
How Podcasting Became My Most Powerful Branding Tool (And How to Start Yours)
Podcasting offers a deeper, more personal way to engage audiences while also helping thought leaders grow their influence and network through meaningful guest conversations.
Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.
When I launched my podcast last fall, I saw it as more than just another platform. It was a necessary piece of a larger puzzle — filling a critical gap in how I communicate my message around personal branding and authority-building with CEOs, entrepreneurs, authors and professionals.
Let's face it: business leaders are busy. While they may enjoy reading books, articles and blogs to stay informed and inspired, carving out time to sit down and read can be difficult. But listening? That's another story.
Whether traveling between meetings, commuting or simply taking a break from the screen, audio (and increasingly, video) content fits seamlessly into the rhythms of a busy life. That's one reason podcasts have become such a valuable vehicle for thought leaders who want to meet their audience where they are — and make receiving their message as convenient as possible.
Related: Why Every Entrepreneur Should Consider Starting a Podcast
Why podcasts matter now more than ever
In today's noisy content landscape, podcasts offer something rare: an intimate, distraction-free space to connect. They allow you to speak directly into someone's ears — literally. That level of proximity and attention is hard to replicate elsewhere.
But the power of podcasts isn't just about ease of access. It's about depth. Podcasts allow you to tell stories, explore ideas and share insights in a format that feels personal, unscripted and real. You're not just delivering information — you're building a relationship.
That's especially important for entrepreneurs, authors and executives who want to cultivate authority. Your audience is not just looking for credentials — they're looking for a voice they can trust. Podcasts let your voice, your tone and your personality shine through in a way that text alone can't.
Authenticity is your advantage
The unscripted nature of a podcast helps build a stronger connection between host and listener. Over time, your audience gets to know your cadence, your humor, your quirks — and that breeds familiarity, comfort and trust.
Think about some of history's great communicators. People felt deeply connected to President Franklin D. Roosevelt during his fireside chats — not because they met him in person, but because they heard him speak directly to them in a calm, intimate setting. Similarly, Ronald Reagan's charisma was amplified through his voice and storytelling.
Podcasting can have the same effect. It allows people to feel like they know you — even if they've never met you.
Guests expand your reach — and your credibility
Although solo episodes can be powerful, one of the best ways to boost the value of your podcast is by including guests. When you bring on other experts, you're not only making the conversation more dynamic — you're also expanding your network and credibility.
Your guest's expertise adds weight to your show. And when they share the episode with their own audience, you get exposed to new listeners who may have never discovered you otherwise. In this way, podcasting becomes a two-way street — each person helps elevate the other.
The added bonus? A guest can help carry the conversation, making the episode more engaging and relieving some of the pressure of having to talk solo for an extended period.
Make it a conversation, not an interview
While we often use the word "interview," the goal should be a conversation. You want the dialogue to flow naturally — not feel like a scripted Q&A. Yes, you should prepare. Yes, you should know where you want the discussion to go. But leave room for curiosity, spontaneity and surprise.
This is where the magic happens — where real insights and unexpected moments emerge. And if that means someone stumbles over their words or goes slightly off track? That's okay. It's real. And real is what builds connection.
An easy launch for a big impact
One of the reasons I often recommend podcasting to clients and colleagues is because it's relatively simple to start. You don't need a massive studio or a huge budget. In fact, many people already have the basic tools: a laptop, internet connection, a decent microphone and a quiet, well-lit space.
Video podcasts are growing in popularity, too — and if you're already on Zoom or Teams regularly, you likely have most of the setup required. The bar to entry is low. The opportunity for growth is high.
Related: The Basics of Podcasting and How It Can Grow Your Business
Amplify your thought leadership
For authors in particular, podcasts are a perfect companion to a book. Your podcast allows you to explore topics from the book in greater detail, engage with new perspectives and keep the momentum going long after publication.
More broadly, your podcast can serve as a hub for your intellectual property — a space where you test ideas, refine your message and engage directly with your audience.
A few key questions to guide your show
As you shape your podcast, ask yourself:
Is this insightful and fun?
Does it reflect my personality and values?
Will it move my audience to take meaningful action?
Am I consistently providing unique value?
If you can answer "yes," you're on the right path. You're not just creating content — you're creating connection. You're building a platform that supports your authority and invites others into your world.
In a world where attention is scarce, podcasts offer something different: time, trust and depth. Use it wisely — and your message will go farther than you think.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Forbes
35 minutes ago
- Forbes
Gavin Newsom And Jay Pritzker Offering Red States The Deal Of Lifetime
Government spending saps economic growth, which is no insight. It's stated routinely in my upcoming book The Deficit Delusion that the centralized and politicized allocation of goods, services and labor in sub-optimal fashion by politicians lays a wet blanket on economic growth. What makes the economically enervating nature of government spending worth mentioning is the ongoing debate about state and local taxes, also known as SALT. Governors in high-tax blue states would like to return to the old state of tax play whereby state and local taxes paid could be 100 percent deducted against federal tax bills. Red state citizens should take this gift from people with names like Newsom and Pritzker and run with it. Except that red state politicians are largely balking. So are their citizens. They see unlimited deductibility of state and local taxes as a subsidy of blue state taxpayers, and an incentive for blue states to tax and spend with abandon at a cost to federal tax collections. Their critiques speak to the undeniable good of an unlimited SALT deduction, for red states. To suggest otherwise is to imply that blue states benefit economically from excessive spending, all at the expense of the federal government's ability to spend. Actually, that's a feature of SALT, not a bug. Once again, government spending is economically harmful. The goal for red state politicians should be to localize the certain damage of government spending to the extent they can. Let California, New York, Illinois and New Jersey pursue a lot in the way of economy and freedom-sapping government so that the federal government has fewer dollars to harm the U.S. economy with. It's certainly odd, but not surprising, that blue state governors would clamor for an enhanced ability to further damage their economies with excessive spending born of high taxes. Much odder is that red states aren't taking the blue states up on an arrangement that to some degree erects a fence around economic foolishness. Red state politicians and their citizens yet again claim the SALT deduction subsidizes high-tax and high-spend blue states. More realistically, it subsidizes the red states that want neither. No doubt blue states see excessive taxing and spending in state as advantageous, and it should be obvious to red staters why: the discredited economic vision of John Maynard Keynes lives on most harmfully in blue states. Their politicians almost to a man and woman buy into the Keynesian notion that government spending grows an economy. Quite the opposite. With full deduction of state and local taxes, what an opportunity for red states to show why Keynes was wrong. Within them there's an underlying understanding that a government that does least does best. Which is yet again why red state politicians and voters should eagerly take the deal being offered from their taxing and spending opposites. The deal implies that blue states will foist more Keynes on their people, the red states quite a bit less. What a deal! Unknown is why red state politicians won't accept such a gift unless, of course, they're more wedded to discredited notions of government waste than their limited government rhetoric suggests.


TechCrunch
35 minutes ago
- TechCrunch
Trump administration takes aim at Biden and Obama cybersecurity rules
President Donald Trump signed an executive order Friday that revises and rolls back cybersecurity policies set in place by his Democratic predecessors, Barack Obama and Joe Biden. In a White House fact sheet, the administration claims that Biden's Executive Order 14144 — signed days before the end of his presidency — was an attempt 'to sneak problematic and distracting issues into cybersecurity policy.' Among other things, Biden's order encouraged agencies to 'consider accepting digital identity documents' when public benefit programs require ID. Trump struck that part of the order, with the White House now saying this approach risks 'widespread abuse by enabling illegal immigrants to improperly access public benefits.' However, Mark Montgomery, senior director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies' Center on Cyber and Technology Innovation, told Politico that 'the fixation on revoking digital ID mandates is prioritizing questionable immigration benefits over proven cybersecurity benefits.' On AI, Trump removed Biden's requirements around testing the use of AI to defend energy infrastructure, funding federal research programs around AI security, and directing the Pentagon to 'use AI models for cyber security.' The White House describes its moves on AI as refocusing AI cybersecurity strategy 'towards identifying and managing vulnerabilities, rather than censorship.' (Trump's Silicon Valley allies have complained repeatedly about the threat of AI 'censorship.') Trump's order also removed requirements that agencies start using quantum-resistant encryption 'as soon as practicable.' And it removed requirements that federal contractors attest to the security of their software — the White House describes those requirements as 'unproven and burdensome software accounting processes that prioritized compliance checklists over genuine security investments.' Techcrunch event Save $200+ on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Save $200+ on your TechCrunch All Stage pass Build smarter. Scale faster. Connect deeper. Join visionaries from Precursor Ventures, NEA, Index Ventures, Underscore VC, and beyond for a day packed with strategies, workshops, and meaningful connections. Boston, MA | REGISTER NOW Going back even further, Trump's executive order repeals Obama's policies around sanctions for cybersecurity attacks on the United States; those sanctions can now only be applied to 'foreign malicious actors.' The White House says this will will prevent 'misuse against domestic political opponents' and clarify that 'sanctions do not apply to election-related activities.'


CBS News
39 minutes ago
- CBS News
Sen. Warren asks for contingency plans on national security after Trump and Musk's social media fall out
Sen. Elizabeth Warren is asking Secretary of State Marco Rubio for information on the Trump administration's contingency plans if billionaire Elon Musk breaches his companies' current contracts with the U.S. amid the ongoing public fall out between him and President Trump. In a letter to Rubio as acting national security adviser and obtained by CBS News, Warren said Mr. Trump and Musk's public disagreements about the upcoming reconciliation bill that escalated into a public online spat could "have serious implications for U.S. national security." The Massachusetts Democrat mentioned Mr. Trump's proposal to terminate Musk's government contracts and subsidies, which the world's richest man followed with a threat that SpaceX would "begin decommissioning its Dragon spacecraft immediately." Musk has since walked back his threat. "No petty social media fight between the president and a billionaire should jeopardize U.S. national security," Warren said. In addition to contingency plans for SpaceX, the senator asked for information regarding the impact on U.S. agencies' satellite communications if Musk's Starlink is turned off. Additionally, she asked Rubio to provide any analysis that the Trump administration has conducted "of its authorities and options under the Defense Production Act to address vendor lock, monopolies, or contractor refusal to meet national security needs." She asked to receive answers to her questions by June 14, whether through a classified briefing or preferably a public response that can be released to Congress and the public, the letter said. Warren has been a vocal opponent of Musk and his involvement in the Trump administration. Last week, she released a report that outlines instances her office has found of Musk benefiting from it. Musk's rocket company has received tens of billions of dollars from the federal government over the last decade, including $3.8 billion in the 2024 fiscal year alone, according to federal records. The bulk of those federal grants are from NASA, which has paid SpaceX billions over the last decade to ferry astronauts and supplies to and from the International Space Station. The agency has also awarded SpaceX upwards of $2 billion in recent years to design and build a lunar lander, as part of NASA's Artemis program, which aims to return humans to the moon for the first time in a half-century. While the public spat appears to have cooled somewhat, Mr. Trump told NBC News' Kristen Welker in a phone interview on Saturday that he has no plans to make up with the mega-billionaire. "I'm too busy doing other things," Trump continued. "You know, I won an election in a landslide. I gave him a lot of breaks, long before this happened, I gave him breaks in my first administration, and saved his life in my first administration, I have no intention of speaking to him." When asked by a reporter Friday if he's still considering rolling back subsidies to Musk as a money-saving move, Mr. Trump suggested he was open to it. "He's got a lot of money, he gets a lot of subsidy. So we'll take a look at that," the president said on Air Force One. "Only if it's fair for him and for the country. I would certainly think about it, but it has to be fair." This isn't the first time the president has needled Musk over his companies' federal subsidies. In a 2022 feud, Mr. Trump claimed Musk would be "worthless" without hefty subsidies for "electric cars that don't drive long enough" and "rocketships to nowhere." The two mended their relationship then and Musk spent hundreds of millions to help elect Mr. Trump in 2024. The billionaire went on to lead the Trump White House's cost-cutting Department of Government Efficiency until last week. contributed to this report.