ding, dong, the niche is dead

I've been doing a lot of thinking about the whole concept of niche podcasting lately -- it started when I was working on my presentation for Podcamp Montreal, on, not surprisingly, podcasting in the niche.

Then I went to the session on -- wait for it -- niche podcasting given by the delightful Jean-François Blais, an engaging storyteller who hosts the podcast Bordel de Mer, on what might, quite rightfully, be considered a niche subject, les chants de marins, or sea shanties.

(Aside:  go, run, listen, subscribe to Bordel de Mer.  It is *wonderful*, and has been accompanying me out to the farm to pick the last of the tomatoes, and handfuls of flowers for the vase in the kitchen.  Yes, I sing out loud, out in the fields.  It is enchanting.  The podcast, that is, not my singing.)

It was during that session that the idea that had been bothering me a little began to really pester me. And then, not too long after Podcamp Montreal, I was listening to an episode of the Canadian Podcast Buffet, in which co-host Mark Blevis interviewed Tyffanie, a podcasting drag queen from Kingston, Ontario, and host of the podcast Breakfast with Tyffanie.

At one point, Mark mentioned about being (pleasantly) surprised by finding out that what Tyffanie does in her podcast -- her niche podcast -- is not so far removed from what, say, the Scarborough Dude does over at DicksnJanes -- essentially, both are voyages of self-discovery that take the listeners along for the ride; both create a truly authentic, individual presence in their podcasts.

And that was the moment when I realized that niche is a word that should be taken out and stabbed until it is well and truly dead.

Don't get me wrong -- the term "niche" is useful in at least a couple of ways I can think of.  First, it's a handy organizational tool, providing a way to connect like with like, so if we're interested in particular subject, we can easily see what's available to us.

It's also useful in thinking about niches as kinds of "neighbourhoods", places that build community and provide safe havens, to give folks places to hang out with others knowledgeable about the subject, or just to create connections and supportive environments.**

All too often, though, the term "niche" ends up being some kind of ghetto, where podcasts that maybe don't fit into the mainstream (and who decides what that is, anyway?) get shunted off.  It's almost as if being in the niche means that the subjects dealt with in the niche are marginal or, horrors, not quite as worthy as those outside the niche.

And that's the point that's been bugging me lately, because more and more, I don't see myself pushing podcasts into niches, into corners. More and more, I see all podcasts as the product of the passion of an individual (or individuals, in some cases), reflecting the individual expression or personality of the producer.

I had, quite honestly, not a lot of interest in sea shanties before I met Jean-François Blais -- but he was so engaging, and so passionate about his podcast subject that I *had* to start listening to him.  I listen because of Jean-François.  The music has just been a huge side-benefit.

And if you think that a middle-aged straight housewife and a younger (much younger) Drag Queen have nothing in common apart from the fact that we both live in university towns of similar size, well, you only have to listen to Breakfast with Tyffanie to hear that you're wrong.

Okay, it's true -- I'm probably not in what Tyffanie might have considered her target market -- and she is providing a place to share information on what the queer community in Kingston is up to.  That's my definition of niche as neighbourhood -- you sit down with your cup of coffee, just like Tyffanie does, and you listen to what's going on, a nice Thursday morning chat, if you will.

But over the course of the episodes I've listened to (I'm still catching up), Tyffanie covers a wide range of topics that are interesting to *me*, too. 

I like to think that this breaks down barriers between niches.  I like to think that it proves that we're all, each of us, just human, just trying to make sense of our lives, our worlds, and that all of us have much more in common than we realize.

And the term niche?  I see it as just one more thing that divides us, instead of bringing us together.

If I push this argument to its extreme, I might even say that every single podcast is a niche of one, because it's not the subject or theme of the podcast that's most important.  What *is* most important is that every single podcast is the product of someone who is passionate about *something*, whether that "something" is sea shanties, knitting, music, social media tools, technology, comics -- you get the idea.  The point is the passion.  The point is the person.

If you stick me in a niche as a podcaster and say, "Oh, well, she just podcasts about knitting and that's not my bag", then you may very well miss out on everything else I share or explore about my life. 

I sure don't want to miss out on what others think or believe, I don't want to miss out on what I can learn from their individual journeys of exploration, just because I make the mistake of shoving them into a niche.

I don't know about you, but my life has become much richer because of a lot of these so-called niche podcasts.

Sometimes you learn the most when you cross the boundaries...

_______________________________________________________________________

**As an aside: Sylvain Grand'Maison has some excellent and interesting thoughts on niche podcasting on his new site, Fono.  In French, but totally worth it, and the discussion continues in his comments.  Most particularly, I think we should be having discussions about niches -- and Sylvain points out the positives in working in the niche, which do exist.  I note with some interest that Sylvain, like me, talks about the passion behind the endeavor.  There is no point doing any of this if you aren't passionate about what you're talking about, whether it's yourself, your hobby, anything...

Comments

[Scarborough Dude]

Nicely put Katherine, and I agree fully! I've never felt I belonged to any niche or needed to be categorized - although we did toss the word 'meche' podcaster around - hmmm, that still might fit.

[John Meadows]

Wow.

This post could serve as the Manifesto of podcasting; you have captured so perfectly the essential spirit of podcasting; it's not about numbers, or market share; it's about connections and discovery, one listener and one podcaster at a time.

[katherine]

Dude, you are proof of the one-person niche if there ever was one :-)

The true individual, one-of-a kind, that's what you are.

[katherine]

Thanks, John.

You know me. I'm all about the communitizing(running and ducking)...

[Andrea of JustOneMoreBook! KidLit Podcast]

Then again, how many of you want to listen to chats about children's books over coffee four times a week? True, fabulous podcasts like on-the-log or dicksNjanes which are created to reflect on the common condition and invite us to wander thru ideas and aspects of life from the clearly unique perspective of a single podcaster are engaging, entertaining, enlightening, uplifting and all that wonderful stuff that makes us listen to them. Still, some of us do stick to an extremely narrow, predictable focus serving a well-defined singular purpose and relating to one tiny, specific topic (strictly avoiding discussing all the other interesting tidbits and aspects of life that may be engaging and entertaining but fall outside that tiny topic). So what's your term for that?

[katherine]

@Andrea Subject specific?

Your point is a good one, Andrea -- as I said, niche is useful in some ways, and mostly I just want to open up discussion. I want people to think about how they look at those niche podcasts.

That said, your podcast is one I listen to from time to time, mostly because I enjoy the chatting about books over coffee. You and Mark are passionate about those books, and it comes through in everything you do.

[katherine]

And the thought just occurred to me: labels like niche *are* useful tools, and I don't seriously, honestly believe that the term is going anywhere anytime soon, simply because it does have moments were it serves a purpose of some sort.

But we can risk putting people into boxes they can't break out of with those labels, that's why I want us to think about why/when we apply them, and how it makes us look at others once they've been put in that box.

[Andrea]

afterall, we podcasters love our over-used warm fuzzy terms ~~ it doesn't look like we'll be giving up "passion", "authentic" and the gang anytime soon. Maybe we should just make up lingo-bingo boards for them and enjoy the game

[Mark Blevis]

Okay... I'm a little late to the party on this one.

I don't believe there's any reason why being considered a niche podcaster should also be a badge of dishonour. On the contrary. I believe one of podcasting's best qualities is that it caters to us content-hungry types in a way that mainstream media has tried and failed. Why? Because mainstream media tries to be all things to all people and we do it by finding our little spot in the grass and claiming it as our own and invite others to join us. Podcasting delivers from the heart to the heart.

Subject specific? Niche? They're the same thing to me. And just because your podcast caters to a specific audience (or niche) on knitting, children's books, marketing, self discovery, music or obscure German strategy games, you shouldn't feel pigeon-holed into speaking only on that topic. In fact, niches don't have to be specifically about your content; they can also be about your format. For example, the only thing that threads any two episodes of Electric Sky together is the format and the interest in learning something new. Otherwise, there is little that connects a retired satellite communications scientist, a vintage war plane collector and a movie store clerk. If your audience is interested in how you share your passion, they're likely to want to hear what you do and what you have to say about your life -- which is another thing that makes podcasting such a great communications channel.

Functioning in a niche makes it easier for people to find you; it makes you and your passion more accessible. You can throw a fresh coat of flashy paint on it if that's what works for you. Underneath it all, and to the people that need to find you, it's still a niche.

[k]

It's never too late to comment. The blog is always open, and further exploration/discussion is *always* welcome.

I honestly don't expect the term niche to go away-- it's a bit like that discussion on the term podcasting, but I deliberately took a bit of a provokative position in order to encourage response.

And you'll notice that I do point out the postives, or at least of the usefulness, of using a term like niche, both in this post, and in a later one I wrote.

If I appear a little sensitive, it's simply because I do end up finding myself pigeon-holed at times, and I wanted to think a bit about that, and push at the issue a little bit to see what others think, too.

But you certainly won't find me at the forefront of any movement to change the language :-)

[Valerie]

When I first read the post (which was awesome, btw), I was thinking about how closely connected podcasters can be to their content, and drew a comparison between a podcast getting labelled niche (books, movies, tech, pets, law, knitting) and a person getting labelled niche (old, fat, sexy, frigid, jock, nerd). I don't think people like having labels smacked on them through everything they do...

...unless it's in terms of developing a *brand*, which people have most commonly done in professional work. We want to project a certain image at the office, then loosen the tie in the car on the way home. I think with the advent of telecommuting and then work in various forms of social media (which has encouraged the concept of personal branding), the lines between professional and personal have the potential for major blurring.

In podcasting, your knitting podcast and Andrea & Mark's children's book podcast live in different areas of that blur because of the intentions of their creators. I have two podcasts in very different places in that blur too - they're in those places because of my intentions. Whether that matches up with a listener's perception is a whole other thing.

So there are going to be people who dig being in a niche because it makes them more identifiable or distinct in a certain context, and there are going to be people who hate being stuck in a niche because it offers a limited perception. The word itself does not change. Perhaps it's safest to think of "niche" not being a niche in itself.

Okay, that being said, I've just used the word "niche" enough that I'm happy to get rid of it. :-) "Meche" is sounding better all the time.

[Mark Blevis]

I have to say that I like posts like this one because they incite conversation. I'm inspired by the various points that have been raised.

[Tyffanie Morgan]

Hi SweetPea! Thanks for the kind words. I have to say that I too love posts like this... posts that reference ME :)

The more I read about niches and niche marketing the more I get confused trying to define “Breakfast with Tyffanie”. Yes, I am a drag queen and I have a vision of informing and connecting the queer community in Kingston with queer events and happenings in town. But I find more and more my actual audience/listeners are not necessarily the queer community in Kingston but instead a global audience (literally and figuratively). According to niche marketing, I should adjust my podcast to address the global audience. I love my audience but changing my focus goes against my goal. So I kinda stuff those niche marketing tactics under the bed for another day. :)

Thanks again! Great discussion!

[katherine]

Great comments folks, lots of food for thought.

Tyffanie, your comment about changing your content to meet your new/global audience connects, I think, with a post I wrote about the metrics of success -- the one about Japanese writer Haruki Murakami, who has a vision of what he wants to write, and doesn't worry about his audience. For me, I'd rather stay true to whatever vision or goal I define for the podcast, and let the listenership it appeals to come naturally.

Andrea made a point over on Mark's blog (hope I remember correctly off the top of my head) about being careful to stick to your agenda if you've defined your podcast in a certain way. I can see that as being important, though I might say that I might change my agenda, but only after being clear with my audience about what I want to change and why.

And I also wouldn't do anything completely drastic. I might make incremental changes and keep my audience involved or informed.

As Andrea said: a chewy topic.

[Mark Blevis]

Andrea and I were talking about your comment, Tyffanie, and we agree that the audience that is drawn to you is drawn to you for a reason. Clearly the word is spreading organically which is the best type of marketing you can hope for.

Niche marketing be damned. I can't think of a compelling reason why you should change your approach simply because your audience makeup is not what you'd envisioned. Accept them as they are and keep doing what you do best. And... if you plan any changes, as Katherine says, be gentle.