ABSTRACT
PurposeTo explore the perceived credibility, relevance, legitimacy and accessibility of videos and podcasts in farm extension.MethodsA two-phase mixed methods approach consisting of a pre-COVID online survey of farmers (n = 221), farmer telephone interviews (n = 60) and in-person focus groups of farmers (n = 4) followed by an analysis of how viewers interact with Agricology videos and podcasts, a further online survey (n = 141) and online farmer focus groups (n = 4) during the COVID-19 pandemic.FindingsIf they are to be perceived as effective extension methods, videos should be short, concise, practical, advert-free and visualise how to implement a practice. Podcasts can be longer, more detailed, and allow multitasking. Both should use farmer-friendly language, be easily accessible, high quality, non-biased, and be created by someone whom farmers respect.Practical implicationsHelps policy-makers and extensionists understand the potential of videos and podcasts and the trade-offs in using them with other forms of extension. The findings are also of use to global advisory services seeking to offer hybridised advice as a result of the ongoing COVID pandemic.Theoretical implicationsElucidates the trade-offs of using videos and podcasts when face-to-face extension is not possible and develops the CRELE framework.OriginalityDiscusses the role of podcasts in farm extension and re-evaluates the role of videos when face-to-face extension is impossible.