IELTS Speaking cue cards › Podcast Habit
Describe a podcast you listen to on a regular basis
Describe a podcast you listen to on a regular basis. You should say: - what the podcast is about and how you first came across it - when and where you usually listen to it - what makes the host or content particularly engaging for you and explain how listening to this podcast has influenced your knowledge or daily habits.
How to approach it
Open with the podcast's name and topic to orient the examiner, then move chronologically through how you found it, your listening habits, and what hooks you about the content. Save the final 30–40 seconds for the 'explain' prompt, which asks for genuine reflection on influence or change. Examiners reward coherent narrative, natural vocabulary, and a clear personal perspective rather than a simple list of facts.
1-minute preparation notes
- Name + topic (e.g. science, true crime, history)
- Discovery story – friend rec / algorithm / article
- When/where – commute, gym, cooking
- Host quality – storytelling, humour, expertise
- Impact – new habit, changed view, new knowledge
Band 8+ sample answer (Part 2)
Show the sample answer (try speaking first)
The podcast I'd like to talk about is 'Stuff You Should Know', a long-running show where two hosts, Josh and Chuck, break down a huge range of topics – everything from how black holes work to the history of cults. I first stumbled across it about three years ago when a colleague mentioned it almost in passing during a lunch break. I looked it up that evening out of curiosity, and honestly, I was hooked within the first ten minutes.
I usually listen to it during my morning commute on the metro. It's become a bit of a ritual, really – I pop my earphones in as soon as I get on the train and the twenty-minute journey flies by. Occasionally I'll carry on listening while I'm cooking dinner if an episode is particularly gripping.
What makes it so engaging is the chemistry between the two hosts. They clearly do thorough research, but they present everything in a conversational, almost playful way, which means complex ideas never feel overwhelming. Josh has a knack for finding the most unexpected angle on a subject, and their genuine laughter makes the whole thing feel like you're eavesdropping on two friends chatting.
In terms of influence, it's genuinely broadened my horizons in ways I didn't expect. I've picked up the habit of fact-checking things I thought I already knew, and several episodes have sparked longer reading projects for me. One episode on sleep science actually convinced me to cut back on late-night screen time, which I'd been meaning to do for years. So it's had a surprisingly practical impact on my daily routine.
Written for StudyChat as an example of a band 8+ answer. 267 words, about 2 minutes spoken.
Part 3 discussion questions
Why do you think podcasts have grown so rapidly in popularity over the past decade?
I think the main driver is convenience – you can consume a podcast while doing something else entirely, which isn't really possible with reading. Smartphones made on-demand audio effortless, and production costs dropped low enough for niche creators to thrive. For example, there are now dedicated shows for almost every hobby imaginable. That level of personalisation is something traditional broadcasting simply couldn't offer, and audiences have responded to it enthusiastically.
How does listening to spoken audio content compare with reading articles as a way of staying informed?
Both have real merits, but they serve slightly different purposes for me. Reading allows you to skim, re-read, and evaluate sources quickly, which suits breaking news well. Audio, on the other hand, tends to go deeper – a podcast host can spend an hour unpacking a single topic with nuance and storytelling. The downside is that it's harder to verify claims on the go. Ideally, I think people benefit most from combining the two rather than relying on just one.
Do you think podcasts could eventually replace traditional radio broadcasting? Why or why not?
I doubt they'll fully replace radio, though they'll certainly erode its audience further. Radio still holds advantages in live, localised content – traffic updates, emergency broadcasts, local news – things podcasts can't replicate in real time. That said, for entertainment and long-form discussion, podcasts are already winning. Younger demographics barely touch traditional radio. I think radio will survive in a narrower role, a bit like how physical books coexist with e-readers rather than disappearing entirely.
What responsibilities do podcast creators have when discussing sensitive or controversial topics?
I feel strongly that creators have a genuine duty of care, particularly because podcasts can reach millions with very little editorial oversight. They should distinguish clearly between opinion and verified fact, provide context for sensitive subjects, and give fair representation to opposing viewpoints. A well-known controversy involving a hugely influential host presenting fringe medical views without sufficient scrutiny is a clear example of what can go wrong. Influence at that scale carries an obligation to be responsible.
Useful language
- stumble across something – Natural way to describe discovering a podcast by chance rather than actively searching for it.
- hooked within minutes – Describes becoming immediately engaged; sounds natural and avoids the overused 'very interesting'.
- it's become a bit of a ritual – Shows the habit is established and meaningful, adding a personal and vivid dimension.
- broaden one's horizons – Useful collocation for describing how a podcast expanded your knowledge or perspective.
- a knack for something – Describes a natural talent; works well when praising a host's storytelling or presenting style.
- go deeper into a topic – Contrasts podcasts with shorter media formats; shows awareness of how different media work.
- the episode flies by – Idiom conveying that engaging content makes time pass quickly; sounds fluent and natural.
- spark a longer reading project – Shows intellectual follow-through beyond the podcast itself; impresses examiners with specificity.
Common mistakes on this card
- Ignoring the 'explain' prompt – many candidates describe the podcast well but rush through or completely skip explaining how it has influenced their habits or knowledge, which is worth significant marks.
- Listing facts without a narrative – reading out generic podcast features ('it has good topics, good hosts') rather than telling a personal story makes the answer feel flat and fails to demonstrate vocabulary range.
- Overusing 'interesting' and 'good' – candidates often rely on these weak adjectives when richer alternatives like 'compelling', 'insightful', 'thought-provoking', or 'engrossing' would demonstrate the lexical resource examiners are assessing.
Record your answer and get a band score
Answer this card out loud, then the Part 3 questions. You get a band estimate on all four criteria, with pace, pauses and fillers measured from your recording.
Tap to start recording
Not ready to speak yet? from a real recording
2 free speaking checks a day. No sign-up. Your recording is deleted right after it is transcribed.
Uploading…