skip to main content
10.1145/3472714.3473622acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesdocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Is There a Transcript?: Mapping Access in the Multimodal Designs of Popular Podcasts

Published:12 October 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Podcasting has grown into an established mode of cultural production, knowledge making, and community building. Though podcasts are commonly designed within multimodal content systems, transcript availability for many podcast series remains uneven. I survey the webpages of 94 English-language podcasts (two each sampled from 47 podcast production networks) in order to measure the availability and findability of official transcripts. With this research, I begin to both investigate the limits of podcasting's practical attention to access and question some of the values, priorities, and assumptions that underly the conventions of podcasting. Transcript availability matters for purposes of inclusion and for the empowerment of audiences who hope to engage with podcasting conversations for scholarship, activism, or coalition-building. This small study forms a foundation from which we can continue building the infrastructure needed to make transcripts more expected and more widely available.

References

  1. Sean Zdenek. 2009. Accessible podcasting: College students on the margins in the new media classroom. Computers & Composition Online. https://seanzdenek.com/article-accessible-podcasting/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Steph Ceraso. 2014. (Re)Educating the senses: Multimodal listening, bodily learning, and the composition of sonic experiences. College English 77.2 pp. 102–123 https://www.jstor.org/stable/24238169Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Mary E. Hocks & Michelle Comstock. 2017. Composing for sound: Sonic rhetoric as resonance. Computers and Composition 43: pp. 135–146 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2016.11.006Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Norman E. Youngblood, Lakshmi N. Tirumala, & Robert Anthony Galvez. 2017. Accessible media: The need to prepare students for creating accessible content. Journalism & Mass Communication Editor 73.3 https://doi.org/10.1177/1077695817714379Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Courtney S. Danforth, Kyle D. Stedman, & Michael J. Faris (Eds.) 2018. Soundwriting Pedagogies. Computers and Composition Digital Press. https://ccdigitalpress.org/soundwritingGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Eric Detweiler. 2019. Sounding out the progymnasmata. Rhetoric Review 38.2, pp. 205–218. doi: 10.1080/07350198.2019.1588567Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Michael J. Faris, Callie F. Kostelich, Tanner Walsh, Sierra Sinor, Michelle Flahive, & Leah Heilig. 2019. 3,000 podcasts a year: Teaching and administering new media composition in a First-Year Writing Program. Proceedings of the Computers and Writing Annual Conference 2019 https://wac.colostate.edu/docs/proceedings/cw2019/chapter6.pdf Accessed 5 July 2021.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Eric Detweiler. 2021. The bandwidth of podcasting. In Tuning in to Soundwriting, edited by Kyle D. Stedman, Courtney S. Danforth, & Michael J. Faris. enculturation/Intermezzo. http://intermezzo.enculturation.net/14-stedman-et-al/detweiler.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Kyle D. Stedman, Courtney S. Danforth, & Michael J. Faris (Eds.). 2021. Tuning in to Soundwriting. enculturation/Intermezzo. http://intermezzo.enculturation.net/14-stedman-et-al/index.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. M. Remi Yergeau, Elizabeth Brewer, Stephanie L. Kerschbaum, Sushil Oswal, Margaret Price, Cynthia L. Selfe, Michael J. Salvo, & Franny Howes. 2013. Multimodality in motion: Disability & kairotic spaces. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy 18.1 https://kairos.technorhetoric.net/18.1/coverweb/yergeau-et-al/index.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Lisa Melançon (Ed). 2013. Rhetorical accessability: At the intersection of technical communication and disability studies. Routledge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Stephanie Kerschbaum. 2015. Anecdotal relations: On orienting to disability in the composition classroom. Composition Forum 32 http://compositionforum.com/issue/32/anecdotal-relations.phpGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Shannon Walters. 2018. A different kind of wholeness: Disability dis-closure and ruptured rhetorics of multimodal collaboration and revision in ‘The Ride Together.’ Composition Forum 39 http://compositionforum.com/issue/39/wholeness.phpGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Matt Wells. 2009. Guardian podcasts: Why no transcripts? The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/help/insideguardian/2009/apr/14/blogpost Accessed 18 May 2021Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Paul Riismandel. 2018. Podcast #129 – Deaf accessibility for podcasts & radio. Radio Survivor Podcast. http://www.radiosurvivor.com/2018/02/13/podcast-129-deaf-accessibility-for-podcasts-radio/ Accessed 20 May 2021.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Joshua Dudley. 2020. Deaf and hard of hearing people are helping to fix the podcast accessibility problem. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/joshuadudley/2020/02/26/deaf-and-hard-of-hearing-people-are-helping-to-fix-the-podcast-accessibility-problem/ Accessed 18 May 2021Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. List of podcasting companies. 2021. Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_podcasting_companies&oldid=1012727076Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Pew Research Center. 2016. Podcasting fact sheet. State of the News Media 2016 Retrieved 21 May 2021. https://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/13/2016/06/30143308/state-of-the-news-media-report-2016-final.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. The Current. 2016. Daily text transcripts of The Current now available. CBC Radio website. https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/daily-text-transcripts-of-the-current-now-available-1.3556910Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. CBC Audience Services. 2018. Will your new website have all the same features? CBC Help Centre https://web.archive.org/web/20180104033810/https://responsive.cbc.ca/hc/en-us/articles/115000322588-Will-your-new-website-have-all-the-same-features- Accessed May 18, 2021.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. CBC Radio. 2019. Thursday June 20, 2019 full transcript. The Current, CBC Radio. Accessed May 18, 2021. https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/anna-maria-tremonti-hosts-her-final-edition-of-the-current-1.5178569/thursday-june-20-2019-full-transcript-1.5183463Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Sean Zdenek. 2018. Designing captions: Disruptive experiments with typography, color, icons, and effects. Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy 23.1 https://kairos.technorhetoric.net/23.1/topoi/zdenek/index.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar

Recommendations

Comments

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Sign in
  • Published in

    cover image ACM Conferences
    SIGDOC '21: Proceedings of the 39th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication
    October 2021
    402 pages
    ISBN:9781450386289
    DOI:10.1145/3472714

    Copyright © 2021 ACM

    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    • Published: 12 October 2021

    Permissions

    Request permissions about this article.

    Request Permissions

    Check for updates

    Qualifiers

    • research-article
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate355of582submissions,61%

PDF Format

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format .

View HTML Format