#101 Posted by TheHumanDove (2523 posts) -

DOLLA BILLS YA'ALL!

#102 Posted by mordukai (7150 posts) -

@JoshyLee said:

@mordukai said:

I actually would like to hear Jeff, Brad, Vinny, and Ryan do some ads. Should be amusing.

This. If the guys need to do ads, I'm sure they can do it in an entertaining way. As long as Vinny doesn't say cunt.

Brought to you by the makers of cunt...

#103 Edited by Kerned (1170 posts) -

I would prefer that the podcast didn't have ads, but my desire for Giant Bomb to be the most successful gaming website on the internet far outweighs any objections I have. If it helps the site, I am completely ok with it.

Also, I have total faith that if it ever did come to that point, the guys would do podcast ads in the most awesome way possible.

EDIT: I forgot to mention: it's a 3+ hour podcast that is available at no cost, who has the balls to complain about a few minutes of ads??

#104 Edited by ThePickle (4182 posts) -

Every other podcast I listen to does ads so it's fine. The problem is they all end up being for the same shit. Get ready for some Audible ads, y'all.

And having the people on the podcast read the ads is standard practice. I imagine that's how they would do it. They can actually end up doing some fun things with them.

#105 Posted by kristov_romanov (459 posts) -

If they could put a GB spin on ads I would be fine with it, maybe even interested.

#106 Posted by grimmspectre18 (70 posts) -

An acceptable pound of flesh for the 3+ hrs a week of audio bliss they give us.

#107 Posted by AuthenticM (3732 posts) -

I would not mind. I'd even encourage it if it would help them financially. My approval is subject to conditions though, such as:

- the ads must not be related to games (Zojirushi !)

- the cumulative length of the ads must be short. I don't want my podcast to turn into cable TV.

#108 Posted by Marokai (2975 posts) -
@Slag: I really don't have the answer. I wish I did. I'm just deeply unsettled by how fast this website went down the cynical rabbit hole of traditional cost-benefit analysis business tactics, and how easily these changes, which in totality, two or three years ago, would've made the community aghast, have been handwaved away and rationalized by so many people on the forums in recent months.  
 
The staff used to be stubborn about ads. Then they had them more often, but would disclose them in the text review. Now, they have ads all the time, even horrendous site overlays, and they don't even have power over their own advertisements anymore. Two years ago, when they attempted to monetize the bombcast, the community rose up in anger and prevented them from doing so, now, we all sit here and excuse it. Jeff used to hate on video ads, and now we have them; I thank my lucky stars I'm a silver member. Hell, Giant Bomb being sold to CBSi was once an April Fool's Joke, but then it happened. Will articles on the front page be split up into multiple pages, to increase ad revenue? Does it matter, at this point? If past is any prologue, the community will excuse that, too, when it happens. 
 
Did reality intrude at some point on the dream? Was this the plan all along? Does what Giant Bomb was founded on even matter to them anymore over continuing to get a paycheck? I don't know. I just don't know. I wish there was an out, here. I wish I could come up with an easy answer, but I can't. Giant Bomb has become too big of a site for them to have complete control of anymore, and the more populist tone this community once had has been diluted more and more as the site grows with people who just care about wacky hijinks and have become too accustomed to a more corporatized internet. I love this site and miss when it had aims to be something special, something better, rather than just doing things like everyone else. 
#109 Posted by Hells (69 posts) -

I am for it, it would add another stream of revenue for the Giant Bomb crew.

And most importantly it would bring Jeff one step closer to being able to do "The Raid". I am genuinely more excited to see that than seeing what Microsoft and Sony are working on for next gen consoles.

#110 Posted by Kerned (1170 posts) -

@Marokai said:

I love this site and miss when it had aims to be something special, something better, rather than just doing things like everyone else.

You really think that this site no long does exactly that? Who is doing anything like what Giant Bomb does? Come on, sit down. Let me buy you a drink and we'll talk this through... :)

#111 Edited by freakin9 (1121 posts) -

I've heard radio shows accomplish ads in a funny way. Then again, a lot of people buying ads might not take kindly to the "fun" being had around their product. To be honest hearing Jeff talk about ads in the podcast makes me think it's inevitable. You can't really know how to react till it happens. I generally don't listen to the podcast every week, so it's not really a big issue for me.

#112 Posted by Marokai (2975 posts) -
@Kerned said:

@Marokai said:

I love this site and miss when it had aims to be something special, something better, rather than just doing things like everyone else.

You really think that this site no long does exactly that? Who is doing anything like what Giant Bomb does? Come on, sit down. Let me buy you a drink and we'll talk this through... :)

<3 I appreciate the tone. 
 
I definitely think Jeff wishes they could be totally different than their competition, but they seem to keep following traditional business paths. They're practically an internet start-up cliche; starting small, doing something different, and then just getting bought by their competition. I think they could do rad things with their new resources, but the only changes we've heard of since they've joined CBSi have been about monetizing this and monetizing that.  
 
It's just weird to hear Jeff talk about Giant Bomb like it continues to be so innovative. It used to be, I think, but they haven't exactly done any new tricks in awhile, and all the changes we hear about are about ads and business acquisitions. Jeff's been alluding to how he thinks the traditional game review model needs to be radically altered. That's great! But they don't seem to be doing much to lead the way on that. I just sort of think this image of the site in Jeff's head is totally amazing, but it doesn't reflect what the reality is. There's a real disconnect between the radical, innovating language Jeff likes to use, and what we end up getting.
#113 Posted by NicksCorner (416 posts) -

@Kerned said:

@Marokai said:

I love this site and miss when it had aims to be something special, something better, rather than just doing things like everyone else.

You really think that this site no long does exactly that? Who is doing anything like what Giant Bomb does? Come on, sit down. Let me buy you a drink and we'll talk this through... :)

Some of the magic is still here but I totally get where is coming from.

The Whiskey house is probably the primary reason for the decline. The synergy between the teams made that place a cornucopia of inspiration.

Today we have hastily and poorly shot Mondays videos and somehow the "Quick look" is now more often than not close to one hour.

What I used to love was that crazy within really well produced content. Now it seems they just sit down and turn on the camera.

#114 Edited by Kerned (1170 posts) -

@Marokai: I get what you are saying, I really do. I don't even disagree with you. But I think that most sites aren't even trying to be different. Others are making disingenuous claims (and documentaries) about how they are going to change things, but end up behaving even worse than everyone else.

The thing I love about Giant Bomb is that I trust that everyone's heart is in the right place. Unfortunately one can't deny the realities of business. The website is a business. CBS needs Giant Bomb to make money, and if it doesn't there may not be a Giant Bomb. Even if the site falls short of what you and I might consider ideal, I'd rather they monetize it and continue to exist than fail to do so and go away. Besides, I want Jeff, Ryan and everyone else to get fucking rich off this shit.

Also: <3 right back at ya, duder.

#115 Edited by freakin9 (1121 posts) -

The reality is Jeff is a guy who's passionate, and it's the reason a lot of people flock to him, from fans to who he does business with. Eventually Jeff is running on the course that if he keeps doing what he's doing then opportunities to make more money will naturally pop up. And for the most part it's working for him. It's funny that people don't get that this is a business. Or aside from that, that they are obligated to never move on from a website all because they liked it once. If you want a bunch of forced ideas that plain don't work then just look at gamespot. The reality is all the video reviews giant bomb has done in the past were terrible, very standard and with none of the cross talk between the personalities that might otherwise make the video reviews interesting. A lot of other "new" stuff like the pc game stuff, and even jar time, are "nice", but hardly incredible. They have four things that work really well, the Quick Looks, Endurance Run, TNT and the podcast. Unfortunately there's only so much juice you can squeeze out of a games website. They would almost have to get away from games to really evolve the website in a way that makes it better... rather than in ways that make people say "eh, I guess this is ok."

#116 Posted by zeekthegeek (391 posts) -

People keep complaining about the CBSi buyout but here's the thing: without CBSi, there would no longer be a Giant Bomb. The whole thing would be shut down because Whiskey went under. Yeah some stuff about that sucks - they gotta talk to a legal department and go through acquisitions chains somewhat. Overall though the tone of the site remains pretty much the same. It has been a rough and busy year for all the guys keep in mind - Jeff mentioned in the Jartime that there were family health issues, Vinny made a tiny human, Dave and Patrick both got married, and so on. However I still love most of the content coming out of the team (with some exceptions, I will never think Spookin with Scoops is a good idea because scarecams are lowest-common-denominator shit)

#117 Posted by theManUnknown (172 posts) -

I would be perfectly fine with it. The podcast forms a very significant part of my week. Do what you need to keep it going.

People may suggest this is compromising what makes Giant Bomb unique. I personally think there is more appeal to this staff than their reticence towards advertising.

#118 Posted by Vinny_Says (5709 posts) -

I have yet to see one "big stupid thing" come out of this buyout. Maybe they should start delivering on this crazyness, instead of building carboard forts in the office, before they start talking about ads in the podcast and shit.

oh sorry are they still getting used to the new office?

#119 Posted by IzzyGraze (850 posts) -

Nah. I used to listen to watch the roosterteeth podcasts then they added 3 commercials breaks in the video and the hosts do breaks to mention their sponsors. I pay to not see ads. If I still don't see them whatever but I do...then no.

#120 Posted by Pudge (886 posts) -

If it's in a totally separate segment than the podcast content, and if the ads are read live and aloud to be ad libbed, I'd be totally fine with it. Basically the My Brother My Brother and Me approach.

#121 Posted by TheHumanDove (2523 posts) -

The funny thing is, and I don't know if any of you realized this...whiskey media was wayyy smaller than CBiS...and they didn't do ads in bombcasts. Now you all seem to love the idea. Well I've been a subscriber for two years, and I stopped because of the lack of content lately...and you're all for this apparently. It's just weird is all. I'm worried if this is the consensus, how the future looks

#122 Posted by Itwastuesday (966 posts) -

I subscribe to avoid the ads. Finding a way to produce a podcast without ads, and a podcast with ads, and then figuring out a way so that only subscribers get no ads, seems like a huge pain in the ass. For this reason, I hope they just don't do them.

#123 Posted by freakin9 (1121 posts) -

All because Whiskey Media sold Giantbomb for whatever amount of money it was, doesn't mean it was actually making money. The subscriber cost is just low enough that you would need a ton of them to cover the costs of hiring 8 full time people, or whatever it is this website had at the time.

#124 Posted by TheHumanDove (2523 posts) -

@freakin9 said:

All because Whiskey Media sold Giantbomb for whatever amount of money it was, doesn't mean it was actually making money. The subscriber cost is just low enough that you would need a ton of them to cover the costs of hiring 8 full time people, or whatever it is this website had at the time.

They bought them from whiskey because they were making money.

#125 Posted by Pudge (886 posts) -

@zeekthegeek said:

People keep complaining about the CBSi buyout but here's the thing: without CBSi, there would no longer be a Giant Bomb. The whole thing would be shut down because Whiskey went under. Yeah some stuff about that sucks - they gotta talk to a legal department and go through acquisitions chains somewhat. Overall though the tone of the site remains pretty much the same. It has been a rough and busy year for all the guys keep in mind - Jeff mentioned in the Jartime that there were family health issues, Vinny made a tiny human, Dave and Patrick both got married, and so on. However I still love most of the content coming out of the team (with some exceptions, I will never think Spookin with Scoops is a good idea because scarecams are lowest-common-denominator shit)

Pretty much this. I was scared as hell when they got bought out, but the site is still the Giant Bomb I paid for back then, and the content that does get produced is pretty much exactly the same quality that was coming out this time last year, plus or minus a little Patrick overload in there somewhere. Hell, they just decided to have Drew shoot arrows at a target in the office without direct permission, I'm pretty sure they're not going out to buy suits and ties anytime soon. They are used to the office now, and I trust that Jeff is pushing for big things to go with the new website launch, which means he's in meetings and has less time to do Quick Looks. I trust these guys to steer me in the right direction with quality games coverage, and to deliver eventually with crazy stuff we've never conceived of. As long as the Quick Looks keep coming every week, I can wait.

Where else is there to go anyway? IGN? Gamespot? YouTube? I'm not in middle school anymore.

#126 Posted by Landon (4143 posts) -

If they made it entertaining, then I wouldn't mind.

#127 Posted by VisariLoyalist (2993 posts) -

Nintendo E shop commercial breaks!

#128 Edited by freakin9 (1121 posts) -

@TheHumanDove said:

@freakin9 said:

All because Whiskey Media sold Giantbomb for whatever amount of money it was, doesn't mean it was actually making money. The subscriber cost is just low enough that you would need a ton of them to cover the costs of hiring 8 full time people, or whatever it is this website had at the time.

They bought them from whiskey because they were making money.

What I meant was making the type of money where you would never have to do anything else(to make money). Factor in that CBSi has now forked over that cash to buy the website and now the realization is there just that much more that you need to make more money. I got the impression that Whiskey Media always planned to sell the company, in some ways it's like a lot of old websites that weren't actually making much money, but had a lot of traffic which they were either able to sell to a public company for a lot of money, or go public themselves. Then of course more and more revenue streams suddenly popped up on those websites.

#129 Posted by FunkasaurasRex (847 posts) -

@Marokai said:

@FunkasaurasRex said:
I've never gotten the impression that Jeff is particularly fond of advertising, so I feel reasonably confident in the crew's ability to limit its invasiveness. And I genuinely hate most advertising.
I was like this once. Naive. Idealistic. Full of hope for the future. I wish I could go back.

Somehow I don't foresee myself becoming jaded and cynical because I got burned by the creators of a video game podcast.

#130 Posted by Carac (47 posts) -

Whatever it takes to stay making great content. Hell, I'd be down for a $100 or $200 subscription level. A yearly sub is current less than a 360 game...and I get way more content and quality entertainment over the course of a year than a single game.

#131 Posted by TheHumanDove (2523 posts) -

@freakin9 said:

@TheHumanDove said:

@freakin9 said:

All because Whiskey Media sold Giantbomb for whatever amount of money it was, doesn't mean it was actually making money. The subscriber cost is just low enough that you would need a ton of them to cover the costs of hiring 8 full time people, or whatever it is this website had at the time.

They bought them from whiskey because they were making money.

What I meant was making the type of money where you would never have to do anything else(to make money). Factor in that CBSi has now forked over that cash to buy the website and now the realization is there just that much more that you need to make more money. I got the impression that Whiskey Media always planned to sell the company, in some ways it's like a lot of old websites that weren't actually making much money, but had a lot of traffic which they were either able to sell to a public company for a lot of money, or go public themselves. Then of course more and more revenue streams suddenly popped up on those websites.

Sure, but we've never seen any improvement to the site. Wheres the money going? I hope to Jeff and everyone elses pockets, but its just strange how now they apparently need to do podcast advertisements now, when with whiskey they were living comfortably enough. Seems like some corporate tomfoolery to me, but I could be wrong.

#132 Posted by Milkman (16800 posts) -

Every podcast I listen to has ads except for the Bombcast. I have no problem with Giant Bomb taking me to THE MONEY ZONE.

#133 Edited by Andorski (5310 posts) -

@TheHumanDove said:

The funny thing is, and I don't know if any of you realized this...whiskey media was wayyy smaller than CBiS...and they didn't do ads in bombcasts. Now you all seem to love the idea. Well I've been a subscriber for two years, and I stopped because of the lack of content lately...and you're all for this apparently. It's just weird is all. I'm worried if this is the consensus, how the future looks

GB/Whiskey Media's situation isn't different from any other start-up. Twitter didn't have any advertisement during it's initial release and Hulu ad time was only a minute and a half per episode after it launched. Now Twitter has promoted tweets and Hulu ad time has increased three fold on top of adding a subscription service.

Companies lay out the path for their content development first and then integrate revenue streams once established. I think a lot of people have this misconception that if a company can produce a service for "free" -- well, not free, but with extremely minimal ad placement and no subscription service -- in the beginning of its launch, then the company can sustain that exact model indefinitely. Truth is that they are always operating at a loss using initial investments. Their goal is to increase their service's visibility, garner an audience, and then capitalize with some form of revenue stream before money runs out.

Giant Bomb tried to make premium subscriptions their sole revenue source, but judging from their "trip across the globe" number of subscriptions goal, they fell short by a lot. Not surprising, as they produce more video content than IGN and Gamespot, which has to cost a substantial amount. Their smaller staff might cut some expenses, but one also has to realize that a smaller staff is much more limited by the amount of videos they can make. Articles covering press releases can be pumped out within minutes by one editor, but an hour long quick means that at least two members of the GB crew are stuck doing that video for the whole hour.

Kinda meant for this to be a short response. tl;dr - No way can Giant Bomb continue producing this much content -- which is primarily video -- without making more money. The only thing you can really blame GB for is not garnering enough subscriptions to make this entire site ad-free.

#134 Edited by TheSouthernDandy (3872 posts) -

Total non issue. Most of the other podcasts I listen to have an ad at the beginning or the end. If it's something that bothers you then...I don't know.

#135 Edited by TheHumanDove (2523 posts) -

#136 Posted by zombiesatemycereal (426 posts) -

I wouldn't really mind, as long it's not obnoxious, which I doubt it would be. Having to listen to a skippable 30 sec-1 min ad that helps out would be totally fine. 

#137 Posted by freakin9 (1121 posts) -

@TheHumanDove said:

@freakin9 said:

@TheHumanDove said:

@freakin9 said:

All because Whiskey Media sold Giantbomb for whatever amount of money it was, doesn't mean it was actually making money. The subscriber cost is just low enough that you would need a ton of them to cover the costs of hiring 8 full time people, or whatever it is this website had at the time.

They bought them from whiskey because they were making money.

What I meant was making the type of money where you would never have to do anything else(to make money). Factor in that CBSi has now forked over that cash to buy the website and now the realization is there just that much more that you need to make more money. I got the impression that Whiskey Media always planned to sell the company, in some ways it's like a lot of old websites that weren't actually making much money, but had a lot of traffic which they were either able to sell to a public company for a lot of money, or go public themselves. Then of course more and more revenue streams suddenly popped up on those websites.

Sure, but we've never seen any improvement to the site. Wheres the money going? I hope to Jeff and everyone elses pockets, but its just strange how now they apparently need to do podcast advertisements now, when with whiskey they were living comfortably enough. Seems like some corporate tomfoolery to me, but I could be wrong.

If you want the cold hard truth, the idea that the money being made is being used just to barely scrape by on paying bandwidth costs is a fairy tale some websites try to sell to the audiences because simply saying "we want to make a lot of money" doesn't go down as well. This is a business, and CBSi doesn't just want to cover the costs of buying the website, they want to churn out a tidy profit. And frankly, that's the way the world works.

#138 Posted by JJOR64 (18993 posts) -

I really don't care.

#139 Posted by Slag (4388 posts) -

@Marokai said:

@Slag: I really don't have the answer. I wish I did. I'm just deeply unsettled by how fast this website went down the cynical rabbit hole of traditional cost-benefit analysis business tactics, and how easily these changes, which in totality, two or three years ago, would've made the community aghast, have been handwaved away and rationalized by so many people on the forums in recent months.

The staff used to be stubborn about ads. Then they had them more often, but would disclose them in the text review. Now, they have ads all the time, even horrendous site overlays, and they don't even have power over their own advertisements anymore. Two years ago, when they attempted to monetize the bombcast, the community rose up in anger and prevented them from doing so, now, we all sit here and excuse it. Jeff used to hate on video ads, and now we have them; I thank my lucky stars I'm a silver member. Hell, Giant Bomb being sold to CBSi was once an April Fool's Joke, but then it happened. Will articles on the front page be split up into multiple pages, to increase ad revenue? Does it matter, at this point? If past is any prologue, the community will excuse that, too, when it happens. Did reality intrude at some point on the dream? Was this the plan all along? Does what Giant Bomb was founded on even matter to them anymore over continuing to get a paycheck? I don't know. I just don't know. I wish there was an out, here. I wish I could come up with an easy answer, but I can't. Giant Bomb has become too big of a site for them to have complete control of anymore, and the more populist tone this community once had has been diluted more and more as the site grows with people who just care about wacky hijinks and have become too accustomed to a more corporatized internet. I love this site and miss when it had aims to be something special, something better, rather than just doing things like everyone else.

Thanks for the response

That's the problem is it? There is no readily identifiable answer for an alternate financial model. You see it, I see it, a lot of people here do and I can tell Jeff does.

I feel ya man, personally I like the idea of subscriber based models. Then the writers are working for you (theoretically), which leads to better journalism or reviews in GB's case since there is less COI issues. The problem is not enough people ever seem to support it. A fact compounded by the fact that the value ad pitch of what subscribing gets you at Giant Bomb has never been presented in a clear and is even less so than it was a year ago.

I figure if no local newspapers can get sole financial support from subscribers across the country, what chance does Giantbomb have?

Maybe I've lost some of my idealism fire I once had, but it's hard for me to begrudge Jeff and the gang for trying to survive/monetize what they do. No one seems to talk about this but I can't but feel Giant Bomb is on the clock so to speak to prove their worth to upper mgt. The next time there is a bad quarter at CBSi you can bet the pencil pushers in accounting are going to mention that they have two video game coverage sites and ask if they really need both.

Now they are part of CBSi I also must admit I feel if I get angry about it they'd be the ones who would suffer which I wouldn't want. In the ole Whiskey Days I did feel like the community had more leverage since Whiskey needed our traffic. And well it was the only game site they had.

I guess what I'm saying is that if we the community don't want ads then we need to come up with a way for them to make money without them. The guys don't seem to have any other ideas than what they've already tried. And while I like the guys' low-key approach to selling subscriptions I don't think it works as well as it could. The few media outfits that are donation/subscriber based like NPR are constantly asking and reminding people to give. Giant Bomb has never done that and I don't know if it's their make-up to do so or do so well.

I do think at some point though it might be nice for the GB staff to actually come out and say what the site's core beliefs are and objective is. What they do and what they don't do. I see a lot of things thrown around about what this site's about but even after being here a year plus I'm not sure I still really know. I suspect they actually trying to figure that out as they do the relaunch. There must be some major soul searching going on behind the scenes as they consider how to change the review.

I don't blame you for being upset with the community, but I do think the community kind of senses their options aren't what they used to be. Corporate Giant Bomb is better than none I suppose is how most people probably see it.

#140 Posted by HistoryInRust (6315 posts) -

I get so tired of ads in podcasts. If you're plugging your own product--a'la Kevin Smith's Smodco adverts before every Smodcast--then I get it. But don't pull a Rooster Teeth and start hammering ads in wherever there's an open window. It's just transparent to me, and the Giant Bomb guys have maintained a nice integrity regarding that stuff.

#141 Posted by Andorski (5310 posts) -

@TheHumanDove said:

I think you are extremely underestimating IGN's subscriptions (and probably Gamespot, but I don't really follow that site). I don't think Alexa gives out hard numbers for daily page views per visitor on their site, but IGN has a global rank of 408. Gamespot is 800, Kotaku is 2,019, and Joystiq is 2,948. Giant Bomb is 5,338. I'm sure IGN and Gamespot's membership count among their total userbase is a much lower percentage than Giant Bomb's, but the amount of traffic they get must lead to a larger membership count despite their shallow penetration into their audience. I also don't think this site's forum is a good barometer for the number of subscriptions being sold. From my point of view, the main posters on this site has changed that much since I started going here ~3 years ago. Anecdotal observation solely on this forum would have me conclude that their membership count hasn't grown that much, and its just the same people resubbing over and over again.

#142 Posted by TheHumanDove (2523 posts) -

Well then thank god we've got patrick if you're right

#143 Posted by huntad (1940 posts) -

If they just put in a 15 second advertisement, that's fine. It's better than their other dumb idea of making the bombcast a subscriber-only feature.

Also, if the crew actually has to speak the advertisement, it screams sellout. Try and make a deal where you can just play a clip or something.

#144 Posted by Zekhariah (697 posts) -

@Turambar said:

How would subscribers go about not having to listen to the podcast ads? A separate, slightly altered mp3 file behind a pay-wall I guess?

Maybe? That seems like enough of a pain, especially with how much iTunes figures into things, that subscriptions might be the main item holding it up. There is no provision in iTunes for a paid subscription podcast, and a lot of people with subscriptions probably go that route to get their Bombcast.

#145 Posted by ArbitraryWater (11739 posts) -

I'm totally fine with them doing that, assuming they spend lengthy amounts of time talking about how awesome Extreme Restraints is.

#146 Edited by Andorski (5310 posts) -

@Zekhariah said:

@Turambar said:

How would subscribers go about not having to listen to the podcast ads? A separate, slightly altered mp3 file behind a pay-wall I guess?

Maybe? That seems like enough of a pain, especially with how much iTunes figures into things, that subscriptions might be the main item holding it up. There is no provision in iTunes for a paid subscription podcast, and a lot of people with subscriptions probably go that route to get their Bombcast.

They can make a separate password-locked RSS feed for podcasts, like they do with videos. Then people can just manually subscribe on iTunes.

#147 Posted by Branthog (5562 posts) -

It depends. I'm against ads, always. I feel they are a plague on content and do nothing but molest and pervert it, even when they are necessary evils. Not to mention, I pay $35-50/yr for GiantBomb. I don't want advertising on top of that.

That said, it depends what the products are and how they're presented. I'm a fan of the live-read. Don't cut away to a commercial break with pre-recorded shit. Take a lesson from the ads they do on NSFW (or all of TWiT, for that matter). Harken back to the old-school ads of the 50s. Or the radio ads of the 20s, 30s, and 40s.

Ideally, don't review products for companies you cover. That is, advertising a Microsoft Surface isn't cool. It's not a video game, but it's still a company whose products you cover on a daily basis.

Instead, cover things that the audience may be interested in, peripherally. Even better, strictly adhere to a policy of only advertising for things the staff actually like. You know, that old school integrity thing of not pimping shit just because you're paid for it. Of endorsing things, because you like them and because you wouldn't want your name associated with something shitty.

Jeff and Ryan have gained my trust over the years. While nobody is an iron-box, I am fairly certain that advertising wouldn't influence Jeff and Ryan in their editorial content. On the other hand, your integrity is important. That means the appearance of impropriety is always vital; not just actual impropriety.

Maybe an appropriate use would be in-house advertising. That is, advertising for other CBSi/CBS Radio/CBS Television properties. That's sort of harmless.

#148 Posted by MariachiMacabre (7096 posts) -

As long as it's only Extreme Restraints.

#149 Posted by WilltheMagicAsian (1545 posts) -

@MariachiMacabre said:

As long as it's only Extreme Restraints.

You read my mind.

#150 Posted by joshrholloway (72 posts) -

I wouldn't mind it if it was done right, but the problem is that it's really hard to do podcast advertising right.

An example of one network that does get it right is 5by5. On these shows, an advertiser gets worked into the middle of each episode, and the hosts take a minute or two to discuss the advertiser and why it's cool. There are a few obvious "high points" provided by the advertiser but they talk about it in a natural way without reading a script or sounding like shills.

But the reason those ads work is that the products fit the audience but are not themselves objects of discussion and criticism. But with a video game podcast like the Bombcast, the most likely product to get advertised would be video games themselves. This raises an issue because you can't exactly have an ad for Medal of Honor: Warfigher, for instance, where the hosts have to talk about the game in a way that tries to sell it, and then trash it. That doesn't really work for the hosts, the advertiser, or the listener.

There have to be some smart advertisers out there who are not in the video game industry who recognize the value of the Bombcast and how their brand could fit in with the show's audience. (As someone mentioned already, Zojirushi comes to mind.) If that can happen, I'm really not opposed to advertising on the show.