FIR #434: Podcasts Defeat Mainstream Media in 2024 U.S. Election

The FIR Podcast Network Everything Feed

Among the many post-election analyses flooding media channels are reports that mainstream media and social media wielded far less influence than they have in the past. Instead, influencers and podcasts held sway. In this short midweek FIR episode, Neville and Shel break down the reports and discuss the impact on communicators far beyond the election and politics.

Links from this episode:

• Borkowski Media Trends: US Election Special
• Donald Trump’s America: Reflections on a Country in Flux – NevilleHobson .com
• Trump’s Win Cemented It: New Media Is Leaving the Old Guard Behind
• How AI shaped the 2024 election: From ad strategy to voter sentiment analysis
• Victorious Trump campaign spent far less on social media than in 2020

---

The next monthly, long-form episode of FIR will drop on Monday, November 25.

We host a Communicators Zoom Chat most Thursdays at 1 p.m. ET. To obtain the credentials needed to participate, contact Shel or Neville directly, request them in our Facebook group, or email [e-mail].

Special thanks to Jay Moonah for the opening and closing music.

You can find the stories from which Shel’s FIR content is selected at Shel’s Link Blog. Shel has started a metaverse-focused Flipboard magazine. You can catch up with both co-hosts on Neville’s blog and Shel’s blog.

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this podcast are Shel’s and Neville’s and do not reflect the views of their employers and/or clients.

---

Raw Transcript:

Hi everybody, and welcome to episode number 434 of four immediate release. I’m She Holtz. And I’m Neville Hobson. In a world closely watching the US political landscape, the outcome of the 2024 presidential election has left many stunned, not only by Donald Trump’s overwhelming victory, but by the speed and clarity with which it was achieved.

It reflects a shifting political landscape where traditional powerhouses of influence established mainstream media and celebrity endorsements found themselves increasingly limited. We will talk about what this means and more right after this.

On one hand, we see the reach of old media diminishing unable to

decisively sway public opinion or check political figures as effectively as it once did. Outlets like The New York Times and CNN rigorously reported on Donald Trump’s policies and authoritarian [00:01:00] tendencies. Yet Trump’s voter base remained unshaken, reinforcing the notion that mainstream media no longer holds the powerful gatekeeping role it once did.

Platforms like Joe Rogan’s podcast with its significant engaged, following, showcased how media consumption patterns are leaning towards unfiltered direct channels that sidestep traditional editorial influence, in essence says Semaphore Media in its latest newsletter. Old media now grapples with its own limitations as emerging platforms, often with looser content guidelines, reshape where and how people engage with political narratives.

Parallel the election highlighted the declining impact of celebrity endorsements once a defining force in shaping public support, high profile figures like Taylor Swift, Oprah Winfrey, and Lady Gaga, through their support behind Kamala Harris, I. Echoing the once powerful endorsements of the past, such as Oprah’s game changing endorsement of Obama in 2007, [00:02:00] yet in 2024, this strategy appears to have lost its punch according to Mark Bukowski, in the sweeping analysis of the declining influence of celebrity endorsements.

Younger audiences while registering to vote in response to celebrity appeals did not sway the election outcome significantly, as these endorsements did not mobilize voters beyond their already polarized basis. The conservative counterculture appeal personified by figures like Elon Musk and Joe Rogan appears to have more traction in today’s fractured media landscape, particularly with audience that see celebrity endorsements as part of the very establishment they oppose.

Together. These trends reveal two sides of the same coin in modern US elections. The waning influence of legacy media and celebrity endorsements underscores a broader shift towards decentralized niche oriented information and influence raising crucial questions about the changing role of traditional institutions in American political life.

There’s more to such [00:03:00] assessments. According to a couple of reports you found Shell from the Wall Street Journal in Digiday. What does that add to the landscape We now see? There’s a lot for communicators to pay attention to here, and we need to pay attention to it because. It, it goes beyond politics. If this is how people are being influenced, and that is our role as communicators, particularly in the marketing and public relations realms that we need to figure out how we play in this particular space.

, Trump went on 30 some odd podcasts. , he spent considerably less. In this last election cycle on social media than he did four years ago. And social media doesn’t seem to have played a tremendous role beyond the fact that, TikTok, as we’ve talked about in the past, has become a place where a lot of younger people, gen Z, go for [00:04:00] news.

And I was, , intrigued to find in the last weeks of the election, a lot of people were being introduced to the Access Hollywood tape from. 12 years ago for the very first time, , because it was being shared , on TikTok and, , they were, shocked and distressed by it. , but beyond that, we didn’t see the fake ads and the fake posts and the fake news sites that were being.

Tossed around , in Facebook posts. , , we just didn’t see the influence of social media. it was going where people were. , in, in one of the articles I read, they made the point that 100% of the manosphere listens to podcasts. , this is the group of men who, , feel disenfranchised , and, , you know, they want , the manly men type, that.

View of masculinity that seems to be very popular, , with the political right. , but it was very shrewd to get onto the podcast that those [00:05:00] people listened to because generally they didn’t vote. And if you could get them out and casting votes for the guy that they said, well, there’s a man, it, it boosts his totals.

How many brands out there are trying to get onto podcasts in order to. Influence people who are listening and are you pitching the right podcasts? You and I get pitched daily, , for people who want to appear on our podcast, and nine 99% of those , are so completely irrelevant to the things that we talk about.

Obviously, it’s just decision. Distribution list and they’re hitting everybody. , but if you can find the podcasts that the market you’re trying to reach is listening to, seems to me that that’s the approach to take these days. Podcasts, listening has quadrupled in the last four years. I think I read, , more people are listening to podcasts than not, and it’s become an important channel for swaying people’s views.

, I [00:06:00] think that the Trump campaign figured that out. , kamala Harris had an opportunity to appear on Joe Rogan’s show and turned it down because her schedule wouldn’t accommodate the three hours he wanted. , what did she lose as a result of that? , the opportunity to reach that same, .

Was it 50, 60 million people between those who watch it on YouTube and those who listen to the audio? , we need to be paying attention to this numbers. We need to be understanding where people are going to formulate their opinions. These days. It’s not where it’s been, and I venture to say that in four years it may not be the same as it is right now.

No, I suspect you’re right. It is interesting. There’s been, a handful of surveys in the last month on podcast leadership in the us in particular, , all of it. Basically saying that this is increasing by X percent, that’s increased. , this has grown the works, and that’s been the story for some time, , which to my mind always stretches credulity a [00:07:00] lot of the time.

It is always growing. Well, guess what? We saw the proof of some of those metrics. In this election campaign, by way, what you mentioned, , the, , way in which Trump took advantage of podcasts. So there’s one medium that, , did seem to play a role in, influencing people not to vote per se. But, , influencing them to think about what Trump stood for his messaging, if you like.

And that was one of the things I thought that Kamala Harris and her campaign team weren’t able to achieve all those celebrities. And I, I mentioned a couple, there’s more George Clooney being one, Bruce Springsteen, , Beyonce, iconic names, yeah. Beyonce, who made a, a pretty racy video on YouTube. I watched it.

Legend. Right? , and yet none of that. Converted , into swaying people’s behaviors to vote for the Democrats. So, , we then looked at, , , the kind of undercurrent, , of, , , shifts , in the US that as at, literally at the grassroots level in almost [00:08:00] every community across the country, the New York Times had , a dramatic graphic, which has stuck in my mind quite a lot since showing.

, the outline of the US territory, , with these arrows, blue and red pointing right and left. , and , the wave was across the country to the right. , the red arrows were quite extraordinary. So with that, and them not seeming to realize it, I think that impacted the strategy they were following.

There was serious missteps with that strategy. , and I, in my mind too, is the, , monthly episode we did, I think it must have been August, it might have been September. Where we analyzed, if you like, Kamala Harris’ social media campaign, , trying to connect with Gen Z. And we were, pretty impressed with all the people she had there.

They’re all in the mid twenties who were running this campaign. And , the force of action that they were doing in engagement with people was truly stupendous, yet it didn’t. Produced the result, they didn’t win the election. So that there, there are so many elements in all this, aren’t there? Shell, I we are touching on particular, , , [00:09:00] avenue, , of interest to us as communicators.

, the social media aspect, you mentioned this earlier, , that all the alarm bells about disinformation, misinformation, fakery and all that stuff, just. Did not happen, it seemed, and that, in a sense, speaks to other issues about polling, for instance. How did they get it so wrong? All the predictions about this were wrong, basically.

, and so the alarm bells, , sound like crying wolf. And so when the real. Stuff hits the fan. , are people gonna be paying attention? But I agree with you that this is a milestone, it seems to me in political campaigning and political communication, engagement with voting public, , that could shape how they do this, , from now on.

But I think people generally. Aren’t so easily, aren’t so malleable as it might have been, or as people suspected they would have been in the past. , people are now questioning it. I, I read one piece, I [00:10:00] think it was in The Economist, it might have been in one of the US papers that talked about, when, , when Taylor Swift came out saying, I backed Kamala.

, the only reaction was what took you so long? The kind of, , acceptance of this that would erupt in, Hey, fantastic. Hey, the Swifton board didn’t happen at all. Why didn’t you do this sooner? I saw people asking. So that seems to be what’s reflected in a lot of other actions we saw happening. So you’ve got that, , the combination of mainstream media losing its luster, if you like, is, is its power is diminished.

, people , are themselves. Driving some of the, , focus to, , niche channels as we hear podcast being one example, but is it. Deeper than that even, is it that people are not swayed on mass as they used to be with traditional approaches to political messaging, making up their own minds from their peers even So , is that it?

Well, a lot of people, I mean, a, a lot of people had their minds made up [00:11:00] back in September, , and nothing the campaigns did was going to shift those. People’s perspectives that left a limited group of people who were undecided or maybe not planning to vote, who could be moved to vote one way or the other.

And that’s why it was so important to try to reach those people, to identify them and reach them. , I mean there’s a lot that that went on that. Of this campaign, there’s the fact that, , Harris only had about a hundred some odd days to a campaign where Trump had been running one for four years.

. Presidential politics, and they’ll tell you that’s woefully inadequate for mounting a presidential campaign. So there’s a lot of finger pointing at Biden for not getting out earlier and giving her the time or having an open primary. , there’s also the fact that on the view, , I read somebody say this was the defining moment that killed her campaign is when they asked, , what she would’ve [00:12:00] done different than Biden did.

So that probably hurt, but you know, you have to look at the fact that Elon Musk bought Twitter, turned it into X and made it primarily a. A, a platform for com promoting the Trump candidacy. , he pumped what, $200 million in, into Trump’s campaign. So this is a factor that we have to think about who’s pouring money into these types of things.

, you also have, , there was controversy when Jeff Bezos, , spiked the Washington Post editorial board’s, plans for an endorsement and said, no. There was less outrage when the publisher of the Los Angeles Times did the same thing. He’s also a billionaire, but not well known as Jeff Bezos is. But ultimately, the New York Times did endorse Harris.

How much sway did that have? I’ve heard that newspaper endorsements hardly ever carry any sway. It’s more, , just demonstrating the [00:13:00] alignment of the paper with its values. , but. Was it really a big deal that, that the Washington Post. Decided that we’re done doing presidential endorsements?

, not if people aren’t paying attention to the mainstream media. I’m not gonna say they’re not paying any attention. What people talk about in social networks and what influencers talk about, , what they talk about on podcasts largely comes from mainstream media reporting, but it’s not. The main body of the politic, the people who are listening to what the mainstream media is reporting.

, it’s the podcasters, it’s the influencers. Yeah. Then they’re going out there and putting their own spin on it , and you know, is sharing their own. Thoughts and, , and opinions. , so that seems to me that’s who we need to reach for any of the external communication that we’re doing these days.

And you mentioned polling, , and how could it be so off? , and it’s the same thing. We’re polling the same way we were, in the 20th century. , we’re [00:14:00] calling landlines, , people aren’t picking them up. . We’re not reaching people on their mobiles. , so you’re getting a very skewed view from the people who do answer their phone and participate,, in the poll.

, so it’s inaccurate, and I’m not sure anybody’s figured out a better way to do this yet. I was following one guy who said, oh, the current methods of polling , , are completely useless these days. I’m doing something different. And it was all focus group based and things like that. But he called. All seven swing states for Harris, and they all went for Trump.

So yeah, kudos to him for trying something new didn’t work. , and what that suggests to me, again, if we take this out of the realm of politics and into the world of brands, are we researching correctly or are we relying on 20th century research methodologies that aren’t giving us the results that we need?

It clearly is that latter part. She, it seems to me, because this is [00:15:00] simply another sign of these huge shifts that are happening in societies and in this case the us , in American society. We talk about the increase in podcasts. We’ve discussed plenty of times before where people getting their news, TikTok and other social channels are primary , for certain generations.

Traditional media is. Imploding , in the sense of reach and influence. , in all the stories we’ve mentioned on national newspapers in our respective countries, regional, local newspapers, they’re all declining circulations, , in this country. Similar to the US I suspect local newspapers are simply.

Particularly online are peppered with popups, trash. They track you that you name it, so you don’t go there and no wonder they’re declining. So they have to put more ads in and, and all that is, is putting people off. They’re looking for alternatives and they’re looking for more trusted sources. So it’s a more.

, niche methodology at play here. So how do you therefore track them, and that’s probably the right word, track them to get their [00:16:00] voting intention. , you’re not gonna be able to do it with confidence because people , will actually lie to you and tell you one thing and do another. In, in, in fact, one of the interesting dimensions of all of this, and I was hearing this throughout the, the campaign is, is that Harris had a very effective ground game.

They had tons of volunteers knocking on doors. Trump didn’t make any effort to do that. He outsourced all of that to political action committees, , and yet he won. So how important is the ground game? , which, leads you to the, again, if we’re going to , shift this over into our thinking about communicating on behalf of , our products, our services, our companies, , are the local experiences, , still as valuable as as they used to be.

And one other point I wanted to make before we wrap this up, there were huge expectations about the role artificial intelligence. Was going to play in this election. You mentioned disinformation and, and deep [00:17:00] fakes earlier. And it turned out that they had very, very little impact on all of this.

But that doesn’t mean that AI wasn’t used. The Digiday article, , which will be linked in the show notes, makes the point that, , the campaigns did use, , LLMs and machine learning, , for content creation, audience analysis, voter targeting, and ad buying. So I. AI had an an impact, just not the one that people were expecting.

No, you’re absolutely right. So this was a shifting sands lecture without any doubt. All the old methodologies, the old values, , suddenly were, , not what you expected. You can’t really trust any of this anymore, and yet no one seems to know how to make changes here. This is a milestone.

It seems to me it is a big scale thing. American presidential election. It will have repercussions. It is starting already on a global level as attention is still on Trump as to what he gonna do before he gets to office. , it gets inaugurated. So, , it makes me think in a small parallel to [00:18:00] the general election in the UK in July, where the conservative party were.

Almost extinction level annihilation. They , were wiped out totally. And polling afterwards. So think about what people were predicting. , which policies would they go for? Which mps and, and what they stand for, would they vote for? It turns out, and this makes total sense ’cause this was how I felt, that they didn’t get the votes because people thought they were just simply damned incompetent.

I. All the scandals, the financial things. I mean, the post office scandal we had in an episode here, , the Horizon Post Office, , , thing with the software, , we’ve had , the tainted blood scandal. It’s even worse. Shell, it goes back four decades, people dying through tainted blood, and that was managed.

Terribly. And , the conservators were 14 years in power, so they took all the hits for everything, every government’s done, they were in the frame for it, and they lost big time. People didn’t vote for ’em. So that must have been partly to play in American elections too. , and I think many [00:19:00] of the folks, , to, to this other point we’ve been discussing had made up their mind months ago, not September.

Prior to that even. So everything since then, they just went out and voted for Trump no matter what. So it’s, political science , will look at this, , for months and we’ll get more knowledge, , in the coming months. This is what we know right now. So , this discussion is a little snapshot really of what , , we think happened.

But if there’s one thing that you can take away right now, start looking at the podcast space as a channel for getting your message out. Not your own podcast necessarily, but getting your people onto podcasts, getting your products on. , it’s the new TV is the new newspaper. You’ve gotta get out there.

To your point about we get approaches all the time and 99% of them are completely irrelevant. If you’ve got a relevant story you would like to pitch to us, do, but. Make it relevant to this podcast and this audience police, and that will be a 30 for this episode of four immediate release.

The post FIR #434: Podcasts Defeat Mainstream Media in 2024 U.S. Election appeared first on FIR Podcast Network.