3 ms·
>QZ has become a spam and advertising cesspool. These companies keep popping up promising to "disrupt" the media world (I'll throw Medium in there as well), an
by stupidhn 9y ago
>QZ has become a spam and advertising cesspool.
These companies keep popping up promising to "disrupt" the media world (I'll throw Medium in there as well), and end up right back at the basic model, spamming readers with advertising.
It's such an interesting market; it's literally delivering text, and we have such a convenient way to consume it. Sure some text is (far) better than others, but like many products, the average person doesn't care at best, and can't tell the difference between crap and good at the worst.
People are going to have to get used to paying for good content. I hope it happens sooner than later.
- mikeash 9y agoIt appears that this article is a summary of one in the Financial Times, which requires payment. The fact that the summary from qz.com got to the front page and the original from ft.com didn't shows you what people actually prefer, regardless of what they might say. I don't see the cesspool that the grandparent comment describes, though. Even in incognito mode with my adblocker disabled, I see the article immediately. There's a gigantic annoying video banner ad at the top, but the story begins right below it, and after that there's one more fairly reasonable ad in the middle of the article. Maybe they're doing some analytics to decide how much they can annoy you, and the other person got incorrectly pegged as someone who can take a lot.
- Eric_WVGG 9y agoI was wondering about his experience too… if viewed on a shorter screen like an 11" Macbook, it's 100% ad. I read Quartz on RSS, so my knee-jerk is "what are you talking about, they do exemplary journalism." The web version is indeed butt.