The New York Times’ Freakonomics has an interesting interview with musician & podcaster Jonathan Coulton, who became an Internet superstar as a result of his Thing A Week music podcast (podcast feed).

Last week, we asked for your questions for singer/songwriter/Internet celeb Jonathan Coulton. Thanks to all of you (including John Hodgman, or at least “John Hodgman“) for the questions, and thanks especially to Jonathan for his answers.

In it, he touches on a lot of topics relevant to all podcasters:

Q: You’ve been getting a lot of mainstream media play over the last year. How has that been different from the attention you’ve gotten from podcasters and other people in the Web 2.0 world? What are the ways each respective media space has contributed to your career? Also, touring is a big part of your life now. What were some of the biggest adjustments you needed to make to being on the road? And how do you balance the adjustment with trying to produce new music?

A: Yes, there’s definitely been a huge increase in mainstream media attention this last year, for which I’m very grateful. The interesting thing is that my business model is sort of at odds with that, or at least, it’s not plugged into it directly. A good example was the May 2007 piece in the Times, “Sex, Drugs, and Updating Your Blog.” Big important newspaper, lots of readers, very complimentary piece, but it didn’t generate the huge spike in Web traffic that I expected to see. Contrast that with the link on the Penny Arcade blog over a year ago, which immediately generated a huge number of new visitors. They’re very different things. Chances are, a lot of people reading this now are not going to know what Penny Arcade is, but they have a huge and devoted following of people who love geeky things and know how to download an MP3. The Times is a much larger, but less focused, death ray. Which is not to say that MSM exposure doesn’t do anything at all, just that it’s harder to track its effects with Google Analytics. I think the best way to talk about the distinction is to say that Internet buzz has a very direct correlation to traffic and therefore sales, whereas mainstream media love tends to have more long-term benefits.

Q: How much attention have you paid to fan creations based on your work? Have you seen any of these creations — music videos, mostly? What did you think of them?

A: I pay a lot of attention, and I’m so grateful for each and every one of them. Some of them speak to me more than others, but each one is amazing to me simply because it exists at all. I wrote a post on my blog recently during a particularly misty moment in which I was considering the sheer number of people who have been plonked in front of my music because they watched a YouTube video that someone else made. There are literally millions of views across all the fan-made music videos. Not only is it a huge help in getting my music out there, but it’s so flattering and wonderful to think that something I created inspired creativity in someone else.

Q: Based on your experience with “Thing a Week” and the pay-what-you-want model for downloads, do you see this as the future for artists in the music industry?

A: I think there’s still a lot of room for things to change, but we’re definitely seeing pieces of what the solution will be. While everyone likes to say that consumers think music should be free, I don’t think that’s true. The Radiohead thing had less to do with business models and more to do with marketing, and granted, they are a super famous band so it’s hard to compare. But their experience and mine both seem to indicate that there are plenty of people who want to support artists they love — it’s ridiculous to think otherwise. If you’re a fan, you’re going to buy music, concert tickets and T-shirts.

I don’t know if pay-what-you-want is the answer, but I do know that the overhead it takes to record, distribute and market music is going to continue shrinking. It’s going to get easier and easier for artists and fans to find each other, and our culture as a whole has already