Again semantics. You are attempting to split hairs based on distribution opposed to type. This is like being a pedant over someone referring to tissues as a Kleenex despite it not being that particular brand. Podcasts were ambiguous back when they were still new, too.
Shoutcast servers were/hosted digital broadcasts. Podcasts were containerized (aka offline) recordings of these. You could argue that calling a live show a podcast is technically incorrect: but thanks to language continuing to adapt to its environment… You’d actually just be out of date or misinformed.
Nor does it prevent it from being a podcast. What prevents it being a podcast is not being distributed as a podcast…
Again semantics. You are attempting to split hairs based on distribution opposed to type. This is like being a pedant over someone referring to tissues as a Kleenex despite it not being that particular brand. Podcasts were ambiguous back when they were still new, too.
Shoutcast servers were/hosted digital broadcasts. Podcasts were containerized (aka offline) recordings of these. You could argue that calling a live show a podcast is technically incorrect: but thanks to language continuing to adapt to its environment… You’d actually just be out of date or misinformed.
This is not semantics. This is not “splitting hairs”. This is not pedantic. How it’s distributed is a fundamental property of what a podcast is.
If it’s not, maybe you can tell me what a podcast is, and how it’s different from a YouTube video?
…why would I do that?
This is not “language adaptation”, this is a complete erosion of the meaning of the word.
We have words for videos, they’re called “videos”, which are fundamentally different from a “podcast”.
Podcast are not necessarily offline. You can stream them.