Podcasting Officially a Word

goldseries writes "The BBC is reporting that the New Oxford American Dictionary is adding podcasting to the dictionary. A year ago it was rejected because not enough people were reading it, but, in a ode to the speed of technology's growth, it is being declared the word of the year. Podcasting has been in the Oxford Dictionary of English since last summer. Podcast beat out words such as lifehack and rootkit for inclusion in the dictionaries. I guess no one needs to know what a rootkit is."

Comments

Food for thought...

[Antony-Kyre]

It may be a word now, but will anyone still be using it 50 years from now?

Re:Food for thought...

[Ziviyr]

I'm sure the durable plastic casing will make good fishing bait for years to come.

Re:Food for thought...

[cjb-nc]

"I got your memo, would you go Xerox 10 copies for me for my next meeting?"

There's a word that was ubiquitous some number of years ago. Can't say I've heard anyone use Xerox as a verb in quite a while. Now it's copy or photocopy. Podcasting will go the same way, eventually. I seriously doubt it will take more than 10 years, much less 50.

Re:Food for thought...

[meringuoid]

It may be a word now, but will anyone still be using it 50 years from now?

Quite possibly. Remember how 'Hoover' became a generic term for a vacuum cleaner? How 'walkman' became a generic term for a portable personal cassette player?

I would not be surprised to see 'iPod' becoming a generic term for digital audio players - or, if Apple defends its trademark as well as it probably will, the obvious corruption to just plain 'pod'. The increasingly widespread currency of the word 'podcast' might well cause this to happen more quickly. If you can listen to podcasts on it, it's a pod, right? Not an iPod, because that's only the Apple ones, but a pod nonetheless...

Re:Food for thought...

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

It may be a word now, but will anyone still be using it 50 years from now?

Marry N'uncle, a swivven'd comely wench shall tell thee by the nonce.

Re:Food for thought...

[Walkiry]

>It's only a term "everyone uses" as long as "everyone" is a small subset of the population.

Here's where we disagree I suppose. I've heard this term used by a wide range of people, in billboard advertisements, TV adverts... Heck, check the MediaMarkt audio and video page and see where the iPod is (hint: click on "Die beliebtesten MP3"). Saturn has the iPods in their "MP3 section." The term "MP3 Player" is very widely extended, where "everyone" stands for a large portion of the general population (sure, all they'll tell you is that it's one of them things that lets you hear the music off your computer, but that's how they're referred to).

Re:Food for thought...

[erroneous]

"maybe"

Re:Food for thought...

[Golias]

If you didn't know, here is a clue: some people don't care to be lost in some fanciful world and would rather be engaged with other people in some form of itneraction.

The way everybody was so close and friendly with each other on New York subways before the invention of the Sony Walkman? The world you live in sounds like it must be really nice. I wouldn't know, as I've never seen it.

Seriously, you sound like a total ass when you assume that you KNOW the reason why other people bought their iPods. I can only speak for myself and those close to me: We buy them to listen to music on, and don't care what the fuck people think about them. When they are not in use for the stated purpose of listening to music, they are hidden away in pockets, glove boxes, handbags, etc.

Why would anybody think of a small hunk of personal electronics as a "status symbol" anyway? It's barely visible, cheaper than jewelry, and usually tucked out of sight. You might as well try to convince me that women who buy expensive vibrators are only getting them because they want to be part of the "in crowd." My first guess is that they are getting them for their own personal satisfaction, and don't really care whether they impress anybody or not.

Re:Food for thought...

[Anonymous Coward]

Oooooooh!

Here I thought you actually believed that. Now I understand. You're bitter because you're the only kid on the block with a cheap-assed iPod knock-off, and rather than acknowledget that you are insanely jealous of the iPod's remarkable ease of use, handy click wheel, compact size, wide array of accessories and add-on features, etc. You see those people having oodles of fun with their MP3 players, to the point that they are unable to contain their elation about finally getting one, and it hurts that you are not having that kind of fun owning yours... so you redirect your bitterness into convincing yourself and others that yours is actually better because it's something different than the iPod.

It's not possible that their player is more popular because it's actually better in some ways. It must be because it's "in." How it got to be "in" to start with, when it's so obviously not as wonderful as yours, is a mystery which will endure for the ages, but now that it's "in" the reason why everybody wants one is that it's "in." Yeah. That must be it.

Re:Food for thought...

[atomic_toaster]

Well, Kleenex started up in 1924, and you have to admit that the term "Kleenex" as opposed to "facial tissue" is still in use... Band-Aid first came on the market in 1920; these days, it's rare to hear someone ask where they can find the "adhesive bandages".

So yes, anything that was the first of its kind to become popular often will stand the test of time. "Walkman" and "rollerblades" have also become popularly used to replace "portable cassette deck" and "in-line skates," but they haven't been around long enough to pass the 50-year test. Although, from what I have observed, it really depends on the level of technology with regards to how long a name sticks around. With the invention of CD's, and now mp3 players, nobody really uses the traditional Walkman anymore (although Sony has also labelled their mp3 players "Walkmans", the term still seems to apply to portable cassette players in popular jargon). Rollerblades, too, while less techy than a walkman, aren't nearly as popular as at their first inception. However, terms like Kleenex and Band-Aids stick around for a long time because they have evolved very little since the product was first marketed.

As an aside, I would personally hope that the term blogosphere does not stand the test of time. It's possibly one of the silliest terms I have ever heard. But with my luck, it will stick around forever, or perhaps be replaced by something much worse...

Pah

[Anonymous Coward]

I'll stick with audio download.

Re:Pah

[Anonymous Coward]

> I'll stick with audio download.

Right. can someone explain to me the difference between new trendy "podcast" and the old "ftp" or "scp" or "http" that we use for everything else? It's the same old technology just dressed up and marketed by Apple under another name. Hell, you don't even need Apple or an iPod to be involved in listening to these audio broadcasts.

It's a marketing gimmick.

Re:Pah

[baryon351]

Right. can someone explain to me the difference between new trendy "podcast" and the old "ftp" or "scp" or "http" that we use for everything else? It's the same old technology just dressed up

Convenience. Back in the early 90s, I remember many remarks like yours about the new WWW. "Can someone explain to me the difference between this new trendy "world wide web" and just downloading files by ftp? It's only text and gifs anyway". Yes podcasts are all just mp3s and xml. They're also one hell of a lot more convenient, in the same way that anyone sane would rather go to www.site.com/index.html instead of manually downloading some text with references to half a dozen images and then go hunting down the images it referred to.

Podcast = find a show you like, subscribe. listen.
Audio Download = find a show you like, find how to download it from that particular site, find how often it's updated to know when to check again, download it, move it to your player/audio device, listen.

Admittedly neither is much different to the other for one single download of one episode. or two. perhaps three, but when you find ten separate podcasts you quite like listening to each episode of, you're bound to just throw it in the too-annoying-to-continue-with basket. This kind of automation benefits the listeners who keep getting their shows easily, and the casters themselves who don't have to continually get their audience to go through a rigmarole of steps just to hear the show. Radio doesn't make you do that.

Re:Pah

[Jearil]

it's kind of funny listening to your rant... You've never used iTunes to get podcasts before. This is an obvious statement, else you wouldn't have made such a silly comment.

Apple really did do something good when they added podcasts into iTunes. Since iTunes is basically the only "official" way to get music onto an iPod anyway (and the one used by most people who own one), the whole podcast thing is made completely simple. You find a podcast in iTunes.. anyone can get their podcast in there, it doesn't take a license agreement or anything with apple, just an available feed that you tell them about. Every time you load up iTunes to resync your iPod, it automatically goes and downloads any new episodes of all of your podcast subscriptions. No bookmarks, no checking back on each one at different web sites for each one (imagine checking 20 websites a day, all for a different podcast, just to see if one updated). Just load up iTunes, update all of your podcasts, update your iPod, and you're good to go. I know on a mac anyway just plugging in the iPod will do all of those steps for you, as usually the default action to an iPod being plugged in is to run iTunes and update it.

Now granted, the end result of automatic podcast updates through iTunes will get you the same as if you went to those 20 different sites and downloaded sperate mp3 files from each and manually put them all onto your iPod (or other mp3 player I suppose), but it's not as easy. And this is where you sound the most silly.

It's exactly the same thing with a distribution method tacked on.

Well DUH! That's the key! Distribution methods are super important, that's what the grandparent was pointing out! Who wants to go and download each element of all web pages you travel to as all of their seperate components and put them together themselves when you can just use a web browser that does all of that for you? An easy distribution method will make a technology go from something that's "neat" that a bunch of geeks will toy with, to something that the general population will jump on.

Re:Pah

[baryon351]

Oh wow, I thought it was just a low-bitrate audio file, but apparently it will magically appear on my iPod without my knowledge! Oh, what's that? You still have to figure out how to find it the first time, (evidently some people have never heard of bookmarks) download it, you still have to check back periodically, barring an RSS feed (which AFAIK still wouldn't get the file for you, just give you notification and/or a link), and copy it to my iPod...

No. You don't get it. You don't have to go find it and download it, You don't have to check back periodically, you don't have to copy it to your iPod, you don't have to bookmark anything, yes it does magically appear on your iPod. You do have to figure out how to find it the first time, but hey. if you can't find something by typing in a search term on the iTunes Music Store and clicking "subscribe" you've probably already been institutionalized.

As you hinted at by saying "barring an RSS feed" that's just what the xml side of a podcast is. an RSS feed that podcasting software (like iTunes) takes, and then does everything you need automagically.

Plugging the iPod in to charge it kickstarts all the syncing behind your back. Yes, magic, once you've done that first step of finding a podcast you like and going "ooh. I like that" and clicking subscribe. Done. Nothing else to be bothered about except listening to it.

Re:Pah

[Anonymous Coward]

audio download? how lame. why not call it what it has been called for over 7 years now...

internet radio or webradio.

podcasting is kind of funny to me. 2600 and other have been doing it for much longer than podcasting has even been thought of.

what kills me is the lamer Adam Curry still tries to claim ownership of it. Yay a washed up hasbenn VJ that is trying to hijack something that has existed for a long time now.

Re:Pah

[Rude Turnip]

Apple didn't invent the word "podcast." As to what "should" or "should not" be part of a language, that wreaks of the same elitism that leads the French government to have a ministry of language. Language is what the people speak, period. Language is descriptive, not proscriptive.

Including rootkit would be more consistent

[dascandy]

> ... but we found that not enough people were using it, or were even familiar with the concept ...

Thanks to Sony and the like, there are more than enough people running a rootkit, so include the word already...

New Oxford Japanese Dictionary

[Alain Williams]

I guess no one needs to know what a rootkit is.

Needed in the Japanese version for the Sony employees (music/CD division).

Why does podcasting need its own word?

[tpgp]

It's just a webcast you can save.

There's nothing particularly special about it.

Re:Why does podcasting need its own word?

[NevDull]

What the fuck is a webcast?

If you're going to be cynical, be properly cynical and stop using words that sound like buzzwords but mean absolutely nothing.

A podcast is an RSS feed with the URL of an audio file in each entry.

Re:Why does podcasting need its own word?

[spot35]

Probably just feeding the troll but here goes anyway...

It's less words. It's entered the public consciousness as Podcast. Apparently, "birthplace", "bump", "torture", "olympian", and "mountaineer" weren't discrete words till Shakespeare coined them and they entered the public consciousness.

Remember, language is a forever mutating beast and will continue to do so, whether you like it or not.

Re:Why does podcasting need its own word?

[toleraen]

Yes, indeed, why create more words? There are already too many words out there! Less words would be doubleplusgood!

Re:Why does podcasting need its own word?

[NevDull]

Podcasting isn't a "webcast" that you can save. It's not streamed, it's downloaded. ...and webcast is an emptier word than podcast.

Re:Why does podcasting need its own word?

[AndersOSU]

Mod parent up that is a interesting link...

I was dismayed to learn that Shakespeare coined the odious terms marketable and gossip, but all is well because he also apparently gave us addiction, aroused, zany and puking - four words I couldn't have made it through college without.

Re:Why does podcasting need its own word?

[tpgp]

1. Rhymes with broadcast. The idea behind most podcasts was that it was a way for people to distribute their audio content (music, opinions and other ramblings) without having access to a radio station.

Broadcast, podcast, webcast all rhyme, they all end with cast.

2. Many people download podcasts so they can listen to them on their portable music player.

I agree - but so what?

3. The most popular portable music player today is the iPod

Riiiiiiight. But again, so what?

4. iTunes is one of the most popular delivery methods for distributing podcasts

Raises eyebrows in astonishment!

Are you sure about that? I thought iTunes was a client?

5. Finally, it is easier to say "podcast" than it is "audio webcast you can save".

Erm, my point was why not just call it a webcast?

$sys$ROOTKIT

[digitaldc]

Now noone will ever know what a rootkit is.

FYI, if you anagram Podcast, you can come up with 'Stop a CD'

Other Technical Words..

[Digital Warfare]

I always wondered why other technical words such as "bollocks" never made it in..

Rootkit is in the New Oxford American Dictionary..

[Afecks]

..you just can't see it ;)

Excuse me?

[springbox]

It's just a fad word for downloading audio from the Internet. This pretty much summarizes it. How did it get added to the dictionary so fast? It's not even generic - it was created in part based on a modern day product. If anything, it should be going into a slang reference guide not a dictionary.

Re:Excuse me?

[SandSpider]

Specifically, it's a word for downloading binary content (generally large binary content, usually audio, video) from the internet in a way that doesn't require active user intervention after subscribing, using a pull model rather than a push model. So emailing an MP3 would not be a podcast, because it's a push technology, but if you use a pull technology such as RSS, Atom, or some manner of SOAP application to direct the download, then it would be a podcast. (Of course, people misuse the word, so it may become more generic than that, but properly, it's as I've written above).

The point is that it's such an easier interface for the end user that it has become popular in its own rights. Technically, television is movies, just in your home and not in a movie theatre, but that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be another word describing it because the interface is different.

And what's with the attitude that a dictionary is some sort of sacred document that should only include words that you think means something special? Is it the third-grade teacher mentality, which says that "ain't" isn't a word, despite its common usage? The great thing about dictionaries is that they can include all forms of words, and give you the proper instances for use. In the example above, the Oxford English Dictionary says:

ain't - informal contraction of
  am not; are not; is not : if it ain't broke, don't fix it. [ORIGIN: originally representing London dialect.]
  has not; have not : they ain't got nothing to say. [ORIGIN: from dialect hain't.]

USAGE The use of ain't was widespread in the 18th century and is still perfectly normal in many dialects and informal contexts in both North America and Britain. Today, however, it does not form part of standard English and should not be used in formal contexts.

A proper dictionary should include words that people want to understand the definition of. If everyone is using the word podcast, and you don't know what it is, a dictionary might be a good place to look it up, especially nowadays when dictionary information is available online so can be distributed faster.

=Brian

Re:Excuse me?

[BodhiCat]

It's not even generic - it was created in part based on a modern day product. If anything, it should be going into a slang reference guide not a dictionary.

There are many words in the English language that started out as brand names. Common examples are kleenex and band-aid. Its not surprising that words based on brand names for computer hardware, software, or processes have made it into the Oxford dictionary.

Re:Product word?

[Duckz]

It's no different than Google being in the dictionary.

Re:What!?

[1u3hr]

I can't believe podcasting got into the dictionary before rootkit did!

Results 1 - 10 of about 74,600,000 for podcast.

Results 1 - 10 of about 8,480,000 for rootkit. So obviously podcast has more currency, and I think in the non-tech media the ratio would be much higher.

You are oh so right....

[spectrokid]

I guess no one needs to know what a rootkit is."
No, no non-techies should have to know about this. They ought to live in a world where it is ok to listen to a CD you bought legally in a normal shop.

podcast or blogcast?

[hutteman]

I guess Microsoft employees can now stop calling them blogcasts

Different Strokes

[scottennis]

I always thought "podcasting" sounded like a euphemism for masturbation.

Re:Product word?

[nycguy]

Aspirin, escalator, elevator and zipper were all trademarked words originally, but are now considered generic names. Kleenex is another good example, though "facial tissue" is their way of trying to keep their name from becoming genericized.

News (at least for me)

[trollable]

In the USA, words are created by companies.

Re:What!?

[Big Nothing]

True, but if you wanna play the numbers-game:

Only approximately 4.5 million users will be using podcasts by the end of 2005.

Up to 24 million users may be infected by the SONY rootkits. In addition, there ARE other rootkits out there...

Ah, well - I just felt like being a smart-ass.

Depends which country

[nighty5]

Not so the US, but the word 'root' in Australia is slang to have sex.

Rootkit - sounds like some sort of fuckfest preparation guide!

Dictionaries don't OFFICIALLY make things words.

[httpamphibio.us]

Dictionaries just report on current usage of groups of letters that have meaning. They don't officiate anything. That's one of the problems with things like acrostics and Scrabble, they don't care if things are actually words or not, just that they are in the dictionary. There is a vast portion of language that manifests itself in words that has never and will never be in the dictionary.

Re:What!?

[geoffspear]

6 billion people this year will be affected by flurgamistophon, and none of them know what it means.

Podcasting is a temporary solution

[GauteL]

.. to the iPod and most other mp3-players not having any radio tuner or internet access when you are on the road.

When iPods and other mp3-players have constant Internet access, "podcasting" will be about as common as people taping radio feeds on their cassette deck to play later. Hardly something requiring a new word.

Re:Could you please clarify?

[arose]

It's an RSS feed that links to audio files instead of articles, if you subscribe to it with a compatible client it automaticly downloads the audio files.