I am sorry, but I fear that this post does not have the ring of truth about it. First, Stanford University does have a substantial audio web presence that is funded by the university -- I am referring to itunes.stanford.edu -- which was launched with such fanfare. (I note that some Philosophy Talk episodes appear here, but with uncertain frequency.) This was launched with great fanfare, including articles in periodicals ranging from the San Francisco Chronicle to Forbes.
Next, while I can fully appreciate that the costs associated with the show, these are surely a direct result of the insistence that the show take live phone calls (although episodes are regularly recycled, calling into question the claims about ISDN charges and the need for these live phone calls) and have side features such as the "Roving Reporter." While such features may be desirable, they are hardly necessary.
Third, the cost is insanely high. For the cost of a subscription to Philosophy Talk, one could purchase the full contents of 60 back issues of Philosophy Now on CD-ROM. One could purchase 5 volumes of "X and Philosophy" (e.g., Seinfeld and Philosophy, Baseball and Philosophy, etc.) One could buy a used copy of the first edition of the Encyclopedia of Philosophy. One could buy 6 Penguin paperbacks containing major original works by philosophers. One could subscribe for a year to Mind journal and have change. Or one could purchase Offline Explorer Pro and download the "free streams" for playback at one's leisure.
Fourth, while the hosts may not receive teaching relief for their work on this program, I would be most surprised if they did not claim this work on their annual statements describing contributions. After all, faculty do not receive teaching relief for serving as editors of journals, or giving talks at other institutions, or for other "community service" obligations. Still, faculty are expected to do some level of these.
Simply put, I would be surprised if even two hundred people signed up for the subscription service. With such a subscription service, I would normally expect an online forum where the subscribers could interact with the hosts, and more content (such as downloadable content.)
I am sorry that the hosts have encountered difficulty in receiving grants and in gaining airtime online. However, given the wide variety of accessible material aimed at educated lay people in philosophy, I find it a bit hard to believe that the funds raised from these subscriptions will justify the ill will engendered by this experiment. Were the decision mine, I would have simply asked for donations, like the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy does.

尽管我很乐意花钱听你的播客，但不幸的是，我不能这样做。对于普通的美国听众来说，它的价格很便宜，但对于普通的拉丁美洲听众来说，它就相当昂贵了。这是我的情况。
Lamento mucho la decisión tomada y espero que en futuro pueda volver a disfrutar de vuestro programa.
Regards,
Rafael
Montevideo,
Uruguay

Philosophy talk is one of the best ways that your kind of philosophy can reach the ears of the public. It seems to me philosophers have had a lesser predominating role in communities and society at large in recent decades compared to the greats like Russell.
Philosophy talk is one such way to spread our acquired knowledge and wisdom to the masses, which is so much needed right now. While I am slightly saddened by the implications of a subscription service; I understand.
Those who feel disappointed about this development should have their beef with the economic organisation of radio and academia, NOT Ken and John. They are going above and beyond their mandate as professional philosophers to do this program and are doing it out of their love for wisdom. More philosophers can learn from them.

Dear Mr. Taylor,
I've been inquiring about downloading podcasts since last year because it's so convenient to listen to shows on the go as opposed to being glued to my laptop. So, it's nice to see that they are available. I've downloaded three episodes so far. I've considered subscribing on a monthly basis or yearly, but I haven't made up my mind because there may occasionally be shows on subjects I don't find interesting.
But, again, I'm happy that the podcast option is available and that I can pick and choose which episodes I want to when and where I want to listen to them.
Thanks!
deb

I enjoy your show, and would pay something for the convenience of being able to download it, but nowhere near $70. Overpricing a service doesn't create a large pool of new donors, it only dissuades potential customers. Consider a non-profit clothing and gift shop, like the AIDS relief shop in the Castro (in San Francisco). They charge competitive prices for their wares, and while you're there you can learn more about their mission and possibly decide to support them in other ways. But if their merchandise was four times the average price, nearly everyone would turn right around and march out the door, benefiting no one.
如果你的下载费用是10美元/年，我现在就已经注册了(你的许多流媒体听众也会这么做)，如果你在每个节目中花一点时间(或在每个播客中添加一条信息)提到你的花费，并把我带回到你的网站，那里……你可以有一个Paypal捐赠链接!我相信，试图强迫潜在客户成为捐赠者，你不会从中得到什么好处。但创造尽可能多的客户，然后鼓励他们成为捐赠者，是一个更可靠的方法。
In any case, thank you for doing the show. It's a pleasure to hear.

Matt:
基本上你是说，如果我们以每集19美分多一点的价格卖给你一年的订阅，那么你会觉得这是一个公平的价格。
顺便说一下，我们并没有强迫任何人订阅播客来听节目。流媒体是免费的，你甚至可以购买个人下载。2022世界杯小组赛分组

I'd really appreciate access to the past episodes, having just got through a long european coach journey by listening to those that were available on itunes, but I share matt's suspicion you'd get more subscribers with a cheaper rate; it's hard to get people to pay for subscription content on the internet (witness the new york times paywall coming down). Personally, I intend to subscribe at the current rate, when I've got the money...

How about offering just one or two episodes for download for free, so potential customers can make up their mind?
While I certainly consider myself sufficiently interested in philosophy to very much appreciate a weekly show on the subject, and sufficiently accustomed to the concept of having to pay for things I like, I consider the current "try the audio stream" approach as a very unclever imposition.
在我的电脑前听音乐是非常不方便的，相当不舒服，而且是一种能源的浪费(电能的浪费，而不是脑力的浪费)。你们自己做过吗?
The message I gather is that I have to pay for the comfort, and not for the contents.
如果(我强烈支持这一立场)我们同意免费提供信息的重要性再怎么高估也不为过，哲学讲座将继续免费提供。中国伊朗亚洲杯比赛直播对我来说，“为舒适付费”的方法是一种数字限制管理解决方案(它还诱使我绕过它——我还没做过)，它不太可能让我从一个感兴趣的陌生人变成一个慷慨的支持者，或者暂时成为一个满意的订阅者。中间缺少的一步是热情的听众，但这是不可能的，如果你继续施加那些令人难以忍受的限制，我选择克制，甚至不开始倾听。
This puts me in the slightly paradoxical situation that although I would most probably like the show, I have not (yet) listened to a single episode.
那么，我的结论是什么呢?如果你遇到障碍，人们要么回避，要么试图绕过它们。当我在我的电脑前，我会喜欢超文本而不是听。当我不在的时候，我会读一些关于哲学的书，或者听一些其他的东西。
P.S. On a side note, I personally consider charging US$ 5 per episode not really a bargain, but I understand that the fixed transaction cost is significant. The pricing model really depends on the number of subscribers - but I (wishfully?) believe the global market for Philosophy Talk might be quite a bit larger than you seem to assume. Following the DRM argument, it even gets worse as I do not feel I pay for the contents, or for any additional value (assuming the cost of providing plain mp3 files is certainly not greater than that of providing audio streaming), but only for not being coerced to listen infront of my computer.

I was afraid that when I click the link to "Continue reading 'Why we Charge for Downloads'" I was going to have to pay for that.
Sorry, no dice on paying.
I can't sit and listen to the stream, I'll just have to try and catch what I can from the broadcast on KOPB.
Cheers

我同意是费用的问题。在我看到你们的收费之前我都准备订阅了。这个程序很好，但是很难证明这么高的价格是合理的。

我认为这个节目很棒，如果它包含一些增强的访问权限，我愿意支付这个价格(我想这是之前提到的)。或许是一份高质量的期刊，或许是对节目主题和嘉宾想法有一定影响力的能力。那些类型的附加组件对我来说可能是值得的。但如果没有这些补贴，价格就太贵了。

Thanks for all the hard work guys- it's a great show. As I'm still a student and short on funds, I'll be listening for free online, but I hope this new system works out. If anyone's looking for an additional philosophy podcast, check out The Philosopher's Zone athttp://www.abc.net.au/rn/philosopherszone/default.htm- it's an Australian public radio show that you can download for free.

I'd give every penny I have to Philosophy Talk, as it's part of me too, a manifestation of the mission of philosophical universe.
I have paid the yearly fee and have bought a bunch that I love.

你在开玩笑吧。一次下载4.95美元!你们是在开玩笑吧?如果它更便宜，我就会订阅，听起来其他很多人也会订阅。别再对每集0.19美元的游戏趾高气扬了。让更多的人付出更少的代价……耶稣读过一些经济学家的书。

Don't listen to Philosophy Talk ever again if you don't support them.

Instead of subscriptions... because what student or adult who are in the humanities field can afford a 60 podcast... you should instead make money by google adds or adds on the website.

不到1/2加仑汽油的价格，不到1/2加仑牛奶的价格，大约一瓶可乐的价格，你就可以购买一个小时的哲学节目!2022世界杯小组赛分组幽默哲学、想象哲学、科学哲学、心灵哲学等。如果你不想买，你可以不买(很明显，你们2022世界杯小组赛分组中的一些人不想买)。花同样的价钱在blockbuster租几天录像带，你就可以购买3个60分钟的哲学脱口秀，而且永远都不用归还，你们中的一些人会抱怨——哇!2022世界杯小组赛分组世界杯赛程2022赛程表欧洲区你会认为这些人只是提高了你的抵押贷款。我很抱歉，有些人觉得自己一直在用笔记本电脑听哲学节目。世界杯赛程2022赛程表欧洲区当我听哲学演讲的时候，我会在家里做中国伊朗亚洲杯比赛直播一些事情。跟你说一声，你没必要坐在电脑前一动不动。这就是演讲者的作用。如果你想享受“在路上”听哲学演讲的奢侈，也许你应该开始存钱，用25美分的硬币来支付。中国伊朗亚洲杯比赛直播 By the way, how did you ever afford a laptop or online access. These luxuries are much more than $1.35.

The subscription price does not trouble me as much as the price for past episodes. I would purchase all back episodes if it was not cost prohibitive. That said, the program remains accessible free of charge. Whether that access comes in the form preferred by any particular listener is of course another question. While free,multi- format availability would be ideal, we should all note that no right to such access is present. I remain a whole-hearted supporter of the program, and I trust that Ken and John will do everything possible to extend access to a wider audience. Thus, while the current pricing is questionable, I pay because the show is an enjoyable part of my weekly activities.

Hi Ken and John,
I just wanted to let you know that I accept and agree with the fees of your service that you provide to us, the audience. You seem to have in the past and continue to discuss many different and interesting topics. I am a new student at UC Berkeley and I am majoring in Philosophy, so it is good to become aware of additional views and ideas about a vast number of topics. I also find it very pleasant that the topics are talked about so casually. I plan to listen to every episode (except for the reruns :-P) and I support you. As a college student, I am strapped for cash, so we are to an extent, in the same boat, but regardless, good luck!
Autif

Dear Ken,
我有一个难题。我已经付了你的订阅费，但我想把你的一些节目给朋友看。这种事还没发生，所以请不要试图让我被捕。公开你的节目可能是非法的。这也是不道德的吗?

How about donations? The effect of having all the music in the world at my fingertips has made me psychologically different in that i feel very annoyed if i have to pay for what i like before instead of after i've enjoyed it. I think many in my generation (80s) may actually be more willing and adapted to donate. (that is, more money (and listeners!) might be gained that way)
我只能代表我自己，也可能代表我在挪威的朋友圈，但对我来说，像你们这样收费可以赚到更多钱，这似乎不是一个先验的明显现象。“海盗一代”已经把在互联网上收费视为一件道德上“不好的”、消极的事情。(as you may have noticed from certain replies, and may not have fully understood the reason for (it's tied up in the whole pirate/freespeech-wars etc))

你想怎么收费就怎么收费，你不需要为自己辩护。这取决于听众是否订阅——考虑到你的产品质量，我认为70美元是一个便宜的价格。
你可以考虑在你的网站上设置一个Paypal捐赠按钮作为额外的收入来源，尤其是在过去剧集的流媒体旁边。如果这是一件简单的事情，我希望很多人会为这个节目捐款。

我不愿意每年支付70美元的主要原因是我不确定这其中有多少会花在你的运营成本上。很明显，你已经将支付系统转包了——我的70美元中有多少是分包商向你收取的费用?我宁愿捐70美元，这样我就知道钱都捐给演出了。
It's a bore trying to listen to streamed episodes. Too much clicking around the website! I have a podcast manager that automatically downloads my favorite public radio shows, so they're all in one place and queued up for listening with or without an internet connection. Philosophy Talk used to be in that queue, and I miss it!
For years the podcast of "This American Life" was only available through Audible.com. I stopped listening to the show because I didn't want to buy anything from Audible. Now that TAL is available as a free podcast, I listen regularly and am a substantial donor.
我不知道你是通过捐赠还是订阅来赚更多的钱，但这可能是一个值得回答的经验问题。