Typical pattern: “Scientists find something strange when they look at a common whatever - and it’s not good!”
This kind of crap used to be the style of little blurbs at the side or the bottom of an article, but it’s in the headlines now. Until you click the headline you don’t even really know what the article is about anymore - just the general topic area, with maybe a fear trigger.
Clicking on the headline is going to display ads, but at that point the goal isn’t to get you to buy anything yet, it’s just to generate ad impressions, which the content provider gets paid for regardless of whether you even see the ads. It’s a weird meta-revenue created by the delivery mechanism, and it has altered the substance of headlines, and our expectations of what “headline” even means.
Lemmy user SLAMS mainstream media, you will not believe what the comment section said
slam
Da dah dah
and welcome to the JAM!
OP is on BLAST after reading this one comment.
SHOCK reaction as bait comment fallout nixes OP campaign success chances, experts warn.
Yeah I made c/savedyouaclick in the hope of getting people de-clickbaiting stories, but I was the only poster afaict. I wonder if calling it newssummararies could help.
Nah that community name is fine, it just needs to be promoted. Someone else linked some communities where it can be advertised.
It could be worth posting about it in [email protected] and [email protected]
Oh I’d be up to help if I could
Maybe a link or two a day
I’ll also contribute a wank or two a day.
Thank you for your service
For what, cutting down?
How do you “do” c/savedyouaclick? I’ve summarized links in a comment before, but I don’t know what would be the point of also mentioning c/savedyouaclick when I do that.
See the existing posts there, I guess, or look at the reddit version. I agree that there’s not much point in cross linking it unless there’s a significant discussion thread for that post. But reddit got those sometimes.
I hate them. I hate that everything is always trying to sell you something or trick you into generating profit somehow. It makes me want to burn down a bank.
No other choice than sticking with the few reputable media that still don’t do that. Gotta support them so they don’t fall into that too.
Sometimes the articles themselves are fine, and it’s just the editorial department that adds the sensational headlines. I don’t know if it’s worth throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
If the marketing has the power to go over the journalism to change the titles, isn’t it a symptom that things are going downward for this media?
Haven’t the titles always been traditionally written by someone other that the articles author?
As long as journalism quality is respected that’s not an issue.
There’s something I hate more than clickbaity headlines, click here to find out!!
want to read news
don’t want to pay for news
news start to use ads to get money
ads pay for clicks
complain about clickbait news– average internet user
I pay for two news subscriptions, and I’d like into invite any of y’all who can afford to, to do similar
Same here.
Fun fact: I was recently forced to find a new apartment.
Instead of throwing myself into the grinder that is the online rent market, I posted an ad in the local newspaper (it cost 36€).
Several landlords answered and basically told me they don’t like to look for renters online either.
After all, most landlords are senior citizens.
The apartment I found through the newspaper was much better and cheaper than anything available online.
So the way I see it, the newspaper subscription saved me around 200-300€/month for the foreseeable future.
deleted by creator
And that’s exactly why I read German news only, they are paid with tax money and there’s a governing body in place that ensures objectivity.
Of course there are private magazines and stuff, but as long as you stay clear of them, you’re by and large good to go.
In fairness, I haven’t found a good paid news aggregator that has those paid sources. I sincerely doubt that most people can pay $10/month each to read NYT, The Economist, Bloomberg, WSJ, their local big newspaper, Wired, and whatever else might be useful.
Well yeah that’s your brain that’s used to the Internet. One newspaper and maybe a weekly journal with Op-Eds and background reports is enough to stay informed.
You don’t need to read every article from every point of view.One newspaper is enough to get a shallow understanding of something, but it’s not enough to get a more nuanced understanding. Even then, not every newspaper covers every story, so you’ll need multiple even for a shallow understanding about XYZ.
Whenever people ask this question, I do this one thing.
While we’re at it, does anyone on Lemmy hate capitalism? I never see anyone mention it.
And that Trump guy is really not turning out well.
Iconoclast!
I don’t hate it, but it’s been allowed to go uncontrolled for too long and it has become cancerous to the successful advancement of society.
Hey does anyone else on Lemmy hate Puppy Kickers?
I think they suck but just curious if anyone else felt that way
deleted by creator
it’s infuriating
Readers hate this one simple trick – Do this every day!
I don’t click those any more. I assume they’re completely written by AI and not fact-checked in any way. They just suck knowledge out of me instead of adding more.
Exactly. If the headline is garbage, I assume the story is, too. Real journalism that’s worth reading doesn’t need to resort to clickbait.
NPR and the BBC still aren’t doing that.
- I think the Associated Press is in the clear here.
- Seems Reuters so far is good too.
- And The Guardian
- Mother Jones
- ProPublica
- Ars Technica for tech news
- The Conversation (always written by subject-matter experts)
- Deutsche Welle
- Etc.
Thankfully there are still a lot of amazing news sources that have held onto their integrity. Click here to see even more. Number 17 will surprise you!
That’s a very good list. I just threw out the first couple that came to mind, but it is worth calling out the organizations that are still trying to do real journalism.
I give small sustaining donations to NPR, ProPublica, and The Guardian. I hope to add a few more when I can.
Well played. You got me to click.
Yes, but this has been the case for many years now.
That’s why I stopped reading the news. Instead I get my news here and I have to interpret what they mean for me locally. Its extremely bullshit. Now orange man has bit into NPR and PBS. When that institution disappears, I won’t have a leg to stand on. I’ll be a mindless robot going to work. Suddenly they come and tag one of my balls with a chip because they said they would but nobody was there to tell us.
I’m not annoyed by them (I simply don’t read them, why would I want to waste my time?), I’m saddened by them.
Edit: that’s also the reason why I read so few newspapers/periodicals. And why I pay for them. I want to support quality work.
