Probably the most successful application of paid podcast subscriptions has been executed by Slate. The online magazine bet early<\/a> on podcasts, launching its first shows shortly after the medium was invented, and a few years ago it debuted Slate Plus, a subscription offering that, among other things, allows subscribers to access ad-free shows with special bonus segments. Today, roughly 50,000 subscribers pay $60 a year for Slate Plus.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But it\u2019s unlikely that all 50,000 subscribers are accessing the paid audio content. Slate Plus members get other perks, including discounted tickets to live events and access to web-only text content. Digiday reported<\/a> that 70% of members — so 35,000 — \u201cjoined because of the publisher\u2019s podcasts.\u201d That means that the podcast subscriptions are generating about $2.1 million a year for Slate. That\u2019s a nice chunk of change, but nowhere near the $400 million The New York Times generated from digital subscriptions in 2018. And remember, Slate has probably the most successful podcast subscription model.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Why is it so difficult to scale podcast subscriptions? Mostly because of the technical difficulties associated with any subscription offering. Podcast listening is fragmented across dozens of apps, and while a few individual apps offer some kind of paid membership capabilities, that means you can only offer subscriptions to people who listen to you through that specific app. The Apple Podcast app, which has, by far, the largest market share of podcast listening, doesn\u2019t provide any in-app payment processing functionality.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Publishers have tried to get around this barrier by using various methods. Some have sequestered the podcasts within their own mobile apps. The New York Times, for instance, locked its podcast Caliphate within its app for a windowed period of time before releasing it on free podcast apps. The sports publisher The Athletic also publishes several podcasts behind its paywall.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It\u2019s unclear how many people actually listen to these paywalled versions, but this approach certainly has challenges, the first being that you\u2019re requiring the listener to consume your podcast outside of the app that they typically use for most of their podcast consumption. That\u2019s increased friction that makes it more difficult for the subscriber to build your podcast into their daily listening routine. Also, the vast majority of publishers don\u2019t have close to the same kind of reach as the New York Times\u2019s app. In fact, many don\u2019t have standalone mobile apps at all. Perhaps this is why The Athletic, when it expanded its podcast offerings from 20 shows to over 120, chose<\/a> to make most of those new shows available on free podcast apps.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Other publishers have experimented with workarounds that allow subscribers to actually listen to subscription-only shows on their podcast app of choice. A number of platforms — Patreon, Substack, Glow — allow podcasters to offer personalized RSS feeds to paying subscribers, and these feeds can be accessed on most podcast apps. The liberal podcast Chapo Trap House, for instance, generates $145,000 per month by publishing premium podcasts through Patreon.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But this approach also comes with challenges. In order for this model to work, the podcaster needs to send the listener to a website outside of their podcast app. They must set up an account, enter their payment information, and then follow several steps to get the paid-for feed back on the podcast app. \u201cIt is a pain in the ass for us, and more importantly, it\u2019s a pain in the ass for users,\u201d Gabriel Roth, the editorial director of Slate Plus, told<\/a> Digiday. That same article reported that Slate\u2019s customer support staff \u201cspends a large portion of her day helping people add the Slate Plus podcast feeds to their preferred podcast app.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n What\u2019s more, this strategy only works with apps that utilize RSS feeds as a mode of distribution. Spotify and Pandora, two apps that have made significant inroads<\/a> to growing podcast listening market share, don\u2019t allow for this, and because they have their own paid subscriptions, they\u2019re unlikely to play nice with other payment platforms.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So am I arguing that publishers shouldn\u2019t bother with paid podcast subscriptions? Not necessarily. But I do think that you should fit them within a larger subscription strategy that offers a bevy of other benefits. Many of these payment platforms — Substack, Patreon, Glow — give the publisher access to subscriber email addresses, so you can offer up exclusive newsletter content in addition to premium podcasts. As mentioned, The New York Times and The Athletic incorporated podcasts as an add-on to their already-existing subscriptions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I could also envision a dynamic emerging that\u2019s similar to the current video streaming ecosystem; just as publishers pitch TV shows to Netflix and Hulu, we might see a future in which publishers pitch exclusive podcasts to Spotify, Luminary, Pandora, and Stitcher Premium. Many of these platforms are already experimenting with these types of deals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Some have proposed solutions that would make it easier for publishers to operate podcast subscriptions. One such solution<\/a> involves the widespread adoption of an open protocol that would allow publishers to authenticate subscribers within their podcast app of choice, but thus far this protocol only exists in theory; no podcast player has adopted it. For now, publishers will need to rely on their clunky workarounds. My guess is most will forgo the process entirely and stick to their free, ad-supported shows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n Simon Owens is a tech and media journalist living in Washington, DC. Follow him on <\/em>Twitter<\/em><\/a>, <\/em>Facebook<\/em><\/a>, or <\/em>LinkedIn<\/em><\/a>. Email him at simonowens@gmail.com. For a full bio, <\/em>go here<\/em><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/mediamakersmeet.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/Specialist-media-in-Europe-report-22.jpg\")
<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n