Archive for Media

How fake tech news works.

  1. Make something up and report story
  2. Make top-ten list of why it will be the best
  3. Make story about others have plans to do it better and cheaper
  4. Make another top-ten list about why competitors will be better
  5. Report fake something is late or having problems
  6. Report fake thing not happening anytime soon
  7. Report competitors losing interest and thinking about not doing it.
  8. Make 7x on ads from clicks on a nothing story
  9. Repeat

Prince 1998 Guitar World interview – Would you ever consider doing something like that?

0{+> : Certainly not. That’s the most demonic thing imaginable. Everything is as it is, and it should be. If I was meant to jam with Duke Ellington, we would have lived in the same age. That whole virtual reality thing… it really is demonic. And I am not a demon. Also, what they did with that Beatles song [“Free As a Bird”], manipulating John Lennon’s voice to have him singing from across the grave… that’ll never happen to me. To prevent that kind of thing from happening is another reason why I want artistic control.

Source: Prince 1998 Guitar World interview – The Music Interview Archive

🙁

The “Best” News Sites. Ok so you told me i’m reading crap, then where SHOULD I look?

Qualifications:

  • Quality Original Content (not aggregating)
  • De-emphasizing opinion pieces, fluff articles, click counts
  • Offers an Ad Free Experience (can be Paid Subscriber option)
  • Quality Website (Design, Access to Archives, Full RSS)

General News

  • https://theconversation.com
  • https://www.reuters.com
  • https://www.theguardian.com
  • http://www.bbc.com
  • http://www.pewresearch.org
  • https://www.economist.com

Tech

  • https://www.wired.com
  • https://arstechnica.com

Sports

  • https://theathletic.com

One person’s history of Twitter, from beginning to end

Here’s the bad news: we did.

Twitter was built at the tail end of that era. Their goal was giving everyone a voice. They were so obsessed with giving everyone a voice that they never stopped to wonder what would happen when everyone got one. And they never asked themselves what everyone meant. That’s Twitter’s original sin. Like Oppenheimer, Twitter was so obsessed with splitting the atom they never stopped to think what we’d do with it.

Twitter made the decision to ride the hate wave. With their investors demanding growth, and their leadership blind to the bomb they were sitting on, Twitter decided that the audience Trump was bringing them was more important than upholding their core principles, their ethics, and their own terms of service.

But when companies tell you they need to be more transparent it’s generally because they’ve been caught being transparent. You accidentally saw behind the curtain. Twitter is behaving exactly as it’s been designed to behave.

Source: One person’s history of Twitter, from beginning to end

Eyes-on with Hulu’s new live TV service

Similarly, when Apple mixed together on-demand music streaming with downloads in Apple Music, it stepped into a minefield. It eventually rolled back the UI to better separate the two things the app does. Will the same thing happen to Hulu? There’s a good chance — especially since there’s no traditional channel guide for live TV — but that’s not its biggest worry.

The thing Hulu should be worried about is brand identity. In trying to reinvent itself as a live TV service, it risks diluting its biggest differentiator — robust on-demand content. Yes, its competition does a lot of on-demand, too, but Hulu basically invented it. There are several TV series on the service, a feature that serves as a key part of its overall appeal.

Source: Eyes-on with Hulu’s new live TV service

Blogs.. yay

Here, I control my words. Nobody can shut this site down, run annoying ads on it, or sell it to a phone company. Nobody can tell me what I can or can’t say, and I have complete control over the way it’s displayed. Nobody except me can change the URL structure, breaking 14 years of links to content on the web.

But the ecosystem for independent publications is fundamentally broken. Getting discovered, building a readership, and profiting from your work as an independent writer are all much, much harder than they used to be.

Source: Redesigning Waxy, 2016 edition

Publishers Are Rethinking Those ‘Around the Web’ Ads – The New York Times

These ads are “built on a premise for publishers to maximize revenue — it’s not built on a premise of finding the next great things for your readers to do,” he added.

“When you’re looking at things from that prism and you’re not maniacally obsessed with monetizing every single pixel, Outbrain is very obviously not fitting into your equation anymore,” he said. “If your readers’ trust and loyalty is No. 1 as the thing you care about most, you can’t have that on your page.”

Source: Publishers Are Rethinking Those ‘Around the Web’ Ads – The New York Times

Your Media Business Will Not Be Saved

Because human beings exist, and we are not content consumption machines. What will save the media industry?—?or at least the part worth saving?—?is when we start making Real Things for people again, instead of programming for algorithms or New Things.

Source: Your Media Business Will Not Be Saved — Medium

Medium and Twitter founder: ‘We put junk food in front of them and they eat it’

“If you look at feedback loops like likes and retweets, they’ve been very carefully crafted to maximise certain types of behaviours. But if we reward people based on a measurement system where there’s literally no difference between a one-second page view or reading something that brought them value or changed their mind, it’s like – your job is feeding people, but all you’re measuring is maximising calorie delivery. So what you’d learn is that junk food is more efficient than healthy, nourishing food.”

Source: Medium and Twitter founder: ‘We put junk food in front of them and they eat it’

Some thoughts on privacy

Somebody on Quora asked, What is the social justification of privacy? adding, I am trying to ask about why individual privacy is important to society.

One would hardly ask to justify the need for privacy before the Internet came along; but it is a question now, because the Internet, like nature in the physical world, doesn’t come with privacy. We are naked by nature in both. The difference is that we’ve had many millennia to work out privacy in the physical world, and approximately two decades to do the same in the virtual one. That’s not enough time.

 

…In the online world, there is an assumption by those with the means to penetrate our private spaces (such as our browsers and email clients) and plant tracking beacons, that behaving in ways that would never be sanctioned in the physical world is okay in the virtual one because, hey, it’s easy to do, everybody does it, and it’s normative now, transparency is a Good Thing, it helps fund the “free” commercial sphere on the Web, etc. etc.

But it’s not okay. Just because something can be done doesn’t make it right. Nor is it right because it is, for now, normative.

Privacy norms should apply to the online world as well as they do to the offline one. And they will, soon enough, because we have advertising and tracking blockers now. These help create and guard private spaces in our online lives, by leaving unwanted ads and tracking files outside. These are primitive systems, so far, but they do work and are sure to evolve.

Source: Some thoughts on privacy