Dear All news agencies on the internet.
Yes All of you.
I wish to warn you about the spread of something nasty. A disease. A disease that degenerates the art of journalism even further than hackery and blag-facing. It can turn even a well researched, interesting and insightful story into a one word mumbled question and answer session. And it isn't even the writer's fault...
I first noticed it.. mmm.. let me see, probably the first day I went on Twitter and started following news agencies. I followed one in particular, the 'Patient X*' of this phenomena... and that was when I first encountered a Tweet like this: Why are these two Hip Hop Titans Feuding?
(*For Reasons of Medical ethics I will not name this Typhoid Mary of internet News, suffice to say that if Scooby Doo tried to say it, he would probably pronounce it as 'Ruffington Roast').
Now if you analyse that Tweet it the exact opposite of a headline. Instead of packing in the most amount of information into a punchy and pithy strap-line that entices you to read the story, it is more like a riddle, something an ancient and wizened might say before allowing you to cross a rickety rope bridge to continue your quest to rescue some dragon or princess or something... So I clicked, thinking something along the lines of: 'Jesus.. Chuck D and KRS One have got into a beef... I wonder what it could be about'
The story is actually that Jay Z and Kanye West made announcements on the same day and there may or may not be a feud, but essentially we don't know.
(Chances are they aren't incidentally, both are far more Titans of Marketing than Hip Hop, and know that nothing shifts units better than a 'tribal' loyalty... Look at the Beliebers... best way to create a fanbase? Create an external threat... anyway... a Blog for another day...)
Of course using rubbish questions in reporting isn't a new thing, headlines have done it for years in an attempt to get you to buy the paper, even spawning 'Betteridge's Law', in which it is stated, any Headline which ends with a question mark, the answer is usually 'No'.. Examples of this are manifold, particularly in health reporting, where headlines like this are plentiful: 'Is your morning Commute Giving You Cancer?' (Answer: No, although some obscure experiment has shown that cells in a dish are producing cancer effects when exposed to certain carcinogens) Is your Morning Coffee Giving you Cancer: (Answer: No, although some obscure experiment has shown that cells in a dish are producing cancer effects when exposed to certain extracts from raw coffee beans), Is your Morning Coffee Protecting you from Cancer? (Answer: No, although some obscure experiment has shown that cells in a dish are combatting cancer effects when exposed to certain extracts from Raw Coffee Beans)
Basically if the Story is about Cancer there is a chance that the headline will be phrased in this way...
What this particular 'Monkey From Outbreak*' has managed to do however is further strip out informational content. Rephrasing of the above Headlines could go as far as. 'Can Morning Commutes Kill you?', 'Is a Fatal disease hiding in Your Cup of Joe?', 'Which Morning Ritual might be saving your life?'
They don't even have to directly push the 'Cancer' button anymore. Simply by stripping out the information, they don't only tickle the fear sensors, they also have a tweak at the puzzle centres of our confused and Twitter Addled Brains. We're a pattern seeking animal, we want to put the pieces together, so we click on the link... and we find exactly the same article we would have never been fooled into reading under the old method.
All this would be fine, if a mite annoying had it have remained confined to what a Gruffalow might refer to as 'The Gruffington Post', but it is obviously a successful method, and so it is spreading. Now you get 'respected' Music Magazines getting in on the act, with Tweets like 'Which 3 legends set to play Glastonbury 2014?" (Which links to an article that basically poses the same question, as Michael Eavis is famously tight-lipped about it until the ticket sales have been completed).
Luckily there are some warriors against this, the mighty HuffPoSpoilers on Twitter, who try and give the salient points to as many dispatches from that mighty news source (Who I totally HAVE NOT referred to in this Blog post up until now) as possible, so you can make an informed decision before you click and drive advertising revenue their way.
An example from this very day reads:
Thanks Huff Post Spoilers! I might have clicked that BEFORE finding out I didn't care a row of buttons about ANY of it...
So what's the harm.. why not hand over your media strategy to the journalistic equivalent of 'The Riddler' from the old Campy Batman Cartoon?
Well.. Where does it End?
Well Here:
@StuffPost: Catastrophic Nuclear Meltdown, But Where?
Or simply here:
@StuffPost: ?
@StuffPost: ?
@StuffPost: ?
... and that's EVEN worse than a British Tabloid running endless XFactor Exposes...
Yes All of you.
I wish to warn you about the spread of something nasty. A disease. A disease that degenerates the art of journalism even further than hackery and blag-facing. It can turn even a well researched, interesting and insightful story into a one word mumbled question and answer session. And it isn't even the writer's fault...
I first noticed it.. mmm.. let me see, probably the first day I went on Twitter and started following news agencies. I followed one in particular, the 'Patient X*' of this phenomena... and that was when I first encountered a Tweet like this: Why are these two Hip Hop Titans Feuding?
(*For Reasons of Medical ethics I will not name this Typhoid Mary of internet News, suffice to say that if Scooby Doo tried to say it, he would probably pronounce it as 'Ruffington Roast').
Now if you analyse that Tweet it the exact opposite of a headline. Instead of packing in the most amount of information into a punchy and pithy strap-line that entices you to read the story, it is more like a riddle, something an ancient and wizened might say before allowing you to cross a rickety rope bridge to continue your quest to rescue some dragon or princess or something... So I clicked, thinking something along the lines of: 'Jesus.. Chuck D and KRS One have got into a beef... I wonder what it could be about'
The story is actually that Jay Z and Kanye West made announcements on the same day and there may or may not be a feud, but essentially we don't know.
(Chances are they aren't incidentally, both are far more Titans of Marketing than Hip Hop, and know that nothing shifts units better than a 'tribal' loyalty... Look at the Beliebers... best way to create a fanbase? Create an external threat... anyway... a Blog for another day...)
Of course using rubbish questions in reporting isn't a new thing, headlines have done it for years in an attempt to get you to buy the paper, even spawning 'Betteridge's Law', in which it is stated, any Headline which ends with a question mark, the answer is usually 'No'.. Examples of this are manifold, particularly in health reporting, where headlines like this are plentiful: 'Is your morning Commute Giving You Cancer?' (Answer: No, although some obscure experiment has shown that cells in a dish are producing cancer effects when exposed to certain carcinogens) Is your Morning Coffee Giving you Cancer: (Answer: No, although some obscure experiment has shown that cells in a dish are producing cancer effects when exposed to certain extracts from raw coffee beans), Is your Morning Coffee Protecting you from Cancer? (Answer: No, although some obscure experiment has shown that cells in a dish are combatting cancer effects when exposed to certain extracts from Raw Coffee Beans)
Basically if the Story is about Cancer there is a chance that the headline will be phrased in this way...
What this particular 'Monkey From Outbreak*' has managed to do however is further strip out informational content. Rephrasing of the above Headlines could go as far as. 'Can Morning Commutes Kill you?', 'Is a Fatal disease hiding in Your Cup of Joe?', 'Which Morning Ritual might be saving your life?'
They don't even have to directly push the 'Cancer' button anymore. Simply by stripping out the information, they don't only tickle the fear sensors, they also have a tweak at the puzzle centres of our confused and Twitter Addled Brains. We're a pattern seeking animal, we want to put the pieces together, so we click on the link... and we find exactly the same article we would have never been fooled into reading under the old method.
All this would be fine, if a mite annoying had it have remained confined to what a Gruffalow might refer to as 'The Gruffington Post', but it is obviously a successful method, and so it is spreading. Now you get 'respected' Music Magazines getting in on the act, with Tweets like 'Which 3 legends set to play Glastonbury 2014?" (Which links to an article that basically poses the same question, as Michael Eavis is famously tight-lipped about it until the ticket sales have been completed).
Luckily there are some warriors against this, the mighty HuffPoSpoilers on Twitter, who try and give the salient points to as many dispatches from that mighty news source (Who I totally HAVE NOT referred to in this Blog post up until now) as possible, so you can make an informed decision before you click and drive advertising revenue their way.
An example from this very day reads:
HuffPo Spoilers
Kim Gordon (@KimletGordon) RT @HuffPostEnt: Surprising guest star heading to @girlsHBO in Season 3 http://huff.to/1fHvvnp
Thanks Huff Post Spoilers! I might have clicked that BEFORE finding out I didn't care a row of buttons about ANY of it...
So what's the harm.. why not hand over your media strategy to the journalistic equivalent of 'The Riddler' from the old Campy Batman Cartoon?
Well.. Where does it End?
Well Here:
@StuffPost: Catastrophic Nuclear Meltdown, But Where?
Or simply here:
@StuffPost: ?
@StuffPost: ?
@StuffPost: ?
... and that's EVEN worse than a British Tabloid running endless XFactor Exposes...
No comments:
Post a Comment