This article was converted by SimpRead; the original source is mp.weixin.qq.com
Over the past two years, finding compelling topics for Podcast Zhi (Podcast Chronicle) has grown increasingly difficult. After producing podcasts for a long time, it feels like most worthwhile subjects have already been covered—and some feel utterly out of reach. When uncertain about what to do next, revisiting the past often proves a fruitful choice.
While reflecting on the past, I suddenly realized that discussing the internal contradictions within podcasting over these years would make for a fascinating topic. History always advances through the interplay of opposition and unity—and podcasting is no exception. Many insights can only be captured by those who have remained continuously immersed in the industry. Though perhaps not fully objective or precise, this perspective aims to help you see a more three-dimensional podcasting world.
Beijing School vs. Shanghai School
In the early days, top-tier podcasts such as Secret Talks Inside the Forbidden City and Ri Tan Park were predominantly based in Beijing. Around 2020, with the launch of Xiaoyuzhou (Little Universe), programs like Left or Right? and Random Fluctuations emerged as a new force—often associated with Shanghai. These two groups differed significantly in thematic focus and format: Beijing-based shows tended toward casual conversation and everyday life topics, whereas Shanghai-based ones leaned toward deep discussion and public-interest themes. Gradually, a distinction arose between the “Beijing School” and the “Shanghai School” (or alternatively, the “Northern School” and “Southern School”). Although many hosts labeled as part of the “Shanghai School” actually reside in Beijing, this convenient shorthand has gained broad acceptance.
This subtle listener mindset was quite common at the time: Listeners of “casual chat” (Beijing School) shows often listened quietly and rarely shared actively; whereas listeners of “deep-discussion” (Shanghai School) shows were more inclined to showcase their listening records on social media. In a sense, podcasting isn’t merely content consumption—it has also become a form of identity expression. These discussions aren’t about geography, but rather about whether podcasting should function as a companion medium or an opinion-driven medium.
This nuanced mindset is likewise reflected in commercialization. (Of course, commercialization is a complex issue involving many dimensions—not limited solely to content.) Judging purely by outcomes, Shanghai-school podcasts rely more heavily on branded podcasts and enjoy greater media exposure, while Beijing-school podcasts depend more on paid subscriptions and offline events—spreading largely via word-of-mouth among listeners. The Shanghai School boasts stylistic flair; the Beijing School excels in audience stickiness. During this exploratory phase—where monetization pathways remain unclear—natural, subtle factional divisions inevitably emerged among programs.
Depth / Dialogue vs. Live / News
This Beijing–Shanghai dichotomy lasted only briefly. First, over time, both sides found their respective ecological niches; second, the emergence of several breakout podcasts rendered such distinctions increasingly irrelevant. Instead, people began asking: What truly qualifies as a podcast? Discussions around podcast formats intensified. Among them, comedy podcasts recorded live with audiences—epitomized by Comic Chat Society (hereinafter “ComiChat”)—deserve special mention.
Since the concept of “podcast” first emerged, debates over its definition have never ceased: Are classic Guo Degang crosstalk performances or Qiang Qiang San Ren Xing (“Three Men on a Talk Show”) considered podcasts? What about radio dramas—frequently discussed within the industry as potential podcasts? There remains no definitive answer. ComiChat’s arrival reignited this debate. Listeners don’t particularly care whether a program “counts” as a podcast—as long as it’s enjoyable and engaging. For hosts, however, the emergence of new formats may provoke anxiety and uncertainty.
ComiChat’s paid program priced at ¥129, discounted to ¥99
(Image source: Jingzhe Youth)
This anxiety stems from three sources:
First, data: Launched in late 2019, ComiChat saw rapid subscriber growth, quickly becoming a focal point for podcast attention. Though many comedy podcasts have existed for years, during that period—when overall podcast metrics remained relatively flat—sudden virality of a new show stood out sharply.
Second, barriers to entry: A live-audience recording seems simple—just adding listeners to the venue—but in reality, the bar is high. Hardware-wise, a stable, sizable venue is required; software-wise, dedicated operations staff are needed for audience recruitment and on-site management. Hosts must possess not only expressive ability but also comedic talent and interactive skills. Especially given the current lack of profitability in commercial operations, so far only stand-up comedy clubs appear capable of meeting all these requirements.
Third, definitional concerns: Regardless of whether listeners perceive the content of a comedy podcast as sincere, most hosts are professional stand-up comedians who consciously—or unconsciously—perform for effect. Does this contradict podcasting’s core emphasis on authenticity?
Xiaoyuzhou’s (Little Universe) Top Hot List on a weekday
(Screenshot date: May 28)
Similar to anxieties triggered by comedy podcasts, news-oriented programs—including Sound Dynamic Morning Coffee and News at 7 a.m.—also stirred concern and confusion. Through frequent updates and consistent information curation, news podcasts rapidly established user habits. Unlike the formal disruption brought by comedy podcasts, news podcasts dominate rankings—repeatedly appearing daily atop platform charts, thereby reducing visibility for other shows and naturally generating dissatisfaction. The strongest collective hope among creators is for platforms to eventually launch a dedicated ranking list exclusively for news podcasts.
Authenticity vs. Pretense
If anxieties sparked by comedy and news podcasts pertain mainly to content forms and creative approaches, then as podcasting further entered the mainstream, industry tensions evolved. With capital, brands, and individuals seeking monetization flooding in, a new dichotomy—“authenticity” versus “pretense”—emerged. Previously, regardless of format, podcast creators prioritized content and consistently produced thoughtful episodes. But this new wave cares less about content itself—and more about leveraging podcasts to build IPs and monetize quickly. Wanting to earn money is perfectly fine; the question lies in whether methods employed are legitimate. The most widely known case involved a host who preemptively registered trademarks for multiple podcast studios. Even before this incident surfaced, a certain undercurrent of tension had already been circulating across the industry.
In 2021, Kuaishou’s “P艇” (Pitong), Baidu’s “Suiyin” (Follow Sound), and Qingting FM’s “Podcast Archipelago” launched. In early 2022, Tencent Music Entertainment (TME) invested in Ri Tan Park, JustPod, and Sound On. Once a niche medium, podcasting started gaining broader recognition—and the term “Year Zero” began appearing frequently. Many platforms intensified efforts toward podcast monetization. Against the backdrop of booming livestream e-commerce, the idea of “selling products via podcasts” began surfacing, with numerous hosts exploring its viability.
The true crux of controversy has never been whether to sell products, but rather whether doing so authentically. Listeners don’t oppose commercial partnerships per se—but they do care whether hosts have genuinely used the recommended products, truly derived positive experiences, and balanced commercial messaging against editorial integrity. For a medium built upon companionship and trust, insincere endorsements erode hard-earned credibility. The industry doesn’t object to product promotion itself—but rather questions whether any viable, proven business model has actually been achieved, delivering on promised results.
Looking back, certain platforms must shoulder partial responsibility for issues arising during this period: failing to consider podcasting’s inherent characteristics, naively assuming that livestream e-commerce models—successful on e-commerce platforms—would translate seamlessly to podcasts; adopting an overly hasty mindset; neglecting rigorous selection and support for podcast hosts; and expecting immediate ROI from this nascent channel—ultimately resulting in a “bad money drives out good” scenario.
Amateurs vs. Celebrities
After the bubble burst, celebrity-hosted podcasts—represented by Yang Tianzhen and Li Dan—became the new focal point of discussion. This contrasting mindset does not stem directly from disparities in data or influence vis-à-vis celebrities—even many hosts feel excited when influential figures enter podcasting, viewing it as evidence of industry momentum.
Selected celebrity-hosted podcasts
(Yang Tianzhen, Li Dan, Zhang Zetian, Li Jing, Jolin Tsai, Xie Na)
Yet celebrity podcasts simultaneously disrupted long-standing norms within podcasting: irregular publishing schedules, vague positioning, and unengaging content still earned algorithmic recommendations. This subtly provoked widespread discontent across the ecosystem—especially among newcomers. Previously, diligent topic research and quality content production could secure visibility; today, chart-topping shows are either long-running veterans or inherently high-traffic celebrities. New podcasts face significantly steeper hurdles to discovery—appearing to require either inviting influential guests or specializing in specific formats to break through.
During my research and fact-checking process, I noticed that all non-celebrity podcasts mentioned in this article launched before 2023—suggesting that although podcasting appears to be moving beyond niche status, few breakout programs have emerged recently. On one hand, podcasting’s overall scale may have expanded, making rapid growth for any single show less conspicuous. On the other hand, podcasting may be trending toward decentralization—much like how users struggle to immediately name top influencers on Xiaohongshu (Little Red Book).
For pure amateurs, launching a podcast today is indeed harder than in the early days. It’s advisable to set personal goals—such as practicing expression or documenting daily life. It’s not uncommon for seasoned podcasters to release dozens of episodes yet still record only double-digit play counts.
Life Sharing vs. Cognitive Growth
Image source: 2025 Xiaoyuzhou (Little Universe) Annual Podcast Trends Report
Content focused on cognitive growth is by no means a novel category in podcasting—but it has surged recently. For example, Self-Evolution Theory, launched in 2020, grew its subscriber base from 300,000 to over 2 million in just one year. In 2025, self-growth content ranked #1 in total listening hours across all categories on Xiaoyuzhou. While earlier frustrations often centered on individual programs, this round of discontent targets the format itself.
Where does this dissatisfaction originate? That very question inspired this article. Perhaps the phenomenon is still too recent for clear, systematic analysis—but here are some perspectives voiced on-air or online:
First, excessive focus can lead to misattribution: Many life problems stem not from personal shortcomings nor can they be solved solely by self-improvement. Long-term immersion in such content may instead accumulate stress.
Second, misplaced priorities: Overemphasis on superficial forms distracts from deeper reflection on critical issues—leading people to act busily without knowing whether those actions truly serve their needs.
Third, time wastage: Many self-growth podcasts feature enticing titles but deliver little practical value—yet filtering useful content demands high effort.
Fourth, mixed quality: Consider the infamous “Scholar Cat” incident—a “mind-body-spirit” coach who promoted excessive spending, driving multiple followers into millions of RMB in debt. Many learned about this figure through podcasts—and there exists no reliable standard to assess whether someone possesses genuine expertise in this domain.
Text source: “The Planet of Wealthy Women”: Scholar Cat and Her Students Burdened with Tens of Thousands in Debt, Sanlian Life Weekly
Conclusion
Wherever people gather, there will be a “jianghu” (a metaphorical “martial world” representing complex social dynamics)—and podcasting is no exception. Yet each time I write such a gossip-adjacent feature, I’m reminded: Compared to other industries, podcasting remains remarkably healthy. Though we speak of “opposition,” no actual reporting, cyberbullying, or similar incidents have occurred—only internal industry discourse, with everyone’s focus remaining firmly on content.
Interactive Topic
What do you think podcasting is currently debating?
Jessica, Editor at Podcast Zhi
Podcast Well-Digging Progress Reporter
WeChat ID: fandomxinweixin (Please indicate “podcast” or your affiliation when adding the author)
© Original content by Podcast Zhi. Reproduction requires prior authorization.
Contact Information:
[WeChat Customer Service] podcaster_union
[Submission Email] podcasterunion@163.com
