After a while I realized that a fairly amount of podcasts/episodes have pretty low density information throughout say a 3 hours talk. There are those gems where sufficiently good preparedness of the interviewer (e.g. read the book and came prepared with a set of well thought-out notes) is met with a suitable rhetorical skill/confidence of the interviewee.
But, alas, I would lie to myself if I believe podcasts are driven by the above.
Personally, I like to hear interesting people talk, it became much a tilted board, so for some time, now, I've cut down my consumption considerably and try to appreciate it as a digital social treat rather than actually knowledge building (very limited).
For that there must be some large enough "active" part involved and as a mere listener I get too comfy too easily. It is a bit like not writing down your ideas, the moment you commit them to "paper" most of the time they are not so "great" anymore and you realize there is more nuance to it ;)
But, alas, I would lie to myself if I believe podcasts are driven by the above.
Personally, I like to hear interesting people talk, it became much a tilted board, so for some time, now, I've cut down my consumption considerably and try to appreciate it as a digital social treat rather than actually knowledge building (very limited).
For that there must be some large enough "active" part involved and as a mere listener I get too comfy too easily. It is a bit like not writing down your ideas, the moment you commit them to "paper" most of the time they are not so "great" anymore and you realize there is more nuance to it ;)