With so much on the line, you'd think NYT would A/B test article titles. Anyone know if this is done with modern journalism? Is is feasible?
Of course. It drives HuffPo's success.
How Forbes Stole a New York Times Article and Got All The Traffic
51–60 of 64 posts
Re: How Forbes Stole a New York Times Article and Got All The Traffic
#52I liked the NYT article a lot more. I'd rather read one article for 10 minutes than 10 articles in the same amount of time.
In the end, I think the market agrees: people pay real money to read the New York Times, but nobody pays real money to read Forbes blogs.
Re: How Forbes Stole a New York Times Article and Got All The Traffic
#53This illustrates the business model NYT is pursuing. The NYT simply cannot put out an article with a headline like that. They would lose subscribers. People who subscribe to the NYT expect a higher level of discourse than "Target knows you're pregnant". Interestingly, Forbes pursues a dual strategy. I doubt they would publish a title like that in their magazine. On the web though, they might as well be The New York P…
When you've paid your $2 for the Times, you've committed to the paper, and you have a big broadsheet (although smaller than it was), so you can scan a lot of complex headlines and ledes pretty efficiently.
When you're online, every other website is competing for your time and attention, screen real estate is limited, and good chance you're using an aggregator like HN, reddit etc.
Online, publishers have to go for linkbait Twitter headlines. If the Times doesn't find a way to do it, this is what will happen, and everyone will read their stuff via Huffington Post or Business Insider.
Re: How Forbes Stole a New York Times Article and Got All The Traffic
#54It's definitely relevant here on HN -- a good article with a bad title probably won't go anywhere. A good article with a great title will stay on the front page for hours.
I would like it if HN included a short description field, so that I'm not clicking articles with opaque linkbaity titles like "Stop fucking coding", and "You're killing yourself".
Re: How Forbes Stole a New York Times Article and Got All The Traffic
#55Also, while I would theoretically be interested in the NYT version, it is 9 pages long. So it sits in my "to be read" tab indefinitely. The Forbes article was doable in a short time frame.
Re: How Forbes Stole a New York Times Article and Got All The Traffic
#56Tangential, but lede is an interesting word and I always thought it was just "lead".
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lede
Example: In the era of Linotype and hard copy, an editor might rework a paragraph (or graf) in a story, circle it and give instructions to composing to have it moved to the top by using the word "lede." If the editor wrote "lead," the typographer might think the editor simply wanted "leading" or spacing inserted.
Re: How Forbes Stole a New York Times Article and Got All The Traffic
#57Forbes got my traffic because they didn't require me to register, log in, pay them money, or whatever it was that NYT was trying to get me to do instead of just showing me the damn article.
Re: How Forbes Stole a New York Times Article and Got All The Traffic
#58Forbes got my traffic because they didn't require me to register, log in, pay them money, or whatever it was that NYT was trying to get me to do instead of just showing me the damn article.
It should be free to read, because it was free to write, right?
Re: How Forbes Stole a New York Times Article and Got All The Traffic
#59With this sensationalist headline, the article is a case in point.
Re: How Forbes Stole a New York Times Article and Got All The Traffic
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Daily Mail (UK) has a similar approach. Their site is the most popular newspaper site globally and while it shares content with its print edition, the site focuses hard on mass market and celebrity stories. The print edition, on the other hand, is IMHO mostly "immigrants are evil" and Fox News-style scaremongering that its retired, middle Englander audience relishes.
The Guardian is almost as bad. When I loaded their page just now, the top story in the sidebar was also celebrity news: http://www.guardian.co.uk/fashion/2012/feb/19/stella-mccartn... I think it's clear this kind of "news" plays across all age groups and classes, not simply "middle Englanders." Even wealthy elites have their forms of lowbrow entertainment. If the goal is to get readers to click on ads, scantily-clad…
Its London Fashion Week which is why that story got a lead - and Stela Macartney frocks are way out of the "middle england " price bracket.
Why do you think it strange that a rare example of the UK actually making stuff is featured?