156: “I’m shooting a wedding, and I’m scared of screwing it up!”

2/28/2017

This week, we talk about niche podcasts, shooting weddings, AND we announce the title of our NEW podcast which begins March 7th! buildtheroads.com

Subscribe in iTunes
Subscribe in Google Play Podcasts
Subscribe in Overcast

SHOW NOTES:

Opener:
Kevin’s Seven -Say Goodnight Kevin | YouTube

The Inner Circle | The Inner Tube

Corban Tech | YouTube

Movie Facts | YouTube

Movie Trailer Trash | YouTube

155: PewDiePie vs the Media Smear Campaign

Pitch Changing in Messy Mondays | YouTube (< Timestamped)

Lost -TV Series | Wikipedia

Ultimate Beastmaster | Wikipedia

The Inner Tube | Google Play Podcasts

Gret Glyer | Twitter

The Good Samaritan -MovieNight Bargain Bin | YouTube

Who Will Build the Roads: (If you missed the links above)

The Fine Bros | YouTube

The Bipartisan Bros | iTunes

buildtheroads.com

Eminem -Musician | Wikipedia

Links Mentioned in Elli‘s Question:
Elon Musk | Wikipedia

The Story of Blue Moon | YouTube (I’ve seen the ads)

Say Goodnight Kevin | YouTube

Kevin’s Divergent Review -Say MovieNight | YouTube

Links Mentioned in Jack‘s Question:
JCB Short Films | YouTube

Diode Short Films | YouTube

lensrentals.com

Zoom H1 Handy Portable Digital Recorder | Amazon

Closing:
Houston Productions 1 | YouTube

The Oscars Mix-Up | YouTube

Why the Mix-Up Happened | Forbes

Ellen Degeneres Takes a Selfie at the Oscars | YouTube

Steve Harvey Having a Mental Breakdown After too Many Questions | YouTube

Josh Defending La La Land the Bargain Bin Podcast | iTunes

Submit a Question

iTunes

Google Play Podcasts

Download

14 Comments

TGWThomas link

2/28/2017 04:57:24 pm

This episode was great! Houston is a great addition to the inner circle!

Jacob

2/28/2017 08:01:44 pm

The "small zoom" is the zoom h1 Here's an amazon link: https://www.amazon.com/Zoom-Handy-Portable-Digital-Recorder/dp/B003QKBVYK

Jacob

2/28/2017 08:07:33 pm

Or at least I think that"s what he meant.

Corban Garcia link

2/28/2017 11:22:42 pm

Texed Kevin and he said you're right. Thanks for finding the link!

Jack

2/28/2017 09:48:15 pm

So cool! My comment was answered! Thanks guys!

Jeff Ross

3/1/2017 07:26:24 pm

I was really disappointed with how you guys decided to report on the Oscars story without doing your research first. Spreading conspiracy theories without complete and contextual evidence is what #FakeNews does. Poor way to set up for a political podcast.

The real story was much more interesting, and here is the best first-hand account of it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygobstg4XQs

Here is an article showing some of the consequences from the fallout:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/movies/2017/03/01/academy-boots-both-pwc-pricewaterhousecoopers-accountants-next-year-oscars/98598564/

As a hardcore Inner Tube fan, I certainly hope that this type of uninformed and sloppy opinion-giving does not happen again, because that is not what this show is all about. I would have expected that you who defended PewDiePie from non-contextual reporting would have given the same defense to the people who were putting on the Oscars. Jumping to conclusions does not help credibility in any circumstance.

David

3/2/2017 11:51:57 am

Past Jeff, no one actually cares that much...

Jeff Ross

3/2/2017 09:34:17 pm

I did not post my comment because anyone cared about how they presented this particular story. I know that the goal of mentioning the Oscars mishap was really to vent about the Oscars in general rather than to talk about what happened in this instance. However, in doing so, they hurt their argument as a whole by spreading unfounded accusations as if they were true.

I posted my comment because a day may come where Josh and Kevin present a story that people do care about, especially since they are starting a political podcast. If they present that story in the same way as they did this one (no research, leading questions, story without context, serious tone about a conspiracy theory to suggest it as fact), they may perplex any informed listeners, mislead uninformed listeners, lose credibility, receive criticism, overreact, gain negative publicity, and/or lose some of their audience as a result. [Or, worse yet, someone else may imitate them by thinking "doing research is overrated when it comes to sincere opinion-giving" and suffer worse than Josh and Kevin would.] If I can prevent such scenarios from occurring, then it is worth the few minutes to compose a thoughtfully-worded comment.

Who knows? Perhaps someone in a political office someday (or maybe up to 16 politicians) will be influenced by "Who Will Build The Roads". If Josh and Kevin are hoping that to be the case, then how they present conspiracy theories and "informed" vs "uninformed" opinions is very important.

Benjamin

3/2/2017 08:14:26 pm

But conspiracy theories are fun!

Jeff Ross

3/2/2017 08:58:14 pm

Conspiracy theories are fun, as long as it is clear that the people talking about them know that they are just theories. Josh and Kevin normally do a good job with that. However, here they presented a conspiracy theory as if it were fact, despite not having taken the fifteen minutes to research the story. If they had presented it as a theory or a possibility, that would have been okay; Instead Josh asked leading questions to make it seem that there could be no other alternative, and asked them in a serious, sincere manner rather than a comedic one (a comedic tone is how they can talk about the moon landing being fake without alienating their audience [space pun intended]).

I would not make such a big deal about this except Josh and Kevin are preparing for their political podcast. Conspiracy theories should be researched and presented for what they are worth, complete with context, especially on a political podcast. If Josh and Kevin want "Who Will Build The Roads" to be reputable, they must keep that in mind. If they just want listeners and attention rather than credibility, then dismiss my advice, bearing in mind that critics will label the show as #FakeNews.

Josh Taylor

3/7/2017 11:50:38 am

Hey Jeff! Thanks for the thoughts. We talked about this a little bit at the end of 157! I listened again and really don't feel I did anything wrong, considering I was just floating the idea that perhaps there was some foul play, which is perfectly possible. But I understand if you don't see it that way! Thanks for listening man.

Jeff Ross

3/7/2017 10:54:34 pm

Hey Josh! Thanks to you and Kevin for taking the time to read my comments and respond in episode 157. [For the random comment readers, it's from the 34:21-40:05 portion of that episode].

Your line at 50:47 of Episode 156 of "I think it was on purpose, come on" came across as "Here is my opinion, but everybody listening knows that it is the only real possibility anyway based on the evidence I just presented". I know you didn't intend it to sound like you were dismissing any other possible alternatives, but that is how it sounded to me. Like Kevin said in the Episode 157 response though, sometimes sarcasm does not come across as clearly to an outside audience as it does between you and him, so I understand how you could have said what you did in the way that you did, and yet not have been trying to be dismissive of alternative possibilities. I think that the episode 157 response was appropriate, and it makes me an even bigger fan of the Innner Tube to know that you guys are willing to address concerns as they arise, even at the expense of more fun topics like, say, Jordan Taylor’s engagement.

In conclusion, I do appreciate how you and Kevin are willing to mention ideas that most "mainstream" opinions won't take the time to consider, and that you consider some evidence that many "mainstream" opinions don't look at. I also like how you guys can effectively use sarcasm to express ideas. I don't mind that you may not have researched everything before you consider ideas, or that you use an idea as a springboard to talk about something slightly different. However, my concern with your Oscars discussion in Episode 156 was that you appeared to have dismissed an idea without having done the necessary research, and it came across as misleading to your audience. I'm sure that there are some listeners who value your opinion more than they value other external sources, which is why I think it is important to make sure that your audience knows that you know the extent to which an expressed opinion is possible, probable, or assured to be correct. Normally context on the Inner Tube provides this information, and I appreciate that Episode 157 was able to provide that necessary context to this situation.

I apologize that this response may be TUBE long, but I hope that it clarifies my thoughts on this issue.

David

3/2/2017 11:53:01 am

Psst*

Jack Bausk

3/19/2017 11:39:47 pm

I just want to say, those who wondered, the wedding went great last night!

156: “I’m shooting a wedding, and I’m scared of screwing it up!”

Leave a Reply.

Subscribe

The Inner Tube

Archives