Who is Vox Media writing for?

https://twitter.com/ashleyfeinberg/status/828992942207594496

the verge is for people who like SCOOPLETS

I think I've grown to like The Verge more over the last year, but that's probably mostly stockholm syndrome.

― The beaver is not the bad guy (El Tomboto), Saturday, January 14, 2017 8:11 PM (three weeks ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

otm, I feel like I enjoy the occasional article and then Nilay Patel shows up and makes me shake my head

@voxdotcom
A defense of Betsy DeVos
https://t.co/MWQlI4p7Gv

Indeed, as the alternative schooling movement spreads, one can imagine it attempting the same kind of capture that every other large industry aims for in its relations with the federal government.

oh indeed, indeed, maybe one should try to imagine that some more

yo vox your corporatist roots are showing

Joel and 9 Others ‏@joeljohnson 3h3 hours ago
@johnjcook @reckless @pkafka @benpopper I was there. Direct ad pulls and interrupted deals were about a million. More importantly: who cares

Ashley FeinbergVerified account
the people who experienced it firsthand deny it, seems like it’s worth an update especially when you’re giving gg-ers a false sense of power

v convincing. it wasn't what u said but more importantly, who cares. also let's not say things that make gg-ers feel powerful.

yeah, sorry, the thread got dropped and I linked to the fun potshots part

https://twitter.com/johnjcook/status/828979581923241984

John Cook
‏@johnjcook
@reckless @pkafka @benpopper our '14 revenue was $45 million. GG started in august and didn't become a thing until october

so there's no way, unless their total revenue was incredibly inconsistent throughout the year, that they were disrupted by gg so badly they dropped that much money

tbf yes, all of these people that are no longer employed by a company that no longer exists are not presenting a unified front

also fucking yeah, make sure a number that seems large is real when it could provide encouragement to the dickhead anti-social justice keep on trumpin' brigade

i'm just saying that the only reason why that number is wrong is because it either is or isn't wrong, not because it might embolden some anonymous online dudes and saying "who cares" is the kind of thing that sets my internal veracity bells off.

the only reason why that number is wrong is because it either is or isn't wrong

this is actually a very reasonable thing and based in the idea the number matters

in fact, it does matter as a gauge of scale, but on the other hand, the people using it as a gauge of scale will deride any correction to the article. cook's right -- it doesn't matter, the $7 million number is out there, if anyone wanted to be emboldened by it, they have their number and they'll deny any correction

there aren't any reasonable people out there who think "gamergate was bad, but if they had a multi-million dollar effect, then maybe I will reevaluate my stance"

http://www.heartofthedreaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/trustnoone.jpg

imo that's a weakness of the "facts matter" brigade I am a part of too regularly

they only matter if:
- they are relevant
- they're part of a reasonable argument or narrative, single facts are ignored by people
- you're arguing to people who will pay any attention to you whatsoever

http://gamedesignreviews.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/dontbe.jpg

imo the greatest science is recognizing biases and emotional responses, very underappreciated

that's what all these dickhole data journalists think

touche

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/02/behind-the-internets-dark-anti-democracy-movement/516243/

“No,” said Nick Steves, the pseudonym used by one NRxer well-known within the movement. “It will only lend false credence to the misleading facts and outright errors you will inevitably print irrespective of my involvement.”

Asked what he thought I would print, Steves explained that “115 IQ people are not generally well equipped to summarize 160 IQ people” and that only one journalist, Vox’s Dylan Matthews, had “come close to permitting NRx to speak for itself.”

160 IQ people who reference their IQ, as if citing that number wins every argument, are too stupid to understand what a 160 IQ is.

"Nick Steves"
"Dylan Matthews"

xp otm

I would say we need a eugenics program to keep anyone who goes around professing a 160 iq from reproducing, but they're doing pretty well with that on their own.

I can't believe I never started a thread on what a shit show wired magazine is

who is writing for vox media?

http://deadspin.com/leaked-data-show-vast-majority-of-sb-nation-page-views-1803138754

like no kidding SB nation is an aggregator

I just assume all those volunteers are big Jon Bois fans and are just contributing their FanPosts as a sort of sweat-equity Patreon to keep the Jon Bois Content Dream alive.
I mean who would not support this guy: https://www.sbnation.com/2017/7/24/16003968/17776-questions-and-answers

Suggest Ban Nation?

it is boggling to me that there is still any audience for the verge or re/code since they are both terrible, overly earnest tech / nerd verticals that cover almost nothing that their competition doesn't, and the UX is still shit whether you're on mobile or desktop, etc etc.

I guess I still keep loading the verge in a tab from time to time because I hope one day it will improve despite knowing that the vox media house style is always going to grate and only 1 out of 40 times am I going to see anything I'm remotely interested in actually reading. It would be nice to see the whole farm pivot away from being so fucking watery and ditch the pretentiously neutered prose, but that seems highly unlikely. If it ain't broke don't fix it, I guess.

went back to the verge again, they're asking what people would want in a membership / premium version (?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!!?!?!?!?!??!??!!?!!?!?) and they couldn't even cover the new Star Wars trailer properly. Also, hilariously, almost none of the ads loaded in Safari on mobile. everybody loses!

The entire Vox Media enterprise makes it crystal clear that the only thing that matters is how easy it is to buy and sell ads while keeping overhead (i.e. staff writer wages) as "reasonable" as possible. Whether or not I, consumer, click on the ads clearly has no bearing on the system; whether the content is remotely interesting to anyone is the most trivial concern. It's like the iMDB model exported to news verticals. If anybody who actually understands this shit first hand would care to educate me as to why I'm wrong I'd love to learn.