I recently posted the following on my Mastodon account for open source:

Random thought, we should have a term for open podcasting (even though @adam@podcastindex.social claims that just “podcast” already means that :)) - I’m thinking about Free/Libre Open Podcasting, the acronym is terrible though, FLOP. It of course borrows from #FLOSS.

The post: https://fosstodon.org/@dellagustin/110706347484988427

It got a pair of replies (one private) that indicated I should elaborate, and I think a blog post is more suitable then a microblog thread.

What do I mean by Free/Libre and Open Podcasting?

By Free/Libre and Open Podcasting (or FLOP, a terrific acronym 😀), I mean a concept and corresponding movement that establishes and defends the freedoms of podcasters and listeners. It is analogous the Free/Libre and Open Source Software (FLOSS), in the way it defines and defends the freedoms of software users. If you are wondering about the need for Libre in the term, check the Wikipedia article Alternative terms for free software with a special attention to the ambiguity of the English word free.

I’m imagining freedoms such as:

  • Listeners are free to listen to, interact with and support their podcasts in their platform and software of choice
  • Podcasters are free to host their podcasts and interact with their audience and/or community in their platform of choice

These freedoms are supported by open standards (such as RSS 2.0 and the podcast namespace), which promote interoperability, but not necessarily by open source software (although that would be good secondary goal).

Why such a concept and movement is important?

The article What is open podcasting, and why does it matter? at podstandards.org already does a good job explaining this, but, I’d like to put it in my own words.

A small digression first, just as the term open source software is not sufficient with respect to the freedoms of software users (therefore FLOSS), the term open podcasting is not sufficient, in my opinion, to represent the fight for the freedoms of podcast listeners and creators.

Back to the importance topic.
Since a long time ago, Apple had THE podcast index, iTunes. It was used by many podcast clients as its main source of content for searching and later subscribing to podcasts, and it still is, to a large degree (although, thankfully, we now have alternatives). Even so, it was open to external consumers (i.e. other players than Apple Podcasts) and it had little policing.

In recent years though, other large corporations made, or are in the process of making moves to close podcasting. Namely, Spotify has coopted podcasts into becoming own exclusive shows (I’ll not call them podcasts, if they are not free/libre and open), and most recently, Google is adding podcasts to YouTube and showing signs it wants to have a lot of control over them.

Although having your podcast in Spotify and YouTube can bring your listeners and grow your podcast, you also risk building your own prison, specially if you end up depending on their monetizations platforms. We have seen arbitrary changes in monetization schemes drastically affecting content creators in the past, e.g. with YouTube and Twitch.

Besides that, I have heard many podcast creators commenting on adjustments they had to do to their podcast to remain in Spotify, including the podcast I’m part of.

Beyond listening

I added the words interact and support to the first freedom above purposely. It means that the freedom and openness should go beyond the listening experience and I’m thinking specifically about two points, social media and monetization (although, it should not be restricted to that in any way).

We have seen the Twitter takeover by a single autocract billionaire, and the platform seems to be melting by the day. With that there was some movement towards freedom and openness with a timid migration into the Fediverse, but more and more I see content creators jumping from one non-free/libre platform to another, e.g. Bluesky and Threads, again having to rebuild their network and locking themselves without any chance of sovereignty.

In a similar way, podcasters tend to use proprietary monetization platforms, such as Patreon and PayPay, where they can get “deplatformed” in an arbitrary way. Here, free/libre and open alternatives, specially not related to cryptocurrencies, which is a divisive topic, are lacking.

What I mean here, is that the movement should fight for freedom and openness to everything that is required for a good and sustainable experience for podcast listeners and creators, thus creating, contributing to and promoting open standards in all these fronts and also promoting the usage of the tools that support them.

Closing words

I hope this clarifies the idea for Free/Libre and Open Podcasting and that it also serves the purpose of fueling conversations nad interactions that will move this forward.

If you are seeing a contradiction between preaching for freedom and openness while having a proprietary comments platform (at the moment of writing, Disqus), please know I’m not proud of that. As a free and open alternative, if you have comments, please reply the the Mastodon post that originated this post: https://fosstodon.org/@dellagustin/110706347484988427