YES— it’s been awhile since our last blog entry.
Here’s why: Donna, as you may know, has a National Post weekend column; it often reflects the intent of Beyond Polarity — amplifying voices and ideas not typically featured in legacy media. Donna’s inquisitive essays are read across the country. That’s the good news.
We’re thinking of making a podcast. An ongoing series tentatively titled TWO PEOPLE TALKING. There’s so much more to tell, and that’s where you come in…
Yes, you.
Do you have time in your day to listen to stories — under-reported stories — that legacy & print media can’t handle? And, if so, will you subscribe to a digital stream (with a monthly fee of no less than five bucks)? It’s okay to say know. Your response will help us make a decision whether it’s wise to go ahead in a very crowded podcast space.
Why five bucks? With 100 subscribers, it’s the minimum cost to professionally produce & distribute an audio podcast with enriched content on a Substack website.
What’s the ‘content’ all about? That’s a question you can answer, as well. What do you need to hear that you’re not hearing? What about your friends? What do they talk about that we should investigate further? We’ve been prescient with Beyond Polarity, speaking to the overlooked stories in the news cycle. And we’ve been forthright in our reportage, sometimes drawing a circle around the unknown-unknowns to get a better sense of what’s missing.
You can help us understand what our next step should be by making a comment.
Thanks, in advance!
BEYOND POLARITY is the consensus opinion of the writers Donna Kennedy-Glans & Don Hill. If you haven’t already, please subscribe — scroll down on your phone or tablet, or look to the right in the panel beside this post. Enter your email to FOLLOW, a wheel spins, hamsters get fed.
Yes I would subscribe.
Keep up the good work.
Thanks
Fred
Thanks, Fred. You’re the first one in! 99 more to go…
As a non-partisan centrist, I’d consider a podcast as you describe. But to be blunt, partisan podcasts are a waste of everyone’s time and energy. I’d have to have a look, before subscribing.
I’ll take that as a ‘know’, Rob. BTW, since you follow Beyond Polarity and perhaps have read Donna’s National Post columns, you already know we _play no favourites_.
Count on our $10! $5 each 😆
Thanks so much, Sally! I’ll consider that two-in-the-hand — making our count needing 97 more birds to come out of the bush…
Do substack. its a great platform for you.
Yes– it is, indeed. Thanks for the affirmation!
Hi folks!
I expect that I would subscribe. Now, having said that, I have to explain my personal problem.
I can hear – kind of – but only with the use of electronic ears. My hearing people tell me that the next step on the journey of my hearing progression is the use of the word “profound” as in “profoundly deaf.” I, of course, just don’t believe them. Too much. Yet.
My point is that, yes, I can kind of hear but it is tough when I use headphones (a necessity, I assure you) and also wear hearing aides at the same time. Painful, you know. But, I do it.
The problem is – and I mean no disrespect to anyone – I find that too, too often folks slur their words; my goodness, that have accents; speak too quickly; and so forth. I therefore have to play some clips over and over again; that is just the reality of life.
So, what am I really saying? Please, please, please, ensure that your podcast has close captions as an option. I find that the use of close captions assists me in understanding the actual speech. So, close captions are really important to those of us who find that the ears that God gave us at birth seem to have run away.
Thanks for listening to me whine.
Ken, points well taken! And — me thinks you’re keen on video of two-people-talking, yes? We shall certainly take that into consideration. That said, I can assure you there will be _transcripts_ made available for download as a complement to each audio podcast. As Orson Welles, the great radio raconteur once said, there shall be no ‘whine’ before it’s time (people of a certain age will get the pun).
Oh, and another comment (sorry – long winded).
I, like many folks, have some political opinions that I just KNOW are sensible and I further KNOW that some contrary opinions are just wrong.
Nevertheless, I subscribe to some of those “wrong” opinion sorts because the quality of the writing and the opinions themselves make think. I absolutely dislike some “wrong” opinions not because they are “wrong” but because they are tedious and just repeat tired talking points but some of those “wrong” opinions make me think about where perhaps I am wrong.
So, this is a long-winded way of saying that political opinions should be welcomed as long as they are not tedious, time-consuming and repetitive. Those opinions (whether “correct” or “wrong”) should be provocative, explainable as to why they do – or do not – make sense but, please, please, please recognize that we the listeners/readers are modestly intelligent and have heard many of the stock arguments and have already bought into or rejected many of them – in other words, what are you saying that is new?
Thank you.
I’d be interested as long as episodes are not too long, as in more than 30 minutes. As you say the podcast universe is already quite crowded.
Thanks Glenn. Hear what you are saying on the length. One thing we’ve learned from our research- some listeners are not sitting down and listening to an entire podcast at one time. They break it up, to fit with their schedule.
You’re right, Glenn. The ‘sweet spot’ for continuous listening (in one go) is around 20 minutes. That said, it’s been tracked that listeners to Joe Rogan, for instance, pause the conversation and listen to the long-winded and complete programme over several listening sessions. The key ‘trick’ is to remain interesting…
I am good for the monthly $5.00
Thanks Leo. Appreciate your support.
I would be happy to pay $5 per month. I subscribe to several substacks and very much appreciate the more nuanced and complete analyses by knowledgeable authors (like you!) I would appreciate discussions about health and healthcare policy.. topics that don’t get attended to in any knowledgeable way in the available mainstream media. For example…. what is teh ‘story’ behind Albertans going to Toronto to pay privately for hip and knee surgery while their counterparts in Toronto come to Alberta? And yet another Albertan gets a hip replacement in a third province and it is apparently covered by Alberta Health? if timely procedures are not availabe in our own province but are in another, isn’t this what ‘portability’ in the Canadian Health Act is all about? As Albertans we need to understand more about healthcare policy and teh difference the expensive system we pay for makes (or doesn’t make)..
This is helpful guidance Judy. Thanks.
I’d give the podcast a try – $5/month is good.
Since we heading into municipal election, it would be great to inderstand effective governance by councils and hiw does a voter assess the performance of council.
Al
Allan, stay tuned to this space. By the early going of September, we should have the ‘metrics’ to give a thumbs up or otherwise on a podcast. Meantime, thanks for our suggestion on the muni-election cycle ahead!