Q+A: David Plotz, Slate Political Gabfest (+ Book Giveaway!)

A couple weeks ago, Slate editor David Plotz was in Minneapolis to promote Good Book, his new book about reading the bible from cover to cover. (Read to the end of the interview to find out how you can win a signed copy.) As a loyal listener to Slate’s Political Gabfest podcast—you can read my review here—I was eager to get him to talk about his role on the podcast.

Between 40,000 and 60,000 tune into the show every week, and it’s the most popular podcast for the online publication. According to Plotz, about a million Slate podcasts are downloaded each month.

We met in downtown Minneapolis on a snowy late-winter afternoon to talk about why he believes Gabfest listeners are worth 100 typical Slate readers, the challenges of a turning a profit on popular podcasts, and how journalists are going to have to adapt to a new-media environment. He also talked about an intriguing future giveaway on the show.

An excerpt of our conversation is below.

When and why did you start the podcast?
About three years ago. It was just something to try—it wasn’t intended to be me and John [Dickerson] and Emily [Bazelon] doing it. It was going to be a bunch of different lineups. Gradually, because we were all in the Washington office and were very good friends, it all gelled, but it took a while. There was a period of time, six months or something, when it was just a lot of different people doing it.

Can you talk about developing the tone of the show?
None of us, except John, were real aficionados of the talk shows or the cable chat shows. Insofar as we knew them, they seemed removed from the actual conversations that journalists really had.

We thought that the podcast would be a way to present some of that inner life of Slate to an audience. We are produced by Andy Bowers, who is a creator of podcasts. He was an NPR guy for 20 years. He understood, in a way we didn’t, the way people connect to voices. They make emotional connections. We thought it was like writing an article. We didn’t recognize that we were forming a bond with listeners. Gradually, over the last couple of years, we’ve realized that we are in a relationship with the people who listen to us. It’s been incredibly rewarding for all of us. We love to do it. I think it’s because it was a sense that we are actually communicating with people who love Slate and love what we do, and reaching them in a way that they really like.

The audience for podcast is much smaller for the audience for Slate—than an article we would write. On the other hand, it’s people who really love [Slate] and really want to be with it. Those are the best people to be talking to.

When did you realize that the podcast was getting really popular?
It’s been a gradual dawning realization. Over the course of the political campaign it really hit us. We did a [contest] where we decided that we needed a slogan. We asked for listeners to submit a slogan, and we got hundreds of entries. We realized this is a really great crowd. It was like oh, for every person who writes in, there are 10 or 100 who aren’t.

In the course of our lives, John, Emily, and I all have had occasions to do public appearances. We noticed that when we did public appearances that invariably the most fervent people at those public appearances, the people who’d come up and talk to us afterwards, were [Gabfest listeners]. We’d see them in Washington, but beyond that, in Chicago or Seattle or whatever, the same thing would happen. Even if that number, compared to to the size of the audience, is not huge, these are people who matter and want to be wih us. They are a great audience so we want to meet them .

Can you talk about some of your more memorable episodes?
I think that by far the most beloved parts of the podcast have been the parts where we’ve gone off script. It's pretty formatted. But sometimes things wander off. There was one memorable occasion where we’d finished the show, and Bill Smee, who was producing it, turned to Emily right as we finished and said "I can’t believe you said that about John Edwards [with regard to his affair]."

I think all of us realized about five minutes into the shouting that this was good. We’re glad that the tape is running. It was completely spontaneous. Emily was dismayed because she was cursing insanely. She didn’t really want everyone knowing how much she curses. I think people loved that connection. They loved seeing the sausage getting made.

It’s real. People feel like they know you.
I deeply, deeply, deeply value the emotional connection that we make with this audience. They are so smart. They are so engaged. I think for us, as a business, which we are first and foremost, being in touch with that audience [is important]. One pocast listener is worth 100 random other people, just because they will stick with us. They care what we say.

We're sponsored by Audible.com, so one thing we're probably going to do is record [Good Book] in house. We'll make it available [through Audible]—we'll give it to anyone who's a podcast listener—just as a little freebie. We haven't realized it, but this is our basic notion.

It must be nice to have a company like Audible on board.
One of the frustrations we had for a long time is that we sold really crummy ads against [the podcast]. It was all done through some service. We just thought: this is bogus. This is ridiculous. These are educated people, there are a good number [of them], and these are people who buy stuff. They have money and they like us and it’s insane that we don’t monetize that. [During one podcast] we said, look, we need an advertiser. Are you an advertiser? Come contact us. That got a great response. What happened was that galvanized our ad salespeople to get Audible on board.

Right. And as a part of every podcast, you guys talk about books you’re listening to through Audible.
As you know, the always-porous barrier between editorial and advertising is more and more porous. One thing we're working with, which I’m loving, is finding ways for us to sell what we are doing. I’m sure there are lines which I would find uncomfortable, but right now I feel like we are endorsing a product. It’s a product that we all use and we all like, and we’re glad to talk about it. Not only is there no shame in it, but given the environment, it's something that people have to do. I think all journalists are getting accustomed to the idea that there is no Olympian detachment in the business they work anymore. We have to do this. Our work is a business. I’m acutely conscious of this since I’m the editor, moreso, perhaps, than Emily and John are. We have to be willing to sell. If we don’t sell, we don’t have jobs. In the world we’re working, that’s one reason why I’m actively enjoying that our sponsorship is for that.

There are a lot of models out there right now for making money on podcasts: subscriptions, advertising, donations. Will you be making an Ira-Glass-style appeal for donors?
My publisher said we can’t do that, because we’re for-profit. It's different when you are not-for-profit. When you are not-for-profit, I think people think you can [ask for donations]. I’m not sure if they would resent having a tip jar. But I would like that tip jar.

I’d definitely chip in. Thanks, David.

*** Want to win a SIGNED COPY of David Plotz's new book, Good Book? Leave a comment by 3/31/09. I'll pick my favorite and mail the winner a copy. ***