Here are some highlights from this 2020 book:
* Traditionally, when a person speaks about one of their friends or someone that they know, there is an assumption that the person in question is someone that the speaker has met in person and has interacted with in the physical world. However, what if the person in question has never actually met their “friend” or had any sort of actual communication or interaction with them? If a relationship is entirely one-sided, and one member of that relationship doesn’t even know that the other person exists, what would make someone think that there is some sort of bond between the two parties? These types of “false” relationships and interactions have become increasingly prominent over the last century, specifically in regard to how people develop relationships with members of the media such as the character of a TV show or the host of a popular radio show. This increase is, in large part, due to the invention and rise in prominence of mass media:
“One of the striking characteristics of the new mass media-radio, television, and the movies is that they give the illusion of a face-to-face relationship with the performer. The conditions of response to the performer are analogous to those in a primary group. The most remote and illustrious men are met as if they were in the circle of one’s peers; the same is true of a character in a story who comes to life in these media in an especially vivid and arresting way. We propose to call this seeming face-to-face relationship between spectator and performer a para-social relationship.”
* The parasocial interactions that occur between a television viewer and a television actor are defined to a great extent by the “illusion of being engaged in a social interaction with the TV performer. The audience responds with something more than mere running observation; it is, as it were, subtly insinuated into the programme’s actions and transformed into a group which observes and participates in the show by turns” (Hartmann & Goldhoorn, 2011, p. 1105). As the parasocial relationship develops between the TV viewer and actor, a form of “mindreading” can potentially occur. Mindreading refers to the psychological phenomenon that suggests “that in any social encounter individuals engage in mindreading to infer the mental states of other people being present” (Hartmann & Goldhoorn, 2011, p. 1106). Mindreading occurs automatically and results in intuitive feelings, not elaborate or complex beliefs, being developed. Mindreading can occur when a person is viewing a TV program because it is an automatic activity that occurs in any social encounter. Therefore, it is plausible that TV viewers may engage in mindreading when they encounter TV performers. For example, when a TV performer looks directly into the camera, the TV viewer could automatically acquire the belief and feeling that said performer is looking at them personally.
Mindreading could also possibly occur between the listener of a podcast and the host of the podcast, as the conversational tone of the host can mimic a social interaction. While a podcast host cannot physically look at the listener, they can “speak” to the listener by addressing them, causing the audience to automatically engage in mindreading, resulting in the development of these intuitive feelings and assumptions about the current mental state of the podcast host. For example, if the host of a podcast were to loudly address his audience using vulgar language, the listener of the podcast might automatically assume that the host is currently angry, even though he or she doesn’t actually know the mental state of the host at that time.
* While the podcast shares many similarities with the traditional radio broadcast, there are several key aspects of this medium that separate it from its audio predecessor. Key among these differences is the component of listener choice and the need for active participation from the listener when it comes to choosing which podcast to consume. While it can be tempting to view a podcast in a sense as Internet radio, this is a misinformed belief, as nothing is being broadcast during a podcast: “To the contrary, and well beyond the casual tuning-in of a radio or television signal, podcast listeners must consciously point their browser to a particular web site that archives these compressed digital recordings and deliberately choose specific files to download” (MacDougall, 2012, p. 169).
Podcasts tend to differ from traditional radio broadcasts in regard to content as well as podcast shows that predominately feature narrative talk as opposed to music. However, the key distinguishing feature of the podcast is that it is an auditory experience, a trait that is shared by radio broadcasts. As a medium, the podcast is able to take advantage of one of the unique features of the human auditory sense in that “there is a tendency to incorporate or fold in what we see, taste, smell, and touch with what we hear. If the podcast originates in sound, it often ends up being a more total or whole sensory experience” (MacDougall, 2012, p. 170). This tendency to incorporate the additional sensory aspects of the area around us into our auditory experience in the manner that MacDougall describes can enhance the experience and the subsequent relationship with a host that the listener develops. Due to the portable nature of the podcast, listeners are able to have a much wider and diverse range of sensory experiences to incorporate into their relationship compared to the more stationary nature of the radio broadcast or even traditional television experience: “Podcasts and the appliances that enable their consumption, are among the latest instances of mobile digital technology that represent a further alteration of the phonological experience of everyday life. . . . The mobilization of such content has been shown to reorient the listener to the world and the world to the listener, prompting (internal) memory and (external) layout to function together as props and foils for the often detailed yet punctuate discourse that typifies the podcast” (MacDougall, 2012, p. 170). An ability to interact with a greater range of stimuli allows for the listeners of a podcast to have an enhanced listening experience, which can help to blur the line between the listener and content. When a listener interacts with multiple stimuli while listening to a podcast, the experience becomes more immersive, which in turn can cause the listener to feel as though he or she is having an actual real conversation and interaction with the podcast host. When interacting with another person in real life, very rarely does this interaction occur in a vacuum, and the ability to consume a podcast on the go, around other people and other stimuli, helps to create a more realistic simulation of an interaction. This mobile aspect of the podcast is an example of how the podcast constitutes an evolution of radio, as it serves as “a fundamentally new form of mediated interpersonal communication. Podcasts enhance the personal feel and all attendant psychodynamic effects of Fessenden’s primordial radio show”.
* Stern’s interview style allowed interpersonal questions to become the substance of the interview, not just the interviewees’ professional lives. In fact, Stern’s interviews were conversations, similar to sitting down with an intimate
best friend to catch up—but broadcast live.
* Stern connects what is occurring on the show with people’s lives: “Today, if you go on a TV talk show and give a great six or seven minutes, people will link to it, if it’s incredible. . . . But if you kill on Stern, it moves the needle”.
* Fans let their investments in the fandom organize their emotional involvement and identities. The size of their investments—be it time or money—construct identity in the fan group. For example, superfan Maryann from Brooklyn calls into the show frequently and attends the majority of Stern’s public appearances; she attended every taping of America’s Got Talent to support Stern. Her strong investment in the fandom is a large source of her identity. Similarly, Bobo, a driving instructor from Florida, calls in to share his love of the show, even admitting to constructing a “shrine” of Howard Stern memorabilia.
His daily routine involves listening intently to the show, and he invests a lot of himself to support the show. Harrington and Bielby (1995) found “being a fan is not just a social but a personal phenomenon; by exploring both dimensions we have been able to consider fanship as a normal, everyday phenomenon” (p. 176). They explored the relationships fans had to different soap operas and concluded that pleasure was a main source of the investment in becoming a fan: “Fans and industry participants reciprocally construct the subculture” of the fandom of soap operas (Harrington & Bielby, 1995, p. 176). The Howard Stern Show has made listeners a part of the show—a Wack Pack of “superfans” call into the show with anecdotes, prank phone calls, and updates on their daily experiences. Akin to soap opera fans, Howard Stern fans and the staff of the show have co-constructed the subculture of fandom.
Stern’s fans weave a fabric that is integral to the show. Listeners of the Howard Stern Show appear to form “para-social relationships” with other fans and with Stern. A parasocial relationship gives the illusion of friendship with television
or radio personas: “The most remote and illustrious men are met as if they were in the circle of one’s peers” (Horton & Wohl, 1956 p. 215). Horton and Wohl (1956) wrote about this phenomenon first, noting fans believe they know the personas on radio or television. Horton and Wohl found that listeners perceive an intimate connection with the personas and imagine a connection or bond with the media character. The personas become integrated into listeners’ daily routines (Horton & Wohl, 1956, pp. 215–218). Stern has mastered the parasocial relationship. For example, one fan and longtime listener of the Howard Stern Show articulated, We end up learning a ton of the details about every member of the show, and as weird as it is to say it, you kind of get to feeling like you know them somewhat and think of them almost as “friends.” The conversational style of the show can make you feel like you’re just sitting amongst a circle of friends, listening to them chat (you just don’t have much ability to provide your input). After a period of time, you get to know enough about the show and its players that you start to understand and even expect inside jokes, etc., which adds even more to the “bond” you feel with the show and its players. (Edmonds 2011, para. 4)
Similarly, a fan reported, “Howard Stern has been going for so long that it would be difficult for him to stop or for his fans to stop listening to him. They listen to Howard because Howard is on; and Howard is on because they listen to him” (Mixon, 2013, para. 5). In several fan interviews, the theme of talking like old friends recurred, and the words “truth” and “honesty” repeated. Thus, fans listen to Howard Stern because they feel a friendship, a “para-social” relationship. In addition to feeling a kinship to Stern, fans said Stern discussed political and social concerns in a way that allowed listeners to be open to his ideas and consider his thoughts without becoming alienated or feeling negative.
