« There Go The Pacific Bluefins | Main | What *Should* We Be Worried About? »

01/21/2013

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Jim

Hi Dave,

I agree with a lot of what you write, including this but why include ZeroHedge? I think you're wrong about that site, I don't see any of the things you are talking about on ZH. It's a great source of information.

Dave Cohen

@Jim,

Well, friend, I guess that means the joke's on you

Please, everybody, go over to Zerohedge and look at what's there today.

http://www.zerohedge.com/

And don't forget to check this out--

http://www.freewebsitereport.org/www.zerohedge.com

Or forget to look at (and click on?) all the ads on the Zerohedge homepage.

-- Dave

Jim

Jim is Jim, presumably, but is not me, so now that's out of the way, this phenomenon is really what's happened with sensationlist media since the early rags of New York. The 'content' is actually the ads, and it always has been. The 'news' is the bait. Television has always followed the same format.

The internet amplifies it, and there are some really ridiculous examples of it. Unforunately, most of the major media sources have seen that sites like the Daily Beast have a more successful revenue-generating format, so they're pretty much all moving to the sensationlist side.

It's adding dramatically to the confusion between reality and fiction taking place in our culture. There are so many conspiracy theories, or stories about what Kim Kardashian wore in Cannes, or hyper-partisan editorial slants now that the heads spins. Just always cross check from multiple sources, and never click on the ads.

Dave Cohen

I guess we shall have to distinguish between Jim #1 and Jim #2.

As above, we shall do so by what the two Jims say.

-- Dave

J. Drew

Some people say "bad news sells", but in case you haven't noticed, those people are wrong. The truth is that bad news is easier base sensational news stories around, and that's what really sells.

John D

You are so right Dave. I don't know how many times I've clicked on an interesting headline only to ask myself after 'why did I waste ten seconds of my life on that?'

Peter

That's what's missing on DOTE-ads! I knew there was a reason I don't see links to you on the SCM's I visit! Dave, you're missing out on 'what's happening'!

Reminds me of one of the best books I've read: Neil Postman's "Amusing Ourselves To Death: Television in the Age of Public Discourse". If he was alive today, he'd be astonished by the depraved state of our world.

Brian

So, basically, this is the same advertising model (and media "subscription" model) that has more or less always existed since long before Hearst sensationalized (started?) wars to increase circulation.

I presume this has been going on since humans decided other humans had something of value...

Naked fan dancing gets them in the door. Then, take their gold (or whatever) by sales or fees or con or theft. Kick back a little to the fan dancer.

Same game. Different outfit.

Best analytical advice ever given... follow the money.

I look forward to the next pieces of your series.

J. Drew

Checked out that Freewebsite report website, that's pretty cool. For zerohedge to be pulling in that kind of cash there must be more lowbrow day-trader doomers than I'd imagined possible. I do wonder how accurate their figures are though. Does DOTE really rake in a big $3.10 a day in advertising revenue? That Seems like an awful lot.

Alexander Ač

Well, and then we have prez Obama talking about climate change (he is in 2nd term, so now he as allowed to): http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-ZC_y78W4t4 - so presumably, this is not "blog" and actually will help for a "common good". Or not.

Alex

The comments to this entry are closed.