New Alan Partridge Podcast & This Time S2 Coming

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

I'd dispute that too. Partridge is mainstream, and has been for over 20 years, well before the popularity of the internet. That's why he kept coming back, not because a few people on the internet were sharing clips.

Did I say it was one or the other?

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

I'm just pointing out that it's not correct to say that choosing to pirate the podcast has no impact at all on its creators.

Not an argument I was making.

Again, I argued it was not depriving them of their livelihoods which is a different, and I think more important moral threshold. Furthermore, as has not been dealt with yet, media business models will almost certainly factor a level of unapproved archiving and sharing online when making budgeting decisions and by doing this they have tacitly accepted this will happen when they release art in a form that doesn't adequately protect the copyright of the owner, rather than taking enhanced steps to protect it that would invariably come at a far more major loss of income.

[BeardFaceMan]

Did I say it was one or the other?

(Never mind the fact that Partridge wouldn't be half as popular or well known had it not been for the freely accessible content that has been shared. Word of mouth is, as it has always been, free advertising.)

Well, that does sound like you're saying Partridge wouldn't be as popular as he is if it wasn't for piracy on the internet, when in reality he was a mainstream star before file-sharing was a thing. Piracy has nothing to with Partridge's popularity, at all.

[holyzombiejesus]

Is it as bad as nicking a torch from Tesco?

[popcorn]

Is it as bad as nicking a torch from Tesco?

It's fine to nick a torch from Tesco because Tesco have factored shoplifting into their projected costs. They expect a number of people to steal torches so why not be one of them? The torch manufacturer understood this risk when they allowed Tesco to sell their torches.

[BeardFaceMan]

Not an argument I was making.

Again, I argued it was not depriving them of their livelihoods...

Only it is. Because you're lowering Coogan's chances at doing some more, or lowering the price he gets offered to make more.

[Menu]

This is a particularly flimsy argument to apply to a podcast, a medium people on low incomes and without major funding can create and publish work of artistic value, but the fact is the product has emerged in a certain form which is infinitely duplicatable at no cost and such a product has a market value of zero. Audible have also decided this specific product should be released for free for a time as a hook to attract people to their wider service. The creators have also consented to this and they have been paid for their work. Someone not paying to hear this is not depriving them of their livelihoods. It is up to Audible/Amazon whether they commission work to be done and whether they decide to use it as a loss leader and whether they choose to protect the copyright of that work adequately, or whether they let it escape to a format that is infinitely duplicatable and has a market value of zero. If they found piracy morally abhorrent enough then they would have protected this art. As it happens, they have most likely accepted archival and sharing will occur and will budget accordingly. They accepted the risk, they took the risk. Everything else is extraneous.

(Never mind the fact that Partridge wouldn't be half as popular or well known had it not been for the freely accessible content that has been shared. Word of mouth is, as it has always been, free advertising.)

sevendaughters doesn't need to justify why they haven't paid for this in the way they have done.

Jesus. It's £8, mate. For a really good product.  And presumably you don't steal from shops? Look, I'm on ESA and I have to pick and choose very carefully what I can afford to spend my money on. I have no qualms about spending it on something I know will bring me happiness (literally for the rest of my life) and which I'd want the producers to go on producing.

[Menu]

If there was a way for the money to go directly to the creators, a la Patreon, with none of the pointless middle men getting any, i'd urge paying for it, but fuck it they're getting paid by Bezos.

This is such a bad argument. If you saw it through logically you'd probably not pay for anything. You wouldn't steal from shops and you shouldn't steal from artists. Especially if their work has brought you much joy, which it clearly has.

[Dr Rock]

It's fine to nick a torch from Tesco because Tesco have factored shoplifting into their projected costs. They expect a number of people to steal torches so why not be one of them? The torch manufacturer understood this risk when they allowed Tesco to sell their torches.

Wise words.

[bgmnts]

This is such a bad argument. If you saw it through logically you'd probably not pay for anything. You wouldn't steal from shops and you shouldn't steal from artists. Especially if their work has brought you much joy, which it clearly has.

I mean I do pay, just saying.

[Menu]

It's fine to nick a torch from Tesco because Tesco have factored shoplifting into their projected costs. They expect a number of people to steal torches so why not be one of them? The torch manufacturer understood this risk when they allowed Tesco to sell their torches.

Quite.

[Menu]

I mean I do pay, just saying.

Oh right. Sorry, man.

[Retinend]

Menu, do you realise how absurd you look giving (admittedly quite wise advice) while sporting such a hilarious avatar?

those not in the know (NSFW)
https://i.imgur.com/hB9IoOq.png don't click

[Menu]

Menu, do you realise how absurd you look giving (admittedly quite wise advice) while sporting such a hilarious avatar?

those not in the know (NSFW)
https://i.imgur.com/hB9IoOq.png don't click

It was literally the first image I could think of when another CABber shamed me into getting an avatar. I mean, even now I can't really think of any alternatives.

[Menu]

I do like the idea that people might think I am him.

[H-O-W-L]

The moralism about pirating this is actually laughable considering how openly this forum pirates TV programmes and the likes. Please pack your E-wang away and understand that people are going to pirate content regardless of what you say or how you try to shame them.

Before you start, I actually did buy this off Audible -- after pirating it first because the pirate format is easier for me to transfer about. Yes, I'm probably a minority. No, I don't care about that, nor the purported moral quandry you're going to use to shame people for pirating something purely because you like it. If they were downloading the entire series of Two Pints of Lager & A Packet of Crisps over and over you would give nae fucks.

[bgmnts]

Before you start, I actually did buy this off Audible -- after pirating it first because the pirate format is easier for me to transfer about. Yes, I'm probably a minority.

I'm definitely going to do that myself actually.

[Retinend]

I do like the idea that people might think I am him.

It's not so much I think you are him... I just can't not think you are him.

[jobotic]

I wish there really was 7 hours of Alan's true crime podcast to listen to, even though it's poor and doesn't work on any level.

[BeardFaceMan]

The moralism about pirating this is actually laughable considering how openly this forum pirates TV programmes and the likes. Please pack your E-wang away and understand that people are going to pirate content regardless of what you say or how you try to shame them.

Before you start, I actually did buy this off Audible -- after pirating it first because the pirate format is easier for me to transfer about. Yes, I'm probably a minority. No, I don't care about that, nor the purported moral quandry you're going to use to shame people for pirating something purely because you like it. If they were downloading the entire series of Two Pints of Lager & A Packet of Crisps over and over you would give nae fucks.

That wasnt really the discussion though, it was more about getting it for free from Audible versus getting it for free from elsewhere, until Shoulders made that post about how pirating podcasts is fine and hurts no one, which was just wrong from top to bottom, really. If you think about the reasons why you bought it after pirating it, those are the reasons why people are saying get it for free from Audible instead of elsewhere.

[H-O-W-L]

That wasnt really the discussion though, it was more about getting it for free from Audible versus getting it for free from elsewhere, until Shoulders made that post about how pirating podcasts is fine and hurts no one, which was just wrong from top to bottom, really. If you think about the reasons why you bought it after pirating it, those are the reasons why people are saying get it for free from Audible instead of elsewhere.

If you get it for free from Audible then don't renew you are actually doing more harm than pirating it, though. That sort of thing adds a major disincentive to investors, who DO look at the metric for releases-to-free-trials-to-cancellations. Not only that but Audible's files is shite. If you really want to get it for free just pirate it, becuase that does far less investor-visible harm. I don't care about investors but they are the people who determine whether or not stuff like this continues to get made.

And yes I can safely say this is fact, as I have spoken to people in this industry.

[popcorn]

And yes I can safely say this is fact, as I have spoken to people in this industry.

I don't think it is a fact, though.

[H-O-W-L]

I don't think it is a fact, though.

There's no evidence for it, but it is fiscal fact.

[BeardFaceMan]

If you get it for free from Audible then don't renew you are actually doing more harm than pirating it, though. That sort of thing adds a major disincentive to investors, who DO look at the metric for releases-to-free-trials-to-cancellations. Not only that but Audible's files is shite. If you really want to get it for free just pirate it, becuase that does far less investor-visible harm. I don't care about investors but they are the people who determine whether or not stuff like this continues to get made.

And yes I can safely say this is fact, as I have spoken to people in this industry.

Gonna need to offer a bit more evidencefor than that for it to be fact, as it makes no sense. Pirating it so they get nothing and so think its not popular and wont make any more is better than someone signing up to their service, getting it, letting them know there is a demand for it, and then cancelling?

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Shoulders made that post about how pirating podcasts is fine and hurts no one, which was just wrong from top to bottom, really.

If you are going to keep failing to comprehend explicitly caveated arguments could you leave me out of it so I don't have to keep popping in here to respond "I never said that, please stop misrepresenting me" every 2 hours.

[BeardFaceMan]

If you are going to keep failing to comprehend explicitly caveated arguments could you leave me out of it so I don't have to keep popping in here to respond "I never said that, please stop misrepresenting me" every 2 hours.

Only you did say that, as evidenced by the bits of your post I quoted. Feel free to not pop back and repeat yourself though.

[H-O-W-L]

Gonna need to offer a bit more evidencefor than that for it to be fact, as it makes no sense. Pirating it so they get nothing and so think its not popular and wont make any more is better than someone signing up to their service, getting it, letting them know there is a demand for it, and then cancelling?

Investors literally do not see the figures for pirate websites -- they aren't particularly known for record-keeping... but they see the figures for people who have registered, downloaded X podcast, then not renewed at the end of their free trial. Can you see the chain here?

[popcorn]

I know nothing whatsoever about bookselling and I'm not a data scientist. But I do work in the field of data metrics bollocks. I will now speculate from my anus. Behold:

Amazon know that when people create a free Audible subscription and get a free book many will cancel the subscription. But from Amazon's perspective, that's not a loss. It's a win, when compared to the starting position, which is that you didn't have an Audible account (and might not even have had an Amazon account).

For the cost of giving you a free book, they have got your email address, put Audible on your phone, and hoovered up some other data about you that you probably didn't notice. You now know what Audible is and you know its potential value to you, leading to a vastly improved odds of one day paying for something. They have also gathered a few extra morsels of data points they can use to sharpen their algorithms and publishing strategies. Amazon have won. They are in this for the long term.

I would find it incredibly surprising if there were some category of books Amazon was devaluing internally (and therefore paying Coogan less for) because they triggered a high proportion of free subscriptions that did not immediately lead to paid subscriptions. Those are still high-value propositions for Amazon.

[BeardFaceMan]

Investors literally do not see the figures for pirate websites -- they aren't particularly known for record-keeping... but they see the figures for people who have registered, downloaded X podcast, then not renewed at the end of their free trial. Can you see the chain here?

That's what I mean though, they don't see the figures for pirate sites so they have no idea if its being downloaded or not or how popular it is, so why would they make more? But if they can see that people have got it from them then they can see its popular and theres more chance of more getting made.

I know nothing whatsoever about bookselling and I'm not a data scientist. But I do work in the field of data metrics bollocks. I will now speculate from my anus. Behold:

Amazon know that when people create a free Audible subscription and get a free book many will cancel the subscription. But from Amazon's perspective, that's not a loss. It's a win, when compared to the starting position, which is that you didn't have an Audible account (and might not even have had an Amazon account).

For the cost of giving you a free book, they have got your email address, put Audible on your phone, and hoovered up some other data about you that you probably didn't notice. You now know what Audible is and you know its potential value to you, leading to a vastly improved odds of one day paying for something. They have also gathered a few extra morsels of data points they can use to sharpen their algorithms and publishing strategies. Amazon have won. They are in this for the long term.

I would find it incredibly surprising if there were some category of books Amazon was devaluing internally (and therefore paying Coogan less for) because they triggered a high proportion of free subscriptions that did not immediately lead to paid subscriptions. Those are still high-value propositions for Amazon.

That does make sense, though.

[bgmnts]

They are advertising Partridge on telly mind, might be a first for an audible show (I remember an Alien book had little youtube ads but thats it), so I think they value the show quite highly.