A little over a year ago I started a firestorm of controversy by blogging about a conversation taking place in the public forum for the PodCamp NYC organizer group over on Google Groups. Group organizer John Haven's wanted opinions on whether or not they should dedicate funds to paying for Robert Scoble's travel expenses in return for an appearance and a few kind words from the great one.

Who asked for reimbursement or offered to pay is subject to debate. Havens claimed that Scoble asked. Scoble claimed that the money was offered. Who knows. At this point I really don't care. In then end Robert Scoble didn't show up at Podcamp NYC. I'm sure I'm the one personally blamed for that. Oh the humanity. Perhaps Robert Scoble should have showed up to represent his employer PodTech in spite of my nefarious efforts to keep him away from the event.

Many times I have heard people judge the future of podcasting by the trajectory of venture capital funded outfits like Odeo, PodTech and PodShow. I've always said that was a mistake. In fact I've stated that independent podcasters would be better off without venture capital money in podcasting. My reason for this belief is not the principle of accepting VC money. Its about the fact that all these companies make the same moves once they cash their checks.

It seems to me that the world of tech startups is a lot like the elementary school yard. The kids who are funded (or whose shows are owned by the funded) don't want to consort with the riff raff from the other side of the tracks. So what happens is that these companies disengage from the real conversation. They remove their ears from the ground. They don't have to be a part of the community anymore. They have millions and they are about the community. Which brings me to the dilemma of PodTech.

Robert Scoble is well known as a grass roots evangelist from his days at Microsoft. He is also known as a video podcaster. And one would've hoped (for the sake of the investors in Podtech at least) that he could bring the mojo from Microsoft to PodTech. It didn't work out though. And I believe that it didn't work out because Mr. Scoble moved away from his core skill of evangelizing and moved into the cushy leather (probably aeron actually) chair of a Vice President of Media Development.

PodTech needed to build a brand, attract an audience and create a community. The VP of Media Development should be the person responsible for developing the content and building that audience. Robert brought his own audience and sponsors but that isn't good enough for a company that has millions in financing, a big office and a few dozen mouths to feed.

"There are more than 30 people working at PodTech and I only bring in a small percentage of revenues (and my show is highly profitable)."

The best place to start finding content and building an audience for a tech network is among the faithful. And many of the faithful can be found at these grass roots Podcamp events around the world. Why wasn't Robert more active at these events? Yes, he attended Podcamp San Francisco in November of 2006. But I don't remember him speaking or teaching. I don't know that Robert has attended any grassroots events outside of the bubble during his tenure with Podtech.

Instead of reaching out, teaching and building community Podtech spent large sums of money on a handful of shows like 1938 Media, Geek Entertainment TV and Lo-Fi St. Louis. Two of the three mentioned here aren't even tech shows. What's up with that? Was there even a strategy?

It seems to me that Robert Scoble never practiced what he preached while at PodTech. The Podtech blog was hardly a place to get the latest real updates on the company. In fact, as of today the last post over there was three and a half months ago. The evangelism in the podcasting community wasn't there either. Scoble's show was profitable and I guess that's all that mattered.

I have no idea whether the choice on strategy with respect to the podcast community was driven by Robert, the investors or their now ousted CEO John Furrier. Either way, Robert should have fought to embed Podtech within the podcasting community. Had Robert done so then his company could have gained the benefits that one can find in the community. People would have respected Podtech more and probably pointed their audiences to something besides the Scoble Show.

No matter. PodTech was never about podcasting. That's obvious. And they are moving in a new direction so there will be no doubt that its a waste of time to look at PodTech as a bellwether of the health of podcasting.

"...PodTech has moved away from an editorial focus and toward an corporate media development one,..."

Thank heavens.

The final takeaway is this. Podcasting is about building things. Building audiences, Building brands, building communities and building relationships. All individuals and companies who want to make a difference in the space should consider that whether they are funded by venture capital or not.

I twittered about this earlier today. I think it's a big deal that XM Radio has launched podcast channels. So far there are nine podcasts on the iTunes store from XM. This move into podcasting indicates two things.

1. XM is moving away from thinking of themselves as a satellite radio company and moving toward thinking of themselves as an audio based entertainment company.
2. XM is waving the white flag and realizing that they have to expand their audience. The only way they can expand is to go all the way into people's pockets without those people having to pay a ridiculous price for a receiver and a monthly fee.

The good thing about this move is that XM is giving those of us who aren't subscribers more content choices. Unfortunately this occurs at the expense of independent podcasters who will find that there is strong growth in mainstream competition in the space.

There are still areas where independent podcasters can distinguish themselves. Mainstream entertainment outfits who produce podcasts are mostly focused on the technology of getting the content out there. Independent podcasters have the chance to build real communities and have a two-way conversation with their audiences. Even today there are still many gaps between the type of content that mainstream sources will offer and what independent podcasters can deliver.

So I'm not bummed out that media companies like the Wall Street Journal, The Economist, The New York Times, XM and many others are in this space. The more the merrier. The challenge, which I find quite fun, lies in building brands and communities one audience member at a time.

By all accounts PodShow has always been the one to watch in the podcasting space. They started out by leveraging the audiences of some of the biggest stars in podcasting with Adam Curry and Dawn & Drew. They've even broken bigger shows like GeekBriefTV. Top it off with $24 million in funding, some good sized brand advertisers and you've got a can't miss venture. Well, not so fast.

PodShow has had a wee bit of trouble solidifying their space as the be all, end all of podcasting driven companies. They have been struggling to find a big hit since they brought Cali (not her real name I believe) Lewis and the GeekBriefTV squad on board. In fact, many of the top shows on the Podshow owned Podcast Alley are not produced in association with PodShow. So if you believe that success in podcasting is based on killer content then it can't be good to have so few of the top shelf content channels in the podosphere.

Today another stake was driven into the San Francisco based company when it was announced that the host of a PodShow produced show called Textra was quitting to work for CNET.

The young lady sings the sweet mantra that so many people who leave web2.0 startups belt out upon announcing their departure when she states, "...I want to make it clear that my departure from Podshow is not an indication of the state of things at Podshow. This is just the next logical step for me and I owe a lot of it to Podshow." Oh what a great way to repay Adam and the PodShow team for their hard work and investment. That's the working world though. I have no problem with someone leaving for greener pastures. But lets face it. If things were rocking at PodShow there would be no reason to move to a cold, hard town like New York City.

It is a sign of bad times coming when you see relatively new (less than a year in Natalie's case) employees leaving startups for old media companies. This is a trend we will see more of in the coming months. Remember when the highly touted Jeremiah Owyang left PodTech for Forrester Research after less than a year? Hey, good for Jeremiah but bad for PodTech, despite Jeremiah's claim that, "I’ve had the most amazing experience..." Smart people like that just don't up and leave young companies on the rise. They do depart companies that are stagnant or declining.

So are you going to shoot the messenger? We need a dose of reality here. Podcasting is not about getting funded and getting advertisers. Its about using the web to build relationships that create opportunities and value that may not be initially quantifiable. Dave knows what he's talking about when he states, "I see podcasting, for bloggers, as just another way to communicate with a few people who are interested in what they know and think. I also see it as a way for professional news organizations, esp non-profits, to flow reports to people in a very convenient and powerful way."

The fact is that what podcasters really need is education and support on how to create a great user experience and build communities on the web. We don't need free web hosting with annoying pre-roll advertisements. And podcasting certainly doesn't need venture capital funded networks or even the myriad of associations and pseudo-unions that want you to pay them dues. These are all distractions from the real meaning and power of this technology.

Consider this a weather report. It is what it is.