Those of you who know me, will know that I am a big fan of podcasting. In fact, podcasting is what really got me into the whole Web 2.0 and social media circle to begin with (I started getting involved in late 2004 / early 2005).

Podcasting — in it’s original audio format — really took off in mid-2005 and early 2006, particularly after Apple launched iTunes 4.9 with a podcast directory. Since then, it’s gained momentum in both audio and video format , thanks in part to the exponential growth of iPods and other MP3 players, as well as the early adopting marketers wanting to embrace new technologies and target niche audiences.

However, with the advent of video-sharing (e.g. YouTube), and social networking (e.g. MySpace, Facebook, etc.) sites in 2006 and beyond, together with a number of initial podcasters fading away into oblivion (I admit, I pod-faded, but I’m coming back!), there has been a sense of doubt whether podcasting actually took off at all or if it was merely a fad.

So, it is with great pleasure that I recently came across a report by eMarketer, called Podcast Audience: Seeking Riches in Niches, which claims that podcasting has indeed taken off, both in terms of popularity as well as ad revenue spend, and will continue to grow:

eMarketer estimates that the total US podcast audience reached 18.5 million in 2007… Furthermore, that audience will increase by 251% to 65 million in 2012. And of those listeners, 25 million will be “active” users who tune in at least once a week… Driven by this audience growth, US spending on podcast-related advertising (including sponsorships) will rise to $435 million in 2012, up from $165 million in 2007…

A number of factors are driving the growth of the podcast-user base:

* Greater ease of consumption for podcast content
* Growing awareness of podcasting
* Terrestrial radio’s use and promotion of podcasting
* Increased penetration of portable players
* The evolution of smart phones and proliferation of affordable mobile data plans

Here’s some additional insightful commentary (about the eMarketer report) from TechCrunch:

The revenue figures will bring a smile to any VC firm with investments in the sector… One interesting aside was eMarketer attributing the growth to podcasts being promoted by the mainstream media. What they didn’t add is that many of the top lists globally on iTunes today also have a strong presence from those very sources; while greater awareness of podcasting is growing the overall market for podcasts, the mainstream media is taking a big slice of the pie.

All this is great news for the world of podcasting and I am very glad to hear that advertisers are finally understanding the power of the medium. However, even though revenue generating podcasts are now quite widespread, I don’t think we can quite consider it “mainstream” just yet, as there are few podcasts that are really raking in the big bucks like a more traditional media channel.

SIDEBAR: As it turns out, to obtain the full 19 page report from eMarketer will cost you a whopping $695… That’s about $37 per page, folks! Now what is a typical podcast ad CPM again? Hmmm… Maybe we (podcasters) should all consider writing reports on consumer behavior instead?

Email — the convenience of sending a message (or spam) at the click of a button. No matter what anyone says, it’s certainly part of our daily (work) life.

While it’s a huge convenience for many of us, it can also cause massive headaches (like when your mailbox is completely full and you need to send an urgent document). Well, talk about the mother of all migraines…

According to Portfolio.com, a lawyer from Pepper Hamilton (which represents Lilly) intended to send a confidential document relating to the Zyprexa settlement to a co-counsel at Sidley Austin (another law firm) via email.

Unfortunately, instead of sending the email to Bradford Berenson (the co-counsel), she accidentally sent it to Alex Berenson instead, presumably due to the ever-so-convenient auto-complete function that most email programs have. And, as bad luck would have it, the Alex (as opposed to the Bradford) turned out to be a NY Times reporter, who then broke the story and caused a frenzy at Lilly.

…one of Eli Lilly’s lawyers at Pepper Hamilton in Philadelphia wanted to email Sidley Austin’s Berenson, about the negotiations. But apparently, the name that popped up from her email correspondents was the wrong Berenson… Alex Berenson logged on to find an internal “very comprehensive document” about the negotiations, the consultant said, and on January 30, Berenson’s article, “Lilly in Settlement Talks With U.S.” appeared on the Times’ website. A similar article followed the next day on the front page of the New York Times.

Ina Fried at News.com had some good commentary about this and also some helpful hints for customizing Outlook, in case you’re worried about this happening to you:

…Some pretty big consequences for a feature that saves a few seconds’ time. Sure, those seconds add up over time. But I imagine the lawyer in question would give any amount of time to have that e-mail back… I try to always give my address bar a second look before hitting send, but once or twice have found my note to a colleague going to an outside contact with a similar name. Maybe Microsoft should get rid of the feature…Then again, in a world where businesses and governments are increasingly secretive, maybe the typo has become the greatest opportunity for openness and democracy. On second thought, leave it in there.

Email: you can’t live with it and you can’t live without it! Sigh…

BTW, if you want a more detailed opinion piece on this, read Erik Starkman’s article on the Starkman & Associates blog.

Thought I’d add a little humor to the start of a solemn week for Patriots fans…

Image from Global House Price Crash

Following a May 2007 report that suggested interference from iPods and other portable music player could cause implantable pacemakers to malfunction, a recent (FEB’08) FDA study concluded that iPods are safe for people with pacemakers (maybe they should call this the “iSurvived Study”).

Here’s a brief synopsis from the press release:

They measured the magnetic fields produced by four different iPod models: a fourth-generation iPod and an iPod with video, and an iPod nano and an iPod shuffle. They also measured the voltages delivered to the inside of the pacemaker by the magnetic fields from the iPods… All their measurements indicated the iPods could not affect cardiac pacemakers… “Based on the observations of our in-vitro study we conclude that no interference effects can occur in pacemakers exposed to the iPods we tested”…

Now, there are several things that worry me about both studies…

Firstly, the initial 2007 evidence was based on 2 reports — one which was done by a 17 year old high school student. Secondly, whomever wrote the press release really needs another lesson in writing…Take this line, for example:

Last year cardiologists operated an iPod during a patient’s examination, and reported in the journal Heart Rhythm that they had seen interference with the pacemaker.

I had to read it 4x before I realized that the cardiologists were not operating on the iPod! OK, that was a little overexagerated, but you get my point.

And as for the more recent 2008 study, is it just me or do you find it strange that they only used iPods for the study? Sponsored by Apple? Or perhaps the lab group just wanted to get their hands on a 4G, an iPod w/ video, a nano, and a shuffle. The shuffle must be for the lab tech (note: I used to be a lab tech many years ago).

Anyway, make of the report what you will. I’m just glad we’re not gonna see big warning labels on future iPods, saying “May Result in Sudden Death if Operated within 30cm of an Implantable Pacemaker“.

Is that why they introduced the black iPod?

Alright…enough fun for today.

While the news of the Amazon-Audible acquisition was interesting, the BIG BUZZ around town this past week was Microsoft’s $44.6 billion bid to takeover Yahoo!

I have to give Michael Arrington (TechCrunch) full credit for the mega-scoop and talking about this issue just a mere few days before the announcement. In a separate post (after the announcement), he also offers an interesting look at what an MS-Yahoo might look like.

Anyway, so you can hear it straight from the horses mouth, here’s the internal email that was sent to MS employees from Steve Ballmer (CEO, Microsoft) announcing the bid.

I guess it was only a matter of time before this happened, since Yahoo already turned down a previous bid about a year ago and their stocks have been sliding steadily downward over the past year or so.

Of course, no sooner had this bid been made public than all the other big players have started scrambling, and rumors abound regarding potential competing bids, such as News Corp — which had previously been in talks with Yahoo about a Yahoo-MySpace merger.

OK, now to top it all off, the other 500-pound gorilla — Google — has entered the picture and called Microsoft’s offer a “hostile bid” and discusses the importance of preserving Yahoo’s independence form MS for the future of the Internet. Here’s a taster from the Google Blog:

So Microsoft’s hostile bid for Yahoo! raises troubling questions. This is about more than simply a financial transaction, one company taking over another. It’s about preserving the underlying principles of the Internet: openness and innovation…

Could the acquisition of Yahoo! allow Microsoft — despite its legacy of serious legal and regulatory offenses — to extend unfair practices from browsers and operating systems to the Internet? In addition, Microsoft plus Yahoo! equals an overwhelming share of instant messaging and web email accounts. And between them, the two companies operate the two most heavily trafficked portals on the Internet. Could a combination of the two take advantage of a PC software monopoly to unfairly limit the ability of consumers to freely access competitors’ email, IM, and web-based services? Policymakers around the world need to ask these questions — and consumers deserve satisfying answers.

Well, this piece of news is RED HOT right now and there’s just too many sources too follow. Just go to Techmeme, TechCrunch or News.com and watch it develop — I’m sure it will be the hot topic for quite a while yet.

I guess acquisitions are in the air again!