61–70 of 124 posts
His words may or may not have merit, but his writing style is extremely persuasive. He got his message across and certainly made an impact. If only AOL took advantage of this, we might be reading an entirely different article.
Just an aside: would have been awesome if the writer created an article generating program. He could feed the program a few key words (perhaps just the name of the TV show). The program could scrape or be manually fed some information from Google trends. Then add some scraping of data from existing articles. Use a markov chain to keep the content fresh and you're good to go! I'm just thinking of the sentence generati…
It would be hilarious but I'm not so sure it would work that well. I think one of the big reasons the scigen papers passed for real was because a lot of people will assume that if they can't understand a paper, it's just gone over their heads. There's enough real jargon in them to reinforce that assumption. Entertainment news is a lot more accessible so it would be pretty obvious.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How many businesses have to succeed at it before it's considered a viable business model? How many have to fail before it's not? And where can you see Vice TV other than online?
Good point. Vice may not be the best example. Perhaps I'm a bit too enamored with their inversion of the magazine model. I just thought that they were are great new cross platform content creator. Can you think of any other? Good is good too. http://www.good.is/
This just makes me think: why in the world would any one want to become a writer these days? There isn't much money in it, unless you get lucky and hit it big. I understanding having a passion, but this is one passion that should be relegated to hobby time. Am I wrong on this? I'm just not seeing the economic viability of writing sentences and having people (whether readers or advertisers) paying you proportionate to…
Funny you say that, 'cause people tell me the same thing about startups. But as Bezos once said: "You don't choose your passions. Your passions choose you."
It's not as pithy, though.
It's a sad sad story. I love reading great content and I never had problems paying for great content. I've been a subscriber to paid magazines/papers and I'll continue to be one to digital ones. But I guess my kind is rare and of course the majority always wins.
I take a slightly less pessimistic view. Its an economic process that is in the process of balancing itself. There are a lot of people who only want "free" information (which is to say free news, free reviews, free self help advice, etc) and of course providing information is not 'free' as it costs real dollars to host it, to maintain it, to fix it up after the web site gets hacked etc. To enable it to stay 'free' pe…
Maybe this is an idealistic thought, but I think this trend of writing SEO laden garbage is what will finally make quality journalism behind paywalls work. People will eventually be driven to pay for decent content, unable to put up with irrelevant half baked articles churned out at breakneck pace.
To take this a step further, for me, the only reason I'm ever exposed to garbage content is from google results. I'm not sure google will be able to solve this problem, or if they do, it won't be from taking the same approach that's made them successful. I expect that some sort of curated search engine(s) will be the solution in the future. What exactly this will look like, I have no idea... if I did know I would be trying to build it.