the entire "pivot to video" strategy that destroyed many of the sites you used to love was based on Facebook lying about video metrics, convincing everyone that was the only way their content was getting shared
they half-heartedly "apologized" for this years later, leaving burning wreckage behind
they half-heartedly "apologized" for this years later, leaving burning wreckage behind
Reposted from
Carli Velocci π½
As a reminder, Facebook had a giant hand in the death of online journalism in the mid 2010s because they inflated metrics that caused publications to crash and burn. Many of us haven't trusted it in a long, long time.
Comments
Who thinks video and podcasting as news sources is superior to reading? I get that some things need to be video but most dont. I only have so much time (limited) in a day to listen to things. I donβt have earbuds in 24/7. However, I have tons of time to silently read and view.
It annoys me to have to get my earbuds out for a video that I *have* to watch because the information isn't in text anywhere.
Competing for the masses on those corp platforms will always be at cross purposes
Politics like music requires you to control your own masters in order to thrive
And theyβre still doing it.
Xitter, probably
But I thought I was in the minority, when it turns out that not many people were interested in all of that video content that ruined everything.
Compare 1990-2005 (YouTube) to 2005-2025
Big difference! I want someone to write Neil Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death, Part II, the Internet
https://traversingtradition.com/2020/10/26/neil-postman-and-the-internet-age/