Comedian dishes on why people are flocking to podcasts for their information
Cook has been a stand-up comedian for over 15 years, and her most recent special, "Mark Your Territory," premiered on Hulu and YouTube on Feb. 11.
The main reason she believes people are turning to podcasts over mainstream media boils down to a lack of trust and relatability between the mainstream media and the public.
"I think people are starting to get more of their political information from podcasts because I think people want to feel like they can trust the interviewer more. And oftentimes, podcasters are people who present as just like, 'I am one of you,'" said Cook. "Especially if it's a comedian, it feels very like, this is a person who's just like us."
She also noted that people have a much easier time relating to comedians and podcasters, who typically present themselves as everyday people, than they would a politician or news anchor.
"This [podcaster] isn't another politician or maybe a news anchor that we don't necessarily relate to as much. And so I think that's kind of why people have turned more to podcasts for not just feeling like they trust the host more, but also, it's like a very different interview environment," said the comedian. "I think the things that are being talked about are a little more laid back. Feels like potentially a more authentic interview than on a major news source."
The 2024 election cycle put this idea of the public trusting podcasters over legacy media into the spotlight, with President Donald Trump and Vice President J.D. Vance allocating large portions of their time on the campaign trail to appearing on popular podcasts such as the Joe Rogan Experience and the Tim Dillon Show.
This strategy paid off, with Trump winning the popular vote in 2024 and continuing to see his approval ratings at personal all-time highs after the election.
Cook also touched on comedy becoming a freer medium than it ever has been, with comics having the ability to say whatever they want — whether they're on-stage or in the podcast studio — and find an audience who's interested in what they say. As Cook explained, there are no longer gatekeepers who are able to mediate what comics are able to convey to their audiences.
"I do think that comedy's become a more free medium. I think more than ever, people have been able to find their own fan base, and it doesn't necessarily have to be like, you don't have to be everybody's cup of tea," Cook claimed. "I think it is becoming very free where people can kind of do what they want, say what they want, and their fans will find them."
As far as stand-up comedy, Cook feels that the biggest reason for its recent surge in popularity was the COVID-19 pandemic, which resulted in people paying more attention to social media and streaming services than ever before.
"I think the thing that's probably helped comedy explode the most was probably the pandemic. You know, everybody was inside on their phones watching TV, watching their phone, and that became a time for comics to make as much content as you could because there was such a demand for it," said Cook.
The end of the pandemic was the beginning of the touring boom for stand-ups, according to Cook. Many people who found their favorite comedians via social media and streaming services during the lockdowns were finally able to see their favorite acts in person.
"I think you saw people finding their new favorite comics over the pandemic, and then once things opened back up and people could start touring again, people were like, 'great, this person's coming to my city, I've been cooped up inside for however long now, I want to go out and do stuff.' And so I think a lot of us saw a big touring boom, especially once people could go out and kind of resume normal life again."
According to Pollstar, revenue from stand-up shows had doubled from 2022 to 2024, with the combined gross revenue among the top 25 comedians during the past year being $582.7 million.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
12 minutes ago
- USA Today
Taylor Swift on 'New Heights': Live updates with timestamps
It's finally happening! Taylor Swift is officially making her first appearance on boyfriend Travis Kelce's popular podcast New Heights — alongside brother Jason Kelce — on Wednesday. The episode was teased on Monday morning by New Heights with an image for a special podcast episode featuring a familiar-looking silhouette before the pop star was officially revealed as a guest Monday night with a hilarious first-look clip. A lot has happened since then. Early Tuesday morning, Swift revealed the title of her newest album — The Life of a Showgirl — after a mysterious countdown on her website led to a storefront to preorder the upcoming record. New Heights even shared the video of the announcement first from their social channels and it seems as if fans will get to hear a lot of talk about Swift's 12th album on the forthcoming episode. And now, the moment is finally here. All the excitement, the theories and buildup have led to this! As Swift appears on the New Heights podcast alongside Travis Kelce for the first time, here are all the best moments from the show live from the episode's debut. New countdown appears on Taylor Swift's website ahead of New Heights episode There's always another wrinkle and another secret with Swift and her music. Ahead of Wednesday's New Heights, episode a fresh countdown appeared with a door and now four colored locks that began to appear throughout the day. What this means is anyone's guess, but fans are wondering if it could lead to the announcement of an Eras Tour documentary, as the keyhole for the locks are shaped like the stage from the tour. Will Taylor Swift reveal the new album cover for The Life of a Showgirl? Given that Taylor Swift held up a physical — but blurred out for video — copy of her newest album, it seems very possible that we'll get the full reveal of the cover for The Life of a Showgirl on Wednesday's show. What time is the Taylor Swift New Heights episode dropping? The episode is set to drop at 7 p.m. ET on YouTube and on all audio podcasting platforms!
Atlantic
13 minutes ago
- Atlantic
The Awkward Adolescence of a Media Revolution
There's a quiet revolution in how millions of Americans decide what's real. Trust is slipping away from traditional institutions—media, government, and higher education—and shifting to individual voices online, among them social-media creators. The Reuters Institute reports that this year, for the first time, more Americans will get their news from social and video platforms—including Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, TikTok, and X—than from traditional outlets. According to Pew Research, one in five adults now regularly turns to influencers for news. For anyone who cares about credible information, this is a potentially terrifying prospect. Social media rewards virality, not veracity. Spend five minutes scrolling TikTok or Instagram and you might encounter influencers 'educating' you about a global elite running the world from 'hidden continents' behind an 'ice wall' in Antarctica, or extolling the virtues of zeolite, 'a volcanic binder for mold' that will 'vacuum clean all kinds of toxins' to lift brain fog, prevent cancer, and remove microplastics from testicles. (Link to purchase in bio.) It's an environment perfectly engineered to scale both misinformation and slick grifts. And yet the popular notion that social media is just a dumpster fire of viral lies misses something vital: Millions of people still care about truth. They are seeking facts on social media from credible voices they can trust. They just aren't always sure where to find it or from whom. I know because I interact with these people every day. I was among the first independent journalists to bring news reporting to Instagram; today my outlet, News Not Noise, spans Instagram, YouTube, a podcast, Substack, and other platforms. In my years of directly engaging with an on-platform audience, the question I receive more than any other remains simply, 'Is this true?' I'm here to tell you the truth isn't dead. Thousands of people like me operate online as what I call 'evidence-based creators.' We're journalists and specialists who use expertise, original reporting, and reliable sources to refute misinformation, add context to breaking news, and answer the endless questions flooding our DMs. The topics we cover range from redistricting to medical misinformation, beauty fads to whether that viral health-food trend might actually kill you. The work is an uphill battle. My cohort is not John Oliver–level media personalities with PR teams, production crews, and a research staff to fact-check the punch lines. We are independent voices operating without safety nets. I like to think of us as the digital equivalent of artisanal chefs working in a factory for mass-produced junk food. The very things that make us valuable—our obsession with facts, our commitment to nuance, our hours spent answering audience questions in the apps—put us at a profound disadvantage in the attention economy. What does it take to produce a slick video claiming that beef tallow is nature's Viagra? Fifteen minutes with an iPhone and zero regard for reality. While we're still sourcing assertions and trying to make complex ideas both accurate and engaging, the bullshit factory has already pumped out six more viral falsehoods. Our secret weapon isn't production value or algorithm hacking; it's trust. When I debunk a viral lie, I'm not a faceless institution. I'm the person who's been with my audience while they brush their teeth every morning, the person who's been in their ears during commutes, the person whose face they've studied through hundreds of 90-second windows into complex issues. This isn't an audience of passive consumers. They're hungry for more—more reporting on more topics, more conversations with experts, more explanations that break things down but don't treat an audience like idiots. 'Can the Supreme Court disbar an attorney?' 'Will the military disobey unconstitutional orders?' 'Do I need another measles vaccine as an adult?' All of this leaves evidence-based creators in a strange limbo. We're clearly valued; Substack, for instance, is proving that audiences are willing to stop scrolling and financially support 'verifiers' they trust. But we're still largely disconnected from the resources and collaborative frameworks that could multiply our impact. We're working so hard at the work itself that we have little opportunity to build the scaffolding required to create a durable new model in digital publishing—one that includes tools such as high-powered marketing and growth engines to reach new audiences, editorial oversight to help with difficult judgment calls, and shared research that would prevent each of us from having to build expertise from scratch with every breaking story. I see this obstacle as an opportunity. History shows us that industries facing technological disruption tend not to simply collapse—they transform. Look at what happened to the music industry when Spotify and its streaming cohort crashed the party. In the old days, musicians lived and died by album sales and radio play, with major labels acting as gatekeepers. Then streaming blew the doors off. The revolution was messy. Many artists found themselves with more listeners than ever but paychecks that wouldn't cover a month's worth of ramen. What helped the music industry find its footing wasn't nostalgia for CDs or vinyl. It was new infrastructure: playlist curation that helped listeners find their next obsession, analytics tools that told artists who was actually listening, distribution services that got music onto platforms, and business models that went beyond streaming royalties to include direct-to-fan revenue and merchandising. Artists still face challenges, but now labels are investing heavily in data to understand trends, offering artists different types of deals, and using their marketing muscle to help artists cut through the digital noise. The industry evolved by creating tools that complemented streaming algorithms instead of fighting them—helping artists understand their audiences, not just pray for a decent playlist placement. In our current information ecosystem, we're stuck in the awkward adolescence of a media revolution. The need for innovation couldn't be more urgent. Local newspapers are dying like mall food courts— 2,500-plus have shut down since 2005. Traditional media outlets are under assault by the Trump administration. And AI is flooding us with convincing fake content, making human truth tellers all the more necessary. Conversations about the press and the tech revolution often get stuck on the problems with or the inadequacy of any solution. It's time that changed. So I'll take the leap and propose some imperfect innovations. First, audiences could benefit from an independent, off-platform certification system to help them discern which independent voices adhere to journalistic standards. Not to be all 'Papers, please' about it, but audiences need signals about who's committed to accuracy versus who's just chasing likes. One solution: a nonprofit voluntary opt-in LEED-type certification that awards something like a blue check mark—but vetted far more rigorously—to creators who use agreed-upon trusted sources, check their facts, and reveal when their content is sponsored. I'm aware that any credentialing system risks backlash from those suspicious of 'gatekeeping.' But people shouldn't be disparaged for 'doing their own research' if they aren't offered the tools to tell reality from fiction. Second, evidence-based creators need support. Imagine a fractional-ownership model where like-valued creators buy into a shared professional framework. With an economy of scale, we could collectively share in things such as legal protection and sophisticated audience-development tools designed specifically for evidence-based content. We could sign sponsors who understand the unique value of trusted voices. We could offer bundled subscriptions to help audiences find more of us at once. This could create sustainable revenue streams without compromising integrity. Finally, legacy media, please stop viewing creators as a threat. We don't have to be competitors—we can be the connective tissue between trusted journalism and the platforms where people now consume most of their information. Traditional media outlets can stay relevant in the new digital reality by partnering with us. But first, it'd help if they'd allow for the possibility that what's happening isn't just the death of an old system—it's the messy, complicated birth of a new one. And like a newborn, it needs more than good intentions in order to thrive.
The Hill
42 minutes ago
- The Hill
NIH cancels mRNA vaccine contracts, citing lack of public trust
National Institutes of Health Director Jay Bhattacharya claims the federal government recently cancelled millions of dollars' worth of mRNA research contracts because the general public does not trust the technology. Bhattacharya explained the reason behind the abrupt contract cancellations, first, during an episode of Republican political strategist Steve Bannon's podcast 'War Room' last week and again in an opinion piece recently published in The Washington Post. In the article, Bhattacharya called the mRNA platform a 'promising technology' and acknowledged that it may lead to breakthroughs in treatment for diseases like cancer. 'But as a vaccine intended for broad public use, especially during a public health emergency, the platform has failed a crucial test: earning public trust,' he wrote. 'No matter how elegant the science, a platform that lacks credibility among the people it seeks to protect cannot fulfill its public health mission.' Bhattacharya's explanation for the administration's pivot away from mRNA technology differs from that of his boss, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Kennedy announced last week the agency would wind down its mRNA vaccine development activities under the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) and cancel $500 million worth of contracts related to the technology. He said that mRNA technologies funded during the pandemic failed to meet current scientific standards and that the federal government would shift its focus to whole-virus vaccines and novel platforms. Bhattacharya expressed concern in the article about mRNA vaccines' ability to direct human cells to produce spike proteins to trigger an immune response. He argues the scientific community does not have a clear understanding of where mRNA product stays in the body, for how long, and whether other proteins are created in the process. Scott Hensley, a microbiology professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Perelman School of Medicine, told STAT that these are also issues with vaccines that use live but weakened viruses like the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine, which federal health agencies have deemed safe and effective. 'This is why we complete human clinical studies before vaccines are widely used in humans,' he told the outlet. 'The mRNA and live attenuated vaccine platforms have both proven to be safe and effective in clinical trials.' He blamed public distrust in mRNA on the Biden administration's COVID-19 vaccine mandates during the pandemic. Bhattacharya expressed concern in the article about mRNA vaccines' ability to direct human cells to produce spike proteins to trigger an immune response. He argues the scientific community does not have a clear understanding of where the mRNA product stays in the body, for how long, and whether other proteins are created in the process. 'Science isn't propaganda,' he wrote. 'It's humility. And when public health officials stopped communicating with humility, we lost much of the public, an absolute necessity for any vaccine platform.'
