11–20 of 247 posts
Taking a look at the Rotten Tomatoes “Top 100 Films of All Time” list [1], I’m not exactly sure why it’s a model to be replicated. It’s extremely obvious that “top” means “popular and/or most advertised.” [1] https://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt/
> In order to be vetted as an individual critic, you should meet the following guidelines: Written > • Consistent output for a minimum of two years. > • Demonstrated film/TV coverage at a publication outside of a self-published website. If you are a self-publishing critic, your reviews should reflect our key values. Having journalist rate other journalists won't serve as a good filter on the actual quality of reporti…
What if Daily Mail suddenly has a great article like they occasionally do? Many professional critics still wouldn't give it a good review because their reputation and careers are at stake.
I definitely don't trust a consensus of journalists to tell me a study is misinterpreted.
Taking a look at the Rotten Tomatoes “Top 100 Films of All Time” list [1], I’m not exactly sure why it’s a model to be replicated. It’s extremely obvious that “top” means “popular and/or most advertised.” [1] https://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt/
In RTs case, "Top" means films no one dislikes it and everybody thought it was at the very least OK. The "problem" with genuinely great films is that they can often be divisive and challenging and generate a lot of strong opinions in both directions, and thus they'll never rate as well on RT.
Taking a look at the Rotten Tomatoes “Top 100 Films of All Time” list [1], I’m not exactly sure why it’s a model to be replicated. It’s extremely obvious that “top” means “popular and/or most advertised.” [1] https://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
RT's model prioritizes consensus in quality instead of brilliance. Using RT for a best of list will give you good safe movies instead of outstanding ones. I'd say it's a good model for news.
... except that most of the news that actually matters is 'outstanding' rather than 'good and safe'
Taking a look at the Rotten Tomatoes “Top 100 Films of All Time” list [1], I’m not exactly sure why it’s a model to be replicated. It’s extremely obvious that “top” means “popular and/or most advertised.” [1] https://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt/
What a weird list with few selections between 1970 and 2015.
Taking a look at the Rotten Tomatoes “Top 100 Films of All Time” list [1], I’m not exactly sure why it’s a model to be replicated. It’s extremely obvious that “top” means “popular and/or most advertised.” [1] https://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt/
Taking a look at the Rotten Tomatoes “Top 100 Films of All Time” list [1], I’m not exactly sure why it’s a model to be replicated. It’s extremely obvious that “top” means “popular and/or most advertised.” [1] https://www.rottentomatoes.com/top/bestofrt/
What a weird list with few selections between 1970 and 2015.