3 ms·

I landed on their website the other day and it opened a full page chumbox[0] which completely obscured their real content. I’ve no knowledge of Rolling Stone m

I landed on their website the other day and it opened a full page chumbox[0] which completely obscured their real content. I’ve no knowledge of Rolling Stone magazine’s history or its current fortunes, but I could tell immediately that - if they valued their own content and their users so poorly and were that desperate to make a buck - they are totally screwed. [0]https://www.theawl.com/2015/06/a-complete-taxonomy-of-internet-chum/ https://www.theawl.com/2015/06/a-complete-taxonomy-of-intern...

Rifu 9y ago
Trying to finish your linked page was very uncomfortable. Interesting read tho.
chloracne 9y ago
CNN is just as awful, somehow, with the chumboxes and I’m not sure how these properties justify this to themselves. Television first, internet second? Old media gets the gold standard, and internet is tripe? Maybe it’s all driven simply by the bottom line and nothing else. Destructive forces are at work ruining what used to be useful sites like The Gothamist and such. For the life of me, I don’t see anything but the disintegration of slow-growth, carefully cultivated brands if paywalls and the bottom line (propped up by tawdry ad infestation) are all that stand between meaningful works of media.