Connect with us

Uncategorized

Patreon and Acast partner for patron-only podcast distribution

Published

on

Patreon and Acast are teaming up to make it easier for podcasters to publish episodes that are only available to the patrons financially supporting them on Patreon.

Most paywall solutions for podcasts are pretty clunky or limited. That’s why Acast launched technology last year that allows publishers to release paywalled episodes that listeners can access on any podcast app.

Patreon, meanwhile, already supports the creation of a patron-only RSS feed, and Brian Keller, the company’s director of creator success said that “exclusive content is the biggest and most effective benefit that [podcasters] can offer to their members.”

Still, he said that many of the podcasters on Patreon are asking for a better solution, which is where the Acast partnership comes in.

Through the integration, a podcaster can link to their Patreon account in their public podcast show notes. If someone clicks on the link and they aren’t already a patron, they can sign up. If they are a patron, their membership level will be authenticated and they’ll be directed to a listening experience allows them to subscribe, via the podcast app of their choice, to a feed that combines whatever patron-only content they should have access to, plus all the free content included in the public feed.

Patreon + Acast

Image Credits: Acast

So from the patron/listener experience, you should only need to sign up once, then you’ll can get your premium episodes without any extra work. The podcaster, meanwhile, can manage their public and private feeds from a single dashboard, while also getting access to detailed listener data from Acast.

Leandro Saucedo, Acast’s chief strategy and business officer, noted that the companies aren’t forcing any Patreon creators to go down this route. They can still distribute their podcasts with whatever platform or tool they were using before.

“With this partnership in place, we hope that usage will be high as possible, but we’re not forcing anybody into it,” Saucedo said.

At the same time, he suggested that there should be a seamless migration process for any podcasters making the switch to Acast, without requiring any listeners to subscribe to a new feed.

Patreon and Acast have already been beta testing this integration with select podcasts, including  Sleep With Me and 90 Day Gays.

“I love the Acast integration!” said Sleep With Me’s Drew Ackerman in a statement. “The analytics let me know that patrons are listening to the content and give me clear insight into exactly what and how they’re consuming it. It’s secure and easy for patrons to get set up, and the fact that there is only one link to share makes it simple for listeners to find the content and brings new patrons to our membership!”

Continue Reading
Comments

Uncategorized

How the US, UK and China are planning to roll out vaccines

Published

on

The vaccines are coming. The UK became the first country in the West to approve a covid-19 vaccine for emergency use on December 2, specifically the Pfizer and BioNTech vaccine, which has completed Phase 3 trials. But the US, EU, and many other countries are expected to follow suit in the following days and weeks. The imminent arrival of vaccines not only means that countries face a huge logistical challenge to distribute them—which is complicated by the fact the two most promising vaccines require ultra-cold temperatures—but they also have to grapple with hard choices over who gets them first. 

Here’s how different countries are making their decisions on distributing vaccines to their populations. 

United States

How many doses will be available? Up to 40 million doses are expected to be on offer in the US by the end of 2020—25 million of which will come from Pfizer-BioNTech, and 12.5 million from Moderna, according to Reuters. Since the vaccines each require two doses spaced several weeks apart, this will be enough to vaccinate 20 million people—but not all shipments will come at once. The first shipment will reportedly cover 3.2 million people, with 5-10 million more doses delivered each week after that.  

Who will get it first? In the US, individual states are responsible for creating their own vaccine distribution plans. They are meant to follow general guidance from the CDC’s Interim Playbook for Covid-19, which was shaped by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) with input from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

ACIP met on December 1, and voted on the recommended first phase of the distribution plan. This is known as 1a, and will prioritize 21 million health care workers and 3 million adults in long-term care facilities, like nursing homes, who are particularly vulnerable. 

USA vaccine covid-19

MS TECH | PIXABAY

The following phases will add other people to the list: 1b will prioritize other essential workers, such as school staff, while 1c prioritizes adults older than 65 and others with other medical issues that increase the risk of serious complications from covid.

Phase two would cover people who work in schools, transportation, congregate housing facilities, like nursing homes, and other places with high concentrations of people. Phase three includes young adults and children—in an attempt to stop super spreading events—as well as other essential workers not previously covered. Phase four would include everyone else. 

But the CDC guidelines leave a lot for state and local governments to interpret and implement. 

Even in phase 1, different states have different definitions for essential workers, for example. ACIP has yet to discuss anything beyond phase 1, leaving many open questions about how to prioritize the rest of the population. One analysis of 47 published state plans by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that about half explicitly mentioned race and health equity as a factor for prioritization. 

China

How many doses will be available? Chinese scientists say the country will have 600 million doses ready this year, the South China Morning Post reports. Wang Junzhi, a member of the nation’s vaccine task force, told journalists on December 4 that the doses of inactivated vaccines will be ready for launch before the end of the year. He said a “major announcement”on vaccine trials was expected in the coming weeks. 

China vaccine covid-19

MS TECH | PIXABAY

China has five vaccine candidates from four manufacturers in phase three clinical trials, including the frontrunners from Sinopharm and Sinovac Biotech. While none have yet been approved for commercial use, they have been administered in so-called “pre-tests” in China, where coronavirus numbers are low, and are also undergoing phase three trials in 15 countries abroad. 

Who will get it first? That question’s already been answered. Emergency authorization was granted to the two leading candidates earlier this year: Since June, an unknown number of People’s Liberation Army members have received shots, and essential city workers started getting vaccinated in July. All in all, roughly one million people have received emergency authorization vaccines so far, including employees of state-owned enterprises, Huawei employees in 180 countries, and Chinese diplomats. 

“An emergency use authorization, which is based on Chinese vaccine management law, allows unapproved vaccine candidates to be used among people who are at high risk of getting infected on a limited period,” said Zheng Zhongwei, the director of the Science and Technology Development Center of China’s National Health Commission, in an interview with China’s state television channel on August 22.

President Xi Jinping has vowed to make the vaccine available around the world as a“global public good.” In October, China joined the Covax Facility, a global alliance of 189 countries that have pledged to equitably distribute vaccines. The US is not part of that group. 

The countries prioritized for distribution of the five Chinese vaccine candidates are primarily those which have hosted trials, which in turn is shaped by China’s strategic interest.  These include Brazil, Indonesia, and Turkey, which have signed deals for 46 million, 50 million, and 50 million Sinovac doses respectively; and Mexico, which has a deal with CanSino Biologics for 35 million doses. 

Little is known about how the Chinese government is prioritizing vaccine distribution domestically, though local reports suggest that individual provinces are making their own plans to buy vaccine doses, which will cost 200 RMB per dose (roughly $30.) The state insurance plan will not cover the cost. 

UK

How many doses will be available? The UK approved the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine for emergency use in the general public on December 2. It will start inoculating its population of 67 million people through the state-run National Health Service, with the first vaccinations to be given to the highest-priority individuals from December 7. The UK bought 40 million doses of the Pfizer vaccine; since each person requires two doses, so it has enough to vaccinate about a third of the population. It has also purchased 100 million doses of the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine, 7 million doses of the Moderna vaccine, and smaller quantities of other vaccine candidates, bringing the total it has bought to 355 million—in short, more than enough to vaccinate everyone. 

Who will get it first? The UK’s decision relied on a group called the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), an independent committee of academics and medical experts responsible for advising government ministers. For its phase one delivery, it divided the population into nine different groups, recommended vaccinating them in this order of priority, which the government has adopted:

  • Residents and staff working in elderly care homes
  • Everyone over 80 years old plus health and social care workers
  • Everyone over 75 years old
  • Everyone over 70 years old plus “clinically extremely vulnerable” individuals, which does not include pregnant people or those under the age of 18. 
  • Everyone over 65 years old
  • Adults aged 18 to 65 years in an at-risk group. This includes people with chronic diseases, diabetes, learning difficulties, morbid obesity or severe mental illness.  
  • Everyone over 60 years old
  • Everyone over 55 years old
  • Everyone over 50 years old

The JCVI has publicly explained its thinking in a 25-page document stating that “current evidence strongly indicates that the single greatest risk of mortality from covid-19 is increasing age.” It has not yet announced plans beyond phase one.

Elsewhere

Russia: Russia became the first country anywhere to approve a vaccine back in August 2020. President Vladimir Putin himself announced its Sputnik V vaccine had been granted authorization on August 11, before phase 3 trials had even started. Those are still underway, but the country is already preparing to start mass immunizations, with Putin ordering officials to start making the necessary preparations just hours after the news of the UK’s approval came in. Vaccinations will reportedly begin with healthcare workers and teachers. They will be free of charge, and the Kremlin says they will be carried out on a voluntary basis. Russia also says it will have up to 500 million doses ready for export. 
Other countries: The options are limited for many lower and middle income countries, since the world’s richest nations—including the 27 member-states of the EU as well as Canada, the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and Japan—have already pre-ordered half of the world’s expected available supply. Ninety two of these countries have joined the Covax Facility, which has secured 700 million doses and aims to cover 20% of the population of lower and middle income countries by the end of 2021.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

3 ways the pandemic is transforming tech spending

Published

on

Ever since the pandemic hit the U.S. in full force last March, the B2B tech community keeps asking the same questions: Are businesses spending more on technology? What’s the money getting spent on? Is the sales cycle faster? What trends will likely carry into 2021?

Recently we decided to join forces to answer these questions. We analyzed data from the just-released Q4 2020 Outlook of the Coupa Business Spend Index (BSI), a leading indicator of economic growth, in light of hundreds of conversations we have had with business-tech buyers this year.

A former Battery Ventures portfolio company, Coupa* is a business spend-management company that has cumulatively processed more than $2 trillion in business spending. This perspective gives Coupa unique, real-time insights into tech spending trends across multiple industries.

Tech spending is continuing despite the economic recession — which helps explain why many startups are raising large rounds and even tapping public markets for capital.

Broadly speaking, tech spending is continuing despite the economic recession — which helps explain why many tech startups are raising large financing rounds and even tapping the public markets for capital. Here are our three specific takeaways on current tech spending:

Spending is shifting away from remote collaboration to SaaS and cloud computing

Tech spending ranks among the hottest boardroom topics today. Decisions that used to be confined to the CIO’s organization are now operationally and strategically critical to the CEO. Multiple reasons drive this shift, but the pandemic has forced businesses to operate and engage with customers differently, almost overnight. Boards recognize that companies must change their business models and operations if they don’t want to become obsolete. The question on everyone’s mind is no longer “what are our technology investments?” but rather, “how fast can they happen?”

Spending on WFH/remote collaboration tools has largely run its course in the first wave of adaptation forced by the pandemic. Now we’re seeing a second wave of tech spending, in which enterprises adopt technology to make operations easier and simply keep their doors open.

SaaS solutions are replacing unsustainable manual processes. Consider Rhode Island’s decision to shift from in-person citizen surveying to using SurveyMonkey. Many companies are shifting their vendor payments to digital payments, ditching paper checks entirely. Utility provider PG&E is accelerating its digital transformation roadmap from five years to two years.

The second wave of adaptation has also pushed many companies to embrace the cloud, as this chart makes clear:

Similarly, the difficulty of maintaining a traditional data center during a pandemic has pushed many companies to finally shift to cloud infrastructure under COVID. As they migrate that workload to the cloud, the pie is still expanding. Goldman Sachs and Battery Ventures data suggest $600 billion worth of disruption potential will bleed into 2021 and beyond.

In addition to SaaS and cloud adoption, companies across sectors are spending on technologies to reduce their reliance on humans. For instance, Tyson Foods is investing in and accelerating the adoption of automated technology to process poultry, pork and beef.

All companies are digital product companies now

Mention “digital product company” in the past, and we’d all think of Netflix. But now every company has to reimagine itself as offering digital products in a meaningful way.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

The fragmentation of everything

Published

on

The rise of technonationalism. Diverging regulatory regimes. The spread of “walled gardens.” Polarization like nothing we’ve seen before. The confluence of several trends is poised to completely fragment our real and digital worlds. For companies, this raises a host of new risks, from cybersecurity threats to reputation risk—which, in turn, will require new responses and approaches.

The techonomic cold war

A “techonomic cold war” is already under way—an ongoing, often-invisible state of conflict at the intersection of technology and geopolitics.

Competition to dominate the next generation of technology infrastructure—such as electric vehicles, 5G networks, and quantum computing—is becoming increasingly heated. It’s a high-stakes contest and the countries setting the rules for these technologies could secure significant economic advantage, much as the United States benefited over several decades from pioneering the personal computer and the internet.

At the same time, populist and nationalist leaders have been ascendant in much of the world. These leaders have protectionist and interventionist instincts, and a willingness to buck established norms. It’s a combination which has resulted in the deployment of unconventional tools to favor domestic companies—not just tariffs and trade wars, but company bans and new forms of cyberattacks such as weaponized disinformation.

All of this is leading to the partitioning of both the real world (e.g., trade, labor mobility, and investment) and the digital world (e.g., tech platforms and standards). In this fragmented future, companies once used to operating on a global stage will instead find themselves restricted to operating within the spheres of influence of their home states. (For more, see “Techonomic Cold War” in EY’s Megatrends 2020 report and MIT Technology Review’s “Technonationalism” issue).

Regulators aren’t the only ones fragmenting the digital world. To a large extent, tech companies have been doing it themselves.

Divergent social contracts

Technology platforms are today’s basic infrastructure, increasingly inseparable from the economies and societies in which they exist. These platforms are increasingly where citizens get news, engage in political debate, network professionally, and more.

But while tech companies might seek to create seamless, integrated global platforms, they in fact deliver their offerings in vastly different societies. The social contract of the US is fundamentally different from that of China, Saudi Arabia, or even the European Union (EU). So, governments and regulators in different markets have been moving to recast tech platforms in the image of their social contracts. An early example was China, which developed its own platforms that better align with its social contract than do US-developed offerings.

Meanwhile, the EU has become increasingly active and visible in regulating technology. The most prominent recent example, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), is a precursor of things to come. The GDPR tackles privacy and data protection, but much bigger regulatory issues loom, from the explainability of algorithms to the safety of autonomous vehicles (for more, see EY’s Bridging AI’s trust gaps report). As these technologies come of age and become more prominent in the lives of citizens, expect governments in different regions to become more active in regulating them. Over time, increasingly complex regulatory issues and divergent ideologies will create either separate platforms, or platforms that ostensibly have the same name but deliver fundamentally different user experiences in different geographies.

Walled gardens

Regulators aren’t the only ones fragmenting the digital world. To a large extent, tech companies have been doing it themselves. Walled gardens—closed, self-contained tech platforms or ecosystems—have endured because they are good for the bottom line. They allow companies to extract more value from customers and their data while offering a more curated user experience. In recent months, there has been a growing fragmentation of “over-the-top” media streaming services, with individual studios and networks developing their own subscriber platforms. Instead of streaming platforms that hosted content from a wide variety of creators, platforms will offer exclusive access to their own content—fragmenting the streaming media experience.

Hyperpolarization

It’s no secret that political polarization has been growing at an alarming rate and that social media platforms—while not solely responsible—have been fueling the trend. Filter bubbles in social media platforms have enabled the spread of misinformation, leaving platforms with the tricky and unenviable task of policing the truth.

Worrying as it may be, everything we have seen so far may be nothing compared with what lies ahead. As social media platforms become more active in stemming the flow of misinformation, its purveyors are starting to seek new homes free from policing. In the weeks since the recent US Presidential election, a growing number of Trump voters have started leaving mainstream social media platforms for alternatives such as Parler and Telegram. By the time the next Presidential election rolls around, it’s not farfetched to anticipate that we could see today’s social media filter bubbles replaced by entirely separate social media platforms catering to conservatives and liberals.

At that point, we will have moved from an era of polarization to one of hyperpolarization. For anyone worried social media platforms are doing too little to curb misinformation, imagine how much worse things will be with platforms that don’t even try.

Risks and challenges

The techonomic cold war necessitates a new approach to cybersecurity. “Companies need to guard against not just malware and phishing attacks, but weaponized disinformation,” says Kris Lovejoy, EY’s global consulting cybersecurity leader. “We’ve seen disinformation used to attack elections, but there’s no reason it couldn’t be used to target companies. Most companies today do not have the safeguards and protections they will need in the next frontier of cybersecurity.”

A second challenge is lack of transparency. Commerce thrives on transparency, yet instruments such as company bans are opaque and seemingly arbitrary. To the extent these instruments undermine transparency, they create uncertainty for businesses.

The regional fragmentation of platforms by regulation and divergent social contracts increases the complexity of regulatory compliance and the risk of regulatory noncompliance. Beyond mere compliance, companies face significant brand and reputation risk if consumers perceive platforms to be misaligned with societal values.

A hyperpolarized future will create some of the most significant challenges of all. Losing the last tenuous bridges between our divergent echo chambers would threaten everything from social stability to the future of democracy and the very existence of a shared reality.

This content was produced by EY. It was not written by MIT Technology Review’s editorial staff.

Continue Reading

Trending