The author raises a valid issue with regard to the way people now prefer to consume information changing and I feel they then stumble within arm’s reach of the solution when they bemoan a “more or less post-literate audience who would prefer that whatever historical edification they might receive come via podcast”.

If they genuinely wish to reach an audience “of the ordinary person of general education” they may need to reconsider how they present their information. One of the commenters make the observation that the difference between history and mythology is whether there is quality evidence presented for the story, which is something the author alludes to but does not directly address. It seems to me that the ideal solution to this is to present the information in a variety of ways, perhaps both in the classic written form and a shorter, but equally well evidenced and referenced podcast form. Dan Carlin’s series “Hardcore History” is a good example of the latter. Should the listener have any question about the information presented, sources are given in the podcast, the transcript and more detailed writing attached and referenced to the podcasts. They make engaging listening, give the audience the confidence to trust the conclusions, and send them to more detailed information should they have any query.