# cheaper tools did not make anyone sound like themselves Source: https://aaronmakelky.com/blog/podcasting-for-creators-human-content-wins-2026 Last updated: 2026-02-20 Cheaper tools did not fix the real problem: creators still have to sound like themselves. Format choices and a few simple systems keep a creator from sounding interchangeable. [Back to blog](/blog) Field notes February 20, 2026 · 10 min read Podcasting · Creators I think the easiest way to fail in podcasting is to assume access is still the hard part. It is not: I can record on a phone, upload in minutes, and put something on Spotify before most people have finished setting up their mic stand. The real challenge now is bringing something useful that a hundred other creators cannot copy. I joined Dr. Alfonso "Fonz" Mendoza on My EdTech Life to talk about content creation, podcasting, and what has changed since AI tools became normal for creators. The short version: cheaper tools did not fix the trust problem. Prefer to listen? [Catch the full My EdTech Life episode here.](https://www.myedtech.life/makelky/) ## Starting is easy now, so standing out is the hard part When I started, I did not start for sponsorships. I started because I was trying to convince a friend to make a podcast, and he said editing was too much work. So I made my own just to learn, with no audience plan and no monetization plan, just reps. Most people overestimate what they need to begin and underestimate how much they can learn by publishing quickly. One of my students once told me to download a free app and just record on my phone. I talked into my iPhone and uploaded. It was not polished, but it was live in about ten minutes, and that reset how I think about the medium. If someone has an opinion worth sharing, or guests worth learning from, I think they can start now instead of waiting to buy a better camera or design the perfect intro. The issue is that this same access is available to everyone else. So yes, entry is easy. But if entry is easy, differentiation matters more. You do not need a stunt, just a reason for people to keep listening. That reason can be a clear audience, a tighter format, a direct teaching style without fluff, or simply a promise you actually keep every week. When Dr. Fonz asked about the shift in podcast potential, that was my answer underneath the tools talk. More people can create, which is great. It also means creators need a sharper point of view. ## Stop chasing big download numbers and build the right relationships I still see creators get stuck on vanity metrics. How many downloads did I get, how many subscribers, and why do bigger brands not want to sponsor me yet? I understand the frustration, but I think it leads new creators into the wrong strategy. If you launched three weeks ago and have fifty downloads, large brand deals are unlikely. Your first phase is learning and trust-building. I usually tell people to "sponsor yourself" first. Keep creating until your data is useful and your audience profile is clear. In parallel, join network-style opportunities where you can learn how sponsorships are run, how ad reads are placed, and how results are measured. Even if the money is tiny at first, that experience is not tiny. I also think new creators underestimate guest strategy. If you are a startup or a solo consultant, bring in the people you want to work with. Have strong, specific interviews with them. Publish publicly as a byproduct. Your real value can come from the relationships you build before you ever close a "real" sponsor. When Dr. Fonz pushed on whether sponsorship culture is changing, I gave the same answer I give in private calls: big numbers are less meaningful than they used to be, and relevance is more meaningful than it used to be. Ten thousand vague listeners may feel good, but a thousand right-fit listeners can change your business. ## Format changes whether people actually get to it I have seen great ideas disappear in bad packaging. I have seen this in schools, agencies, and creator businesses. Teams spend hours writing long text updates that people never read. The same information in audio or short video gets consumed immediately. That happens because people are busy, not lazy. I think format is about context. My wife is a good example. She listens while doing other things around the house. She is not opening a long PDF for leisure. A lot of people consume learning content the same way. This is why I push creators to capture audio and video, even if they think they only want one output. Record once, then repurpose. Use the long form for YouTube and podcast platforms. Pull short clips for social posts. Turn strong points into text if your audience likes written summaries. One source can support every channel without reinventing your content each time. I also disagree with the "audio-only forever" stance for most new creators trying to grow. If you want to stay audio only for creative reasons, that is valid. I respect that. If the goal is discoverability, it is harder now without video distribution. Platforms reward video behavior. Ignoring that reality is a strategic choice, not a neutral one. Dr. Fonz and I both came from education, so this point matters even more there. Teachers and schools do not need to become media companies. They just need a repeatable publishing habit that meets people where they already are. ## Repeatability is where speed comes from The first time I edit, everything feels slow. By the tenth time, I move faster if I build repeatability into my process. This is why I care less about "best tool" debates and more about whether a creator can produce consistently without burning out. A practical benchmark I use is a one-to-one ratio between final runtime and total edit time. If I record for one hour, can I move from raw file to publish-ready in about one hour? New creators will not hit that immediately, and that is fine. But it is a useful target because it forces better decisions. Templates, saved layouts, reusable intros and outros, clip presets, naming conventions: anything you set up once and stop rebuilding. Anything you can reuse should be reused. I have seen creators waste huge amounts of energy rebuilding the same visual setup every week. Then they wonder why publishing feels impossible. This is where AI can be practical without taking over the creative work. For example, I like using AI to identify potential clips, place markers, or clean caption punctuation. I still review every output before posting. The goal is to remove repetitive grunt work, not outsource judgment. If a system saves me twenty minutes on low-level editing, I can spend that time improving the actual message. ## I trust a rough edge more than over-editing There was a period where everyone chased maximal editing: heavy transitions, constant effects, aggressive cuts, every filler word removed. A lot of it looked impressive and felt exhausting. I think the trend is moving back toward clarity and human voice. When I edit, I usually leave natural filler in audio and video unless it muddies the point. For captions, I often clean it up so the text is easier to read. That balance keeps the person in the delivery while making the idea easier to follow. Over-editing can do more damage than light imperfection. If cuts are too aggressive, people feel the jump even when they cannot explain why. That friction pulls attention away from the idea itself. I have watched highly respected shows where the visual cutting style was so tight I had to switch to audio-only consumption. Perceived quality is not the same as over-processing. The edits I trust are the ones that make the point easier to follow without sanding off the person saying it. This applies to AI use too. I use AI every day and work in a space where these tools are central. What I am against is outsourcing all thinking. When I skip AI entirely for a day and do things manually, it reminds me where my own weak points are. That check matters. If I automate every step for too long, I feel the cognitive drop. Most creators will if they are honest. For podcasting, I trust AI most when it is doing support work, not trying to be the creator. I want tools speeding up production without flattening the judgment that made the show worth recording. ## What I still trust I think podcasting still works because relationships still work. People share things made by people they trust. They send links to friends. They talk about ideas in group chats. They come back when they feel like someone is speaking directly to their reality. I do not see avatar trends or automation stacks replacing that. The creators I trust keep showing up with a clear point of view and something specific to say, no complicated setup required. Trust is still the hard part. ### Listen to the episode - [My EdTech Life with Dr. Alfonso Mendoza](https://www.myedtech.life/makelky/) ## Related pages - [All AI notes](/blog) - [Tools](/tools) - [About Aaron](/about) ## Sources and references - [Descript](https://www.descript.com/) - [Perplexity](https://www.perplexity.ai/)