Poll: Show length and content

BV family! I want to get a better idea of your thoughts on the show length/content.

Currently a typical show looks like this:

2 x segments where we discuss a topic (usually 10 - 15mins long each).
1 x interview (about 10 - 15mins long)
1 x review (about 10 - 15mins long)
1 x Wrong In 60 Seconds (1min long)
Intro/Outro (about 3mins each)

From time to time I have felt we could benefit from adding a third discussion segment and I know some of the other guys have felt that would make the show too long. Our current shows usually weigh in at around an hour (or maybe an hour an 10mins for a longer show).

So, thoughts on the show length/content:

  • I would like a longer show/more content
  • The show length is just right
  • I would like a shorter show

Also share any other thoughts on the structure/format of the show. :slight_smile:

Thanks!

Wouldn’t mind a 90 minute show, but it’s working just right how it is. Perhaps more interviews?

I don’t think the length is too much of a problem for the listener. Because each show is segmented, it is very easy to pick up where you left off if you don’t have the time to listen the entire show at once.

It doesn’t seem, in my mind, that the length of the show would be an issue, but rather, what you, the presenters, would be comfortable doing, for that could impact the quality of the show if enthusiasm should wane on the part of the presenters, or even just one. It is a quality show as it is now, and I would think it would be great if that same quality could be maintained for a longer length.

The longer you make the show, the more likely it is people will listen to it in bits, separated by time. I already do this - I listen when driving, and it can take me a week to finish a show.

If more people do this, it means, I suspect, that feedback in the forums will be spread out over a greater length of time and be more disjointed.

You can have too much of a good thing :slight_smile: Have I Got News For You, the 30 minute version, is definitely better than the 45-minute edit.

I’m with @gerv here, I think; I don’t think I’d want the show to be much shorter (agreed that people will listen in parts, but much shorter either means fewer segments overall (which I don’t want) or paring down each segment to just the important parts, which makes the show more informative but considerably less fun). But I don’t think it should be longer either; an hour is about right, I reckon.

1 Like

Wouldn’t mind shorter shows if they where released more frequently.

This is a really great point. We definitely want it to feel like a show, not just a bucket of segments that you dip into here and there.

Needs more frippery, though.

No worries there. :slight_smile:

Hour is perfect for me at least… Strikes just the right balance and I find that podcasts >= 1 hour and 30 minutes make it near impossible to listen to, especially in one go.

I do enjoy the interviews so one way of giving us more bad voltage(which seems to be what the poll suggests so far) would be to split a feature interview into a separate 20 minute podcast while keeping current length of podcast. A small voltage if you will.

Additionally… Depending on your ability to produce something quickly given your various commitments … You could do a 20 minute podcast when newsworthy events in the tech community happen. E.g Microsoft open sources .NET we get a small voltage podcast with some information + reaction.

Additionally… Depending on your ability to produce something quickly given your various commitments … You could do a 20 minute podcast when newsworthy events in the tech community happen. E.g Microsoft open sources .NET we get a small voltage podcast with some information + reaction.

Stand Alone Brian podcast called “Brian Wins at All Everything.” Maximal smugness.

1 Like
Please respect our code of conduct which is simple: don't be a dick.