More than 40% of people surveyed say they get their news from podcasts.

Should publishers block AI bots from stealing content and traffic? Is there an upside?

Podcasting is no longer a scrappy little industry of hobbyists, it's gone mainstream and is evolving.

Getting artificial intelligence companies to pay for access to content seems reasonable. The RSL Collective hopes to pave the way.

Speed demo by Ivan Minutillo, Bonfire maintainer (@[email protected]) at FediForum June 2025. More info: https://fediforum.org/2025-06

Attached: 1 image Just sent out another ask for support for @[email protected]. https://marketingjunto.com/september-premium-subscriber-drive/ If you like the content I'm publishing weekly, please consider a premium subscription. I'd like to make this a revenue generator to fund more endeavors and, well, to feed myself and my family. We're not there yet. But I hope to soon! #Support #SupportIndependentMedia #WillYouSubscribe #Fediverse #Newsletter #Marketing #DigitalMarketing #Technology

I'm not a huge fan of asking for support but...

Some say yes. Others, not surprisingly, say Hell NO! As for me, I'm not sure. On one hand it could be a dangerous slope but, on the other hand...

Google's Danny Sullivan was at WordCamp US in Portland, Oregon this past week and said Google needs the open web. Of course it does. So it can feed its Artificial Intelligence System. Let's not forget that.

YouTube is a great place to watch podcasts that are put out as podcasts in audio only on the feeds. But YouTube isn't podcasting and not all podcasts need to be video.

Widely panned as a flop. ChatGPT 5 is the victim of being over hyped. And some people not realizing that ChatGPT shouldn't be your BFF.

In a recent retort to critics, Google has gotten defensive about its AI Search.

My biggest point of uncertainty about Ghost 6.0 was whether people were going to "get" the social web integration. The technology is wonderful, but complex. For many people, terms like ActivityPub, Fediverse, bridge, protocol, server, toot, boost, and Webfinger are alienating and confusing. They subtly imply that unless you understand what all these words mean, this might not be the place for you; in the same way crypto terms—blockchain, web3, wallet, keypair, nonce—are a wall of jargon that scream "you don't belong here" to normal people. The work of a product team, when working with new technology, is to abstract away as much of this complexity as possible, so that it feels friendly and approachable to new people. To send an email, you don't need to know what SMTP, IMAP, POP, DKIM, SPF, or DMARC are. To browse the web, there's no requirement to understand HTTP, DNS, servers, SSL, TTL, load balancing, or caches. The most significant impact these protocols have is perhaps that users never have to think about them. So while building the social web integration for Ghost, we weren't just reasoning about how to make it work and what it should do—we were thinking deeply about how to frame it. What words to use. What to compare it to. How to explain it. How to make it not need explaining at all. Will people "get it"? This question consumed more of my mental energy than anything else, right up until the moment we finally hit launch this past Monday. My personal nightmare would have been if the response to the launch was another chorus of "I don't understand what the point of this is"—"this is too complicated"—"what does [x] even mean?" I've seen it happen so many times before when people try to figure out this tech and how it relates to their lives. The graveyard of technically superior but user-hostile products is vast. But, I'm thrilled to see—at least so far—that hasn't been the case. To be sure, there are still points of functional confusion. Chief among them: Why doesn't post X from platform Y show up on platform Z right away? But for the most part, I've been really encouraged by how many people have just jumped right in and started using it, without getting stuck and needing more explanation. They're just... publishing. And connecting. And it's working. My strongest belief about the social web is that if we want it to succeed, we have to keep lowering the barrier to entry. We have to keep minimizing the need for arcane language. We have to keep solving the things that people expect to work, but don't, rather than endlessly explaining how the underlying technology works. We have to create more familiarity with concepts people already know. Let's not forget that email, as a technology, was based on the humble letter. To/from, subject, inbox, outbox—these were all words based on sending physical memos. The metaphor made the transition accessible. The interface and format of a new technology can often be the single biggest factor in determining its adoption. After all, for over a decade, we've had artificial intelligence capable of performing some pretty incredible tasks. The moment it really caught fire, though, was the moment it became a chatbox. Not when it got smarter. Not when it got more powerful. When it got simpler. I think we've taken a big step in the right direction with the social web in Ghost 6.0. And now we need to keep going.

The thing about the Sydney Sweeney Jeans advert did exactly what American Eagle wanted. A response.

Artificial Intelligence is here to stay. Getting found and cited in the AI overviews has become a goal for most companies. How do you do this? Write good quality content.

Marketing Junto is a weekly newsletter about the ever-changing landscape of digital marketing. From web design trends to SEO & paid search to social media, it’s all covered.