Daniel Jalkut:
I see The Talk Show’s format as the prototype for many other successful podcasts on the 5by5 network: Dan Benjamin plays the cool, somewhat disinterested straight-man to a “star” whose own temperament, philosophies and interests ultimately define the show. After the initial success of The Talk Show, Dan threw the net wide, inviting folks such as Marco Arment, Andy Ihnatko, Merlin Mann, John Siracusa, Horace Dediu, and Jim Dalrymple to indulge audiences with their own personalities and areas of expertise.
Very true, it’s a great formula for podcasting.
Umm, isn’t this the first podcast format like ever? Like 5 years before Gruber’s podcast? Isn’t indulging “audiences with their own personalities and areas of expertise” in the original podcast manifesto?
It’s a bit different. While podcasts are ostensibly about a topic or a set of personalities, Dan does it differently. Instead of presenting himself equally in the podcasts, Dan expertly plays the role of facilitator in helping his co-hosts to vent, argue, opine, and express themselves, and that format started with Gruber back in 2007, even before 5by5 existed. He serves to showcase his co-hosts, and he does it extremely well.
What you say isn’t incorrect, but I’d compare the difference between what you’re talking about and what they’re doing as being similar to how putting the enunciation on a different syllable can entirely change a word. It’s the same idea as what you’re talking about, but with a different focus. That twist is what makes it work.
That might be how it’s supposed to work, but the way I see it—and that’s something Mr. Jalkut didn’t stress enough—is that Dan’s passion for podcasting and his personality made the Talk Show worthwhile.
Unlike Hypercritical, Amplified and Build & Analyse (to name a few) the Talk Show felt more like a discussion between House and Wilson, Dan being Wilson, enabling Gruber (who’s not exactly a House, but you get the drift).
I listen to the shows not only for the information value, but also for the interaction of the co-hosts and their pal Dan.
That’s something Gruber simply cannot replicate, which doesn’t mean that his podcast won’t be good, it’s just not the Talk Show anymore.
It’ll be interesting to see how Gruber’s show develops over time. Having listened to the first episode, I’d recommend he take a page out of Shawn King’s book: The atmosphere in his podcasts is always amicable, but he’s also a great moderator, managing to keep the discussion very focused, while still giving his guests the necessary leeway.
I very much like your “House and Wilson” analogy.
Thank you, I quite like that analogy myself 😉