This fundamental question that has been challenged and even abused: what is a podcast anymore? There's plenty of misinformation and disinformation out there about what a podcast is. My efforts to help set the definition straight may be fruitless, but there's more to consider here than only the meaning of the word.
This is my 400th episode of The Audacity to Podcast, to to commemorate this milestone, I want to jump back to this fundamental question because how we answer it will affect the future of our content and even of the whole podcasting industry.
The definition of a “podcast”
First, there are multiple uses for the word “podcast.” It's both a noun and a verb. But we'll focus on the noun.
For an up-to-date definition, look at WhatsAPodcast.com, which is a collaboration I started with Todd Cochrane and some other podcasting-industry experts. Here's that defintion as of July 27, 2025:
A series of episodic audio or video content that is downloadable on-demand via an RSS (“really simple syndication”) feed.
That has been worded slightly differently over the years, but this is the core of the definition. A “podcast” is really a label for content distributed in a specific way. Adam Curry, the co-creator of podcasting, even recently said that he would be fine if we defined podcasts as only audio. I would accept that in the definition, too, since YouTube pretty much killed video podcasting (the “why” and “how” are topics for a different discussion).
And as a noun, some people even use “podcast” to refer to individual episodes of a podcast, almost like an abbreviation, albeit somewhat ambiguous. For example, someone might say, “In my last podcast …,” “Listen to this week's podcast …,” or “In this podcast …,” referring to specific episodes, but not completely separate podcasts (a series of episodic content). But for clarity, I recommend using “podcast” to refer only to the collective series and not to the individual episodes.
Other attempted definitions of a “podcast”
Ask average people to define a podcast and you'll get a variety of responses, usually similar to one of the following:
- An interview show
- Any audio on the Internet
- Only audio shows
- Any independently created audio or video content not syndicated through terrestrial broadcasting or paid streaming platforms
- Or, my favorite to laugh at: anything on YouTube where you can see multiple people talking into visible microphones
At Podcast Movement Evolutions 2025, Dan Granger, along with Veritone One and Oxford Road conducted some research surveys of audiences and then came up with the following definition:
An audio-driven, on-demand program rooted in the spoken word. Typically episodic and conversational, podcasts cover wide-ranging themes and formats. They are accessed via open RSS feeds or other distribution platforms and often supplemented by video.
And for “video podcast”:
An episodic on-demand program rooted in the spoken word, where synchronized visuals meaningfully shape the experience.
It's that “other distribution platforms” that actually undermines the definition because “other” can mean “any.” By their definition (and some derivatives I've seen), audiobooks are now podcasts. YouTube is now podcasts. Netflix/Hulu/Disney+/Apple TV+/Amazon Prime are now podcasts. Random apps with audio are now podcasts. It's kind of the Oprah of definitions: “YOU are a podcast, and YOU are a podcast!
What's wrong with redefining what a “podcast” is?
By attempting to redefine “podcast,” Veritone One is actually (perhaps unintentionally) erasing what a podcast is. With their definition, almost anything could be a podcast now, which means nothing is specifically a podcast!
Thus, with a more “inclusive” definition, what makes one YouTube video a “podcast” but not another one?
Or imagine a world where “podcast” was universally redefined to include all these types of audio and video content on the Internet, then we would need a new term to label the shows that are distributed only via RSS (which, by nature, is open). I've heard some people say “open podcasting” and “RSS podcasting,” but those sound redundant to me. Podcasting is by nature, open and based on RSS. So there's not much different about those redundant terms from saying “ATM machine” (“automated teller machine machine”), “PIN number” (“personal identification number number”), and “please RSVP” (“RSVP” is short for répondez s'il vous plaît, so this phrase translates to “please please respond” or “please response please”).
(Fun aside: I sometimes like to make fun of these kinds of redundancies by jokingly saying things like, “as ASAP as possible” and “for your FYI.”)
True podcast distribution and consumption are unique
The distribution and consumption styles for podcasts is radically different from other media. Nearly all other content is built around centralized consumption from centralized distribution. For example, you can only stream Stranger Things on Netflix. Most content on YouTube is available only through YouTube. And other movie and show licensing deals limit how you can watch or acquire them.
While your podcast gets centrally distributed through your RSS feed, you can take that content to almost any hosting provider. You could even download the RSS feed code as an XML file and host it on any web- or file-serving service (even though that's usually not a good idea). So the distribution is completely portable and invisible to your audience!
But consumption is where podcasts excel. There are hundreds of podcast apps, nearly all offering the same catalog of podcasts. And even if a podcast isn't searchable within that app, nearly all podcast apps allow you to manually follow an RSS feed—often bypassing any kind of corporate or government control of the podcast-consumption experience (there are some exceptions, though).
Because podcasts can automatically download in the background, they can be consumed anywhere you can take your podcast app: on a boat, on a train, in a car, on a plane, mowing the yard, doing the dishes, even on the job, or anywhere your audience wishes. Podcasts are the green eggs and ham of media! Other than audiobooks, no other media can be consumed so freely and portably!
Strict definition versus usage description
I remember an episode of Grammar Girl's Quick & Dirty Tips to Better Writing in which Mignon Fogarty interviewed an editor for Dictionary.com. He said that often times, their job is to record how people are using a word, which is not always its literal meaning, so that other people can understand the usage.
I thought that was profound. Also, the meanings of some words change over time based on usage.
Here are two examples to illustrate this.
- In the first popular English translation of the Bible, the King James Version (KJV), God tells Adam and Eve in Genesis 1:28 to “replenish the earth.” Some people have tried to use that to say Adam and Eve had to repopulate the earth. Back when the KJV was released, “replenish” meant “to fill,” but it now means “to refill.” The meaning of the word changed.
- When I hosted a podcast about the TV show Once Upon a Time, I had a funny realization about something I didn't know while we were live-streaming our podcast-recording. One of the characters in the show said a magical town was “lousy with magic,” and I took that and the context to mean “horrible with magic.” And I had prepare a whole theory and explanation around that line. But that's when I learned that the word “lousy” can also mean “infested.” And that—rather to my embarrassment—completely changed the meaning of the dialogue and invalidated a point I was trying to make.
So it is a fair point that the meanings of words change with usage—sometimes by irony (for example, “it was a wicked delicious cake,” “the baddest car”), and sometimes by cultural use. But I think there are some definitions that should not be changed because it would muddle the meaning, ignore reality, invalidate or even erase hard work, and is often outright unnecessary because other words already exist to serve those alternative needs.
We don't need to redefine “podcast” to include other media because we already have a perfectly good term: “show.” There are Netflix shows, television shows, radio shows, live shows, YouTube shows, and more. (But please don't say “podcast show,” because that's redundant except in alternative-meaning uses like “The London Podcast Show,” or you could even say “the The Audacity to Podcast show” if you want to make your head spin!)
Is the definition a “gatekeeper”?
I've heard some people complain that maintaining a strict definition of “podcast” is introducing a sort of “gatekeeper” in podcasting. They might make the case that it's demeaning or “non-inclusive” to tell someone they're not creating a real podcast because their content is only on YouTube (or whatever proprietary platform). But I don't think that's the case at all! Instead, maintaining clear constraints to the meaning can actually be empowering for people.
Consider someone who publishes their content only on YouTube and you tell them about podcasting. You suddenly open a whole new world of opportunities for them! Instead of being on only one platform, you're helping them to see that they can be in hundreds of different apps, often free from distracting algorithms, connectivity requirements, or corporate and government censorship. They can reach more people with their content if they distribute it also as a podcast (a real podcast, that is!).
It's kind of like if all someone knew of meat was hotdogs and they considered that to be the definition of “meat.” But then you introduce them to juicy hamburgers, crispy bacon, tender steaks, seasoned jerky, smoked brisket, grilled fish, fried chicken, and more. You're not just expanding their understand of a word, you're changing their worldview on meat!
Should you really call your content a “podcast”?
You can probably anticipate where I've going with this. I've said for many years (especially in episode 184 back in 2014) that although I think we should maintain the definition of a “podcast” similar to what I've shared here, we should not limit ourselves and our content by calling them “podcasts.” Instead, use a more descriptive label, like “talk show,” “interview show,” “audio drama,” and such. I especially like the word “show” because it's not limited to any distribution method. You could have a “show” a YouTube, on a stage in front of a live audience, broadcast on radio or TV, in paid streaming platforms, burned to CDs, on X or TikTok, live or time-shifted, and more—or even, as a podcast!
So if people ask what you do, I recommend you lead with the main value first. Instead of saying, “I have a movie-review podcast,” you could say, “I have a weekly talk show reviewing movies for families.” You could then add how people could get it by saying, “You can watch it on YouTube, listen to it as a podcast, or get it from my website.”
See? We live in an incredible era where you can—from literally your closet or basement—distribute a message that can be consumed anytime, anywhere, by anyone.
That is the audacity of podcasting!
Community corner
- Thanks to Bryan Entzminger, Dreb Scott, and Steve Webb for streaming support to The Audacity to Podcast totaling about 4,500 satoshis!
If you love The Audacity to Podcast and value the podcasting inspiration and education I provide, would you please consider giving back what it's worth to you?
Supercharge your podcast engagement and grow your podcast!
Do you ever feel like your podcast is stuck? Like you're pouring your heart into your podcast but it seems like no one is listening?
Try Podgagement to help you supercharge your podcast endgagement!
Get speakable pages to simplify engaging with your audience, accept voicemail feedback (with automatic transcripts), see and share your ratings and reviews from nearly 200 places, follow your podcast rankings across nearly 34,000 global charts, discover networking opportunities, and more!
Ask your questions or share your feedback
- Comment on the episode
- Send a written or voicemail message here
Follow The Audacity to Podcast
- Apple Podcasts, Spotify, other Android apps, or in your favorite podcast app.
- Subscribe on YouTube for Podcasting Videos by The Audacity to Podcast
- Follow @theDanielJLewis on X-Twitter
Disclosure
This post may contain links to products or services with which I have an affiliate relationship. I may receive compensation from your actions through such links. However, I don't let that corrupt my perspective and I don't recommend only affiliates.
Related Content
