't really have to pay for; and that's probably how they view it. The reason these companies don't put any real content up, is they're too cheap to pay the actors for using their voices. I will not rate them, I will only abuse them.

If you don't like my political views and I've offended you, good. I meant to. They have nothing to do with how I rate an actual podcast; Bush supporting or not.

[radiofilibuster]

Wow.

You shred NLO... and yet, you lost points in doing so. Until today, I thought the two actions would be mutually exclusive.

That takes talent.

And another thing: it appears you're taking yourself way too seriously. With each post, however, fewer and fewer of us are taking your credibility as a reviewer seriously.

In fact, dare I say, your reviewing style seems at times to have a LOT in common with NLO.


Kevin

[Patrick]

What's funny is you say you doubt we have listeners because we aren't in iTunes. That doesn't mean ****. For the record, we have only been out of iTunes for about a month. We have nearly 10,000 regular subscribers, whether or not you believe it. I like it when people try to tell me things about my show. Good times.

Your review was awesome. I needed a good laugh. You listen to a show where we have a guest, the guest makes an outdated joke (in a segment where we were talking about outdated jokes, mind you) and you use that to determine that the hosts of the show aren't funny. Yeah, you're a real keen observationalist. Before I thought your reviews were politically motivated, but now I realize that a retard with his fingers gummed up with peanut butter could have written a better review, or realized that the episode he was reviewing wasn't even typical. You bashed Vox Monitor too. I think it's pretty safe to say your emotions blind your judgement and you aren't that intelligent to begin with.

Good luck with your site. I'm sure it will really become a great source for quality podcast reviews. :roll:

[vox_monitor]

I really don't understand why everyone is jumping on this guy just for doing what he wants to do. Yeah, the Feedburner idea was somewhat confused, but does that justify this level of snideness? Whether you like the reviews or not, the idea of a review site doesn't need to be trashed.

I personally think there aren't enough sources out there for honest podcast reviews. Sure, I listen to Vox Monitor and I enjoy it (when they aren't sending me 20 files of music jams in one day) but I think it's a fair statement that their style won't be to everyone's taste. Some competition in that market is a healthy thing. You can like these reviews or not, but don't bash the guy just for trying.


ha ha... Sorry, sorry, sorry, about media onslaught day. I have since had it made abundantly clear to me that people did NOT appreciate that. My bad, I misunderstood the whole "automatically download" thing and just wasn't thinking. We took a serious hit in listeners from that misstep, that we're just now recovering from, so let me just assure anyone who reads this that it won't happen again.

And I agree with you, EP. We too totally encourage others to review podcasts. Including mr. spank here. We were very flattered (and surprised) to discover ourselves apparently among "the top 100 podcasts," as Podspank was kind enough to grace us with a review.

eric

[SFEley]

ha ha... Sorry, sorry, sorry, about media onslaught day. I have since had it made abundantly clear to me that people did NOT appreciate that.
It's cool, man... If it really bothered me I'd have e-mailed you or left a comment or something. It just seemed like something to razz you about. >8-> I had no idea you'd actually lost a bunch of listeners over it; that seems a bit extreme of them, since it's an easy option to just skip over anything you don't want to hear.

[RED BAR RADIO]

[quote]
You have such a great show and audience, why would you kick a guy who is no threat to you? Maybe he'll learn something from a bit of constructive critisism and come up with a winning site. He could be any of us.

Peace be with you my brother,
TINKOFF RADIO

Yeah - you're right. I was just "barking" and pist off at podcasters at the time I wrote that post.

Anyway - just take my comments as entertainment value. I really could care less about the topic at hand.

At the end of the day, if you are a sincere, honest person, who puts a lot of effort into your product - you have my respect.

[RED BAR RADIO]

I saw it, and immediately dismissed Red Bar Radio as a buffoon. Trolling like that isn't worth a response, so let's not waste time by arguing with him or treating him as someone who thinks.

I was only joking. Of course, it would be terrible if innocent people died. I was merely expressing my feelings on the "podcast community".

Sorry if I offended any of the people that have good shows.

[tWW]

The joke here is that some of you take yourselves way too seriously. www.Podspank.com

We don't take ourselves seriously at all... so much so, that I don't have the patience to troll this entire thread (sorry) OR figure out IF we are even using feedburner or whatever... Truth be told, I'm more than a little intoxicated at the moment (shocking, I know!)...

Quite simply, my entire contribution to this exchange =
SPANK ME!

[TheCritic000]

SPANK ME![/size]

In time, but only if you're bad.

For now, Soccergirl, incorperated - PodSpanked (http://www.podspank.com)


www.PodSpank.com