Nah, I’ve seen it before with no ads
To those complaining that the show is covering topics “not Google” I suggest that, yes, the show could be renamed to “This Week in Internet Companies” but that doesn’t really have a great ring to it. It’s not just about Google because Google is not (and maybe never was) the leader in progress of online services companies any more. Think FAANG. So the show could be renamed This Week in FAANG, I guess, but not everyone would know what that meant either.
Yeah, I guess “This Week in Internet Companies” would be a more accurate description of what the show is about. Think of Google as an “example company” for the kinds of things talked about on the show.
Anyway, really hoping the lack of ads isn’t a sign of some possible problem. TWiT and TWiG are the two twit shows I definitely watch on a regular basis. (I’ve watched other twit shows on a much less regular basis. >_< )
The more I think about it it, the title might more accurately reflect the content if it went something like “This Week in globalism and the governmental policies that are evolving to handle the changes brought by a global Internet and the Internet companies that are shaping them.”
That title will rival Jeff’s lower third
I think @Leo is aware of this trend, obviously, based on his introductory discussion on TWiT this week (starting around 7m50s):
Technically, it could be an Economist or The Atlantic type of reflective format, but focused on tech. For that, they would need to embrace it and probably do different research for it. It could be awesome.
One of the problems^h characteristics of the show today is, that it feels like 20% news and 80% opinion. I’d love that to balance a bit more towards the opposite ratio. Or, maybe more aptly: I’d love to love a show that’s 80/20 on information/opinion - but I am aware that it’s more work to produce and also possibly harder to listen to.
Among the worst about this idea would be that I’d fear Stacey would not feel her positioning in IoT to be compatible with that. I suppose it might be true, but I am simply more interested in her take on the socio-technological and political side of things than the new smart oven or faucet. The former matters more to me than the latter and I think she has a well-reflected take on those issues.
The show is fine
He he - yeah, same here. WW, TWIG, and TWIT. I suppose they are the most entertaining shows. It helps to have strong characters in a show and Paul definitely is. If TWIT was a Hollywood movie, Paul might be played by a 20 years younger Jack Nicholson. Certainly, the week after Microsoft demoted Windows from being central to their operations I imagined Paul resembling Jack in the Shining.
It is all the fault of “Gutenberg” , if he didn’t invent the printing press we would all be busting rocks to make tools.
Thank you Ant Pruitt for giving a voice to TWIT
Hopefully you are right
I can’t say “don’t worry” because every show has to carry its own weight. We can’t produce even a venerable and beloved show like TWiG for free for very long. (cf. the recent cancellation of Triangulation.)
But TWiG has a good sized audience and I’m sure it will be fine. Advertising tends to wax and wane with the season. If TWiG goes ad-free for more than a month, then it’s time to worry but that’s pretty unlikely.
And Jeff Jarvis isn’t going anywhere. I’m very very happy with the panel.
Thanks for the update Chief.
Glad to hear you have no plans of changing the line up either.
If there is something we as subscribers can do (besides begging friends and family to subscribe) please let us know.
What P J said
Thanks for keeping us up to date
Hope thinks get better
Leo thank you for the clarification
Also a thing to maybe consider down the line is possibly subscription or patreon
I watch a lot of your shows but have little use for these sponsors (I have bought one, Aftershokz but unable to support since I was in Canada.) I also would not mind some of my information to be shared as long as you are transparent about what is shared.
He has already addressed that topic in a past thread. He is not interested in subscriptions apparently.
If we could raise enough money I would consider crowdfunding. When I started TWiT we hoped to do it that way, but never made more than $9,000/month - not enough to do more than one show.
I also think it’s pretty hard to charge for something that used to be free. That doesn’t usually go well. But I’m not ruling out an experiment.
Maybe for a new show that offered something more/different?
Ha! Mr. Laporte has the pipes. I’m just “smooth”. ((kidding))