Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

25 Things I Didn't Want to Know About You

time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 42 posts

Re: 25 Things I Didn't Want to Know About You

#11

Post by andreyf »

harpastum wrote: post #5

"This recent bout of viral narcissism has sent roughly 800,000 hours of worktime productivity down the drain...But it's just so stupid...I can't believe I'm saying this, but I've finally found something more stupid than Twitter." I think the only thing worse than sharing mundane details about yourself for the world to see is to be the TIME writer that has sunk so low as to whine about it in a front-page article (yes,…

Really? This counts as journalism these days?

No, but it counts as selling eyeballs to advertisers, which is the business Time is in. It's the same business all magazines are in.

Re: 25 Things I Didn't Want to Know About You

#12

Post by raju »

Strangely enough, I got tagged (thrice in the last two weeks). I was just making up the list, and realized, its actually a great exercise. I really enjoyed writing that list (still working on it though).

Though if this is mainstream journalism, and this is from Time.com, I am sufficiently confident that I am not the only one wasting my time (assuming I even agree with the author)

Re: 25 Things I Didn't Want to Know About You

#13

Post by Retric »

andreyf wrote: post #11
harpastum wrote: post #5

"This recent bout of viral narcissism has sent roughly 800,000 hours of worktime productivity down the drain...But it's just so stupid...I can't believe I'm saying this, but I've finally found something more stupid than Twitter." I think the only thing worse than sharing mundane details about yourself for the world to see is to be the TIME writer that has sunk so low as to whine about it in a front-page article (yes,…

Really? This counts as journalism these days? No, but it counts as selling eyeballs to advertisers, which is the business Time is in. It's the same business all magazines are in.

The sad thing is I found the list far more interesting than the article. Hint: If your going to rant about something as a waste of time don't let it upstage you're job.

Re: 25 Things I Didn't Want to Know About You

#14

Post by jmtame »

my favorite list i've seen so far:

1.) I don't usually fill out chain lists. 9.) I've made People Magazine's most beautiful people list 6 years running. 13.) I really like 30 Rock. 16.) I've never tasted my own urine. 17.) David Blaine is actually just a character in my imagination. 19.) I was half of the men at the million man march. 22.) Four of the things on this list are true. 23.) #22 isn't one of them. 25.) I really, really hope someone sends me $25.

Re: 25 Things I Didn't Want to Know About You

#16

Post by jgrahamc »

I tried to start a chain like this as a Facebook application called Four Things, One Lie. The idea was for people to post five things, one of which wasn't true, about themselves: http://www.jgc.org/blog/2007/07/stop-me-before-i-code-again-...

I guess most people have no imagination.

Re: 25 Things I Didn't Want to Know About You

#17

Post by nazgulnarsil »

harpastum wrote: post #5

"This recent bout of viral narcissism has sent roughly 800,000 hours of worktime productivity down the drain...But it's just so stupid...I can't believe I'm saying this, but I've finally found something more stupid than Twitter." I think the only thing worse than sharing mundane details about yourself for the world to see is to be the TIME writer that has sunk so low as to whine about it in a front-page article (yes,…

The online demographic for newspapers and magazines is quite a bit different than their ink and paper counterparts. Right now traditional journalism sources are floundering in the online environment. They've gotten so used to their name-brand advantage that they have forgotten why they became a respected name in the first place: providing a higher quality of research, analysis, and writing than others.

In order to survive the transition these organizations are going to have to build respect from scratch, once again becoming authoritative sources. Yes, aggressive editorials is an easy way to attract clicks. But it will kill your business model in the long run.

Before the web people took what these publications said for granted. Now anyone can go investigate prime sources with a few clicks. This raises the bar for journalistic integrity. It remains to be seen if the traditional publications rise to the challenge or sink to the level of tabloids.

Re: 25 Things I Didn't Want to Know About You

#19

Post by davi »

unalone wrote: post #8

I took a bit of a more unorthodox approach when I got tagged. I figure it's better to make notes worth reading: http://unalone.tumblr.com/post/75897218/continuing-my-facebo... Most people aren't funny, they aren't insightful, and they share way too much. Facebook is a loose social network; a "friend" on Facebook might translate to someone you'd barely recognize in real life. This is a problem inherent with any group.…

My opinion of Time and Newsweek has been consistently low for about 15 years. When I was in high school, I thought they were "serious" newsweeklies. I went so far as to keep a crate of them my library was discarding, with some vague idea of having them around for 'future reference' (mind you this was pre-web). Then, sometime in college, I picked one up and realized that it was essentially just a printed version of TV-caliber news. Out went the crate.

Point of story: could it be you who have changed, not Time or Newsweek?

(Though maybe they really did change -- media quality is a hard thing to deal with quantitatively or objectively.)

Post reply on HN