Two Podcast Episodes That Changed My Life This Week

From an avid podcast consumer

Podcasts really rose to the occasion during the pandemic, being a sort of entertainment that didn’t require our eyeballs to be glued to a screen. You can crochet, do laundry, take a leisurely stroll while getting to listen to all of your favourite content.

Moreover, for the longest time, podcasts were spread by word of mouth rather than by algorithm. While algorithms are useful, in every instance of algorithms being implemented, we get a version of clickbait — where creators try to use snatchy titles to grab attention but deliver average to poor content.

That’s why the word-of-mouth type advertising that serves as a backbone to this content format is so valuable to me, as a consumer. While Spotify has now taken over a portion of the podcasting space and is offering algorithmically generated suggestions, most of the recommendations that happen still come from friends and family.

And I love that.

I’m ready to keep this tradition alive, even though the space is becoming more of a hybrid between user-suggested vs. algorithm-suggested episodes.

Here are two podcast episodes that really changed how I thought about the world this week that I would love others to get a chance to listen to.

Diving into the world of slow TV with Invisibilia

Invisibilia has been an all-time favourite podcast of mine, and their new season has been amazing. This specific episode goes in the exact opposite direction of the stories they usually tell.

Invisibilia is known for telling stories, narratives from specific topics surrounding anything related to humanity. And this piece, though narrative, talks about non-narrative content: slow TV.

They discuss the concept of Norwegian “slow TV”, which could be anything from 10 hours of a train ride to 15 hours on a boating and fishing trip. No narrative. No plotline. Just calm, slow TV.

It sounds incredibly boring, right?

That’s what I thought too. Yet, before I’d discovered this episode and that Norway had absorbed this concept into their regular programming, I’ve watched countless “voiceover”-less cooking vlogs, like Hanse’s channel.

There’s something calming to just seeing something unfold in its natural pace in front of you, without having to constantly think about, interact or comment about things.

And maybe that’s the break we all need this summer.

Reflection/Writing Prompts: What genres of TV or videos do you watch? Are they narrative-heavy? What are the topics? Where might “slow-TV” fit into your day? Do you find that you spend every moment of your day creating and/or consuming something perfectly packaged for consumption? Do you ever just create just for the sake of creating?

What “likeability” really means in the workplace

This podcast episode from Lifekit was eye-opening, and gave me words to describe the intricacy of my experiences with racism and sexism.

And the stakes of that scorecard are even higher in the workplace. Because “any time you, as a woman, advocate for yourself in the workplace, you are asking yourself, ‘Is the thing that I am potentially getting worth the potential trade-off in likeability?’ “ says Menendez. “Because likeability isn’t just who sits next to you at lunch. It’s also about who is seen as a person who is on a path to success. And so those trade-offs are very real.” Episode transcript

Being evaluated on “likeability” is such a slippery slope, and often is a metric that is so highly influenced by internal biases. But, because it’s not a direct insult to someone’s sex, gender, race, etc., it’s often something not reportable.

In fact, if you speak to people who are less aware about their own biases, they can often tell you it’s all in your head, or that you’re simply “jealous”. The most ironic is when this message is delivered by allies who celebrate publically how much anti-racism work they’re doing, but internally gaslight your experiences with microaggressions.

The damage that conflicting messages about “likeability” also points to how ineffective feedback regarding it are for people who receive it. I’ve just as often been told that “I’m too warm and soft” as I’d been told “to smile more” as a way to increase likeability. It’s a slippery slope to ask the person receiving this “likeability” judgment to change for whoever is judging when that judgment builds on a foundation for aspects that the recipient cannot change.

The damage of being rated on “likeability” when what you’re actually rated on is “whether or not you fit gender or racial stereotypes” or “how well you can hide being ‘different’” is that the metric slips and slides around.

Reflection/Writing Prompts: When you provide feedback, you reflect on where that feedback comes from? What evidence supports the feedback you’re about to give? Would you give the exact same feedback if this person was another gender or race? How often do you use “likeability” as a way to measure your interactions with others? How much of that is motivated by bias? Be honest with yourself.

These two podcasts really changed my view on two vastly different topics this week, and that’s what I like about podcasts. They’re often well-researched and have high production value, discussing topics that you never thought you’d be interested in, but expand your understanding of the world.

What podcasts are you currently listening to and which ones do you recommend? I’m currently searching for more recommendations!

Hi I’m Lucy Dan 蛋小姐 (she/her/她) and I love podcasts, food and writing ❤ Feel free to tag me in your responses to this article or to submit your written piece to The Brain is a Noodle!

Hop down the rabbit hole? 🐰🕳

^ by Pablo Pereyra