Does “society for the rehumanization of the internet” make anyone else think of a certain red dwarf episode… “The Committee for the Liberation and Integration of Terrifying Organisms and their Rehabilitation Into Society”
2 Likes
How are we to distinguish between viral mills whose goal in life is to drive traffic to their site by parroting popular content and honest blogs who eke out a living by happy accident of having enough viewers to generate advertising income? You say Cracked isn’t a viral mill because they often post original content. Is percentage original content the yardstick we should use? Or would measuring the percentage of the screen taken up by ads be better? Is it a sharp line, or more of a fuzzy blur? Sites that post more than 20% original content have internet soul, while those with less are internet soul-suckers? I find BoingBoing mildly annoying at times for all the shill-work they do for various writers and artists whose mediocre work ends up mentioned here as little more than a thinly-veiled advertisement. I don’t begrudge those folks basking in the warm light of BoingBoing’s attention, but it does carry the unsavory pong of nepotism. So when I see a post wringing its hands about how -other- sites are sucking the soul out of the internet through their crass commercial behavior, it makes me itch a little.
3 Likes
it makes me itch a little.
You might want to see a doctor about that before it… spreads.
1 Like
Its the “smarm” debate all over again isn’t it?
About yardsticks.
That’s the wrong question I think since there’s no objective way to answer it; You say boingboing is a shill for some artists and I presume you believe they are shilling because these artists produce what you consider to be mediocre work, therefore they cannot be honestly promoting work they actually like.
I don’t agree with that, and if we can’t gauge intent then trying to settle on yardsticks is pointless.
See, I don’t think buzzfeed should die, I just won’t click on their links because I do believe their business practices are poisoning the internet AND I can get the “content” just by doing a google search (Hot or Not? Buzzfeed ranks Canada’s 22 “hottest” prime ministers). With Huff-po, I won’t click because they don’t pay their writers, and I hate how cracked splits posts so they get more clicks but I think their stuff is funny (entirely subjective I know), but also I think It would be still a bit more unfair to syphon their articles from somewhere else since they produced it.
Me I would deem upworthy clickworthy if they were something more than a sort of 9gag for youtube videos. If I consistently came across videos that I would be hard pressed to find any other way though, they might get my attention. If Buzzworthy had a semblance of an editorial point of view instead of just seemingly procedurally generated content:
You [Won’t believe/'ll cry/be shocked] that [insert_random_name_here] was [Insert_lurid_activity_here] with [insert_random_farm_animal/gardening equiptment_here] [insert random_number_of_exclamation_marks_here]
I might warm up to them slightly.
I can only speak for myself, but I think boingboing lives up to its tagline of “Direcory of wonderful things” so I find it’s value consistent, if they monetize this they can keep it up, its a good balance I think, and I don’t think you can say the same for other sites.
2 Likes
In the age of Web 2.0, millions of eyeballs can replace doctors. Post a video, or a photo, and we’ll solve the problem, together, as a community.
Corporations are people too, my friend.
2 Likes
But, but…he was so cuuuuute, and he said he was allergic to latex…
I have one weird trick for dealing with viral mills.
3 Likes
In the eyes of the law, yes; in my eyes - not a bloody chance.
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.
