5 ms·

As somebody with no dog in this fight, I cannot help but wonder if there's a correlation between PageRank and the rise of referring to text on a page as "Conten

by gardano 11y ago

As somebody with no dog in this fight, I cannot help but wonder if there's a correlation between PageRank and the rise of referring to text on a page as "Content", rather than, well, "An Article".

kolinko 11y ago
Content is just a generic term. If you write a post or a Slideshare that has mostly pictures in it, it's still content but not an article.
- the_af 11y ago
  Not sure if the parent poster referred to this, but it's not absurd to consider that the term "content" may have harmful connotations. See Stallman's opinion on this (I know, an extremist view, but I think he has a point): "Words to avoid (or use with care)": http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Content http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Content > If you want to describe a feeling of comfort and satisfaction, by all means say you are “content,” but using the word as a noun to describe publications and works of authorship adopts an attitude you might rather avoid: it treats them as a commodity whose purpose is to fill a box and make money. In effect, it disparages the works themselves. If you don't agree with that attitude, you can call them “works” or “publications.” I think there may be a correlation between this negative phenomenon of gaming pagerank and referring to articles and pictures as "content", as if they were second-class citizens of the web.
- gardano 11y ago
  I guess my reaction is such that the term "Content" relegates an article (or a slide deck) to being a unit of commerce, rather than a summary of thought (or of emotion).
smitherfield 11y ago
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=content%2Carticle&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Ccontent%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Carticle%3B%2Cc0 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=content%2Carti...

by gardano 11y ago

As somebody with no dog in this fight, I cannot help but wonder if there's a correlation between PageRank and the rise of referring to text on a page as "Content", rather than, well, "An Article".

kolinko 11y ago

Content is just a generic term. If you write a post or a Slideshare that has mostly pictures in it, it's still content but not an article.

the_af 11y ago
Not sure if the parent poster referred to this, but it's not absurd to consider that the term "content" may have harmful connotations. See Stallman's opinion on this (I know, an extremist view, but I think he has a point): "Words to avoid (or use with care)": http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Content http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Content > If you want to describe a feeling of comfort and satisfaction, by all means say you are “content,” but using the word as a noun to describe publications and works of authorship adopts an attitude you might rather avoid: it treats them as a commodity whose purpose is to fill a box and make money. In effect, it disparages the works themselves. If you don't agree with that attitude, you can call them “works” or “publications.” I think there may be a correlation between this negative phenomenon of gaming pagerank and referring to articles and pictures as "content", as if they were second-class citizens of the web.
gardano 11y ago
I guess my reaction is such that the term "Content" relegates an article (or a slide deck) to being a unit of commerce, rather than a summary of thought (or of emotion).

smitherfield 11y ago

https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=content%2Carticle&year_start=1800&year_end=2008&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Ccontent%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Carticle%3B%2Cc0 https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=content%2Carti...