4 ms·

any clarifications on what substance there is? this reads like a two minute hate of a d-list celebrity and i struggle to understand what makes it interesting in

any clarifications on what substance there is? this reads like a two minute hate of a d-list celebrity and i struggle to understand what makes it interesting in the hacker sense.

dang 9y ago
You mean in the Hacker News sense? From skimming the article, I'd say three things. (1) The signal/noise ratio seems high, i.e. there is a lot of factual information and relatively little ideological noise. (2) The story contains complexity, for example in the relationships between the people involved, that makes it less predictable than the median. Predictability is what we're most trying to avoid on HN. (3) It's a new variation in the ongoing shift in discourse about these behaviors, which is an interesting new phenomenon in the guidelines' sense (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). So yeah, there's a lot for people to rant and repeat about, but I think also some substance to consider, and maybe yield some insights about. We're asking users to make a conscious effort to eschew the former and go for the latter.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > The signal/noise ratio seems high, i.e. there is a lot of factual information and relatively little ideological noise. That seems true. > The story contains complexity, for example in the relationships between the people involved, that makes it less predictable than the median. There is complexity, but it's the pretty much the kind of complexity that has become a cookie-cutter template of harassment narratives in creative industries recently. > It's a new variation in the ongoing shift in discourse about these behaviors Is it, though? The dynamics seem to be nearly identical to many of the other narratives recently, differing only in the identity of the victims, perpetrator, and workplaces involved.
  - dang 9y ago
    Fair points. You may be right.
gdulli 9y ago
You could not possibly have read it and earnestly have that opinion of the piece's substance. edit: To clarify, you may reasonably either like or dislike it, but to claim it's lacking substance is trivially demonstrably false.
- jack9 9y ago
  It's lacking substance as the GP indicated. I read through it and have no problem asserting that.
  - mercer 9y ago
    It's probably one of the most nuanced articles on the topic I've read in a while. Could you elaborate why you felt it lacked in substance?
eganist 9y ago
This is actually the exact sort of long-form journalism I would expect from an outlet with proper pedigree, and it's the sort of hard-to-monetize journalism which BuzzFeed funds with its separate clickbait business model. This is Palanti(e)r journalism from them. Your comment suggests you didn't even click the link.
- zrobotics 9y ago
  While I may not like it, I am glad that buzzfeed has managed to find a way to support good journalism. I almost wonder if they wouldn't be better off segregating these pieces from the rest of their content, as it seems to me that there are likely two entirely different audiences for each type.
- baud147258 9y ago
  I've discovered the buzzfeed homepage in my language, in French, which mostly article like those in more mainstream publications. Still I've skimmed a few and they looked good.

any clarifications on what substance there is? this reads like a two minute hate of a d-list celebrity and i struggle to understand what makes it interesting in the hacker sense.

dang 9y ago

You mean in the Hacker News sense? From skimming the article, I'd say three things. (1) The signal/noise ratio seems high, i.e. there is a lot of factual information and relatively little ideological noise. (2) The story contains complexity, for example in the relationships between the people involved, that makes it less predictable than the median. Predictability is what we're most trying to avoid on HN. (3) It's a new variation in the ongoing shift in discourse about these behaviors, which is an interesting new phenomenon in the guidelines' sense (https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html). So yeah, there's a lot for people to rant and repeat about, but I think also some substance to consider, and maybe yield some insights about. We're asking users to make a conscious effort to eschew the former and go for the latter.

dragonwriter 9y ago
> The signal/noise ratio seems high, i.e. there is a lot of factual information and relatively little ideological noise. That seems true. > The story contains complexity, for example in the relationships between the people involved, that makes it less predictable than the median. There is complexity, but it's the pretty much the kind of complexity that has become a cookie-cutter template of harassment narratives in creative industries recently. > It's a new variation in the ongoing shift in discourse about these behaviors Is it, though? The dynamics seem to be nearly identical to many of the other narratives recently, differing only in the identity of the victims, perpetrator, and workplaces involved.
- dang 9y ago
  Fair points. You may be right.

gdulli 9y ago

You could not possibly have read it and earnestly have that opinion of the piece's substance. edit: To clarify, you may reasonably either like or dislike it, but to claim it's lacking substance is trivially demonstrably false.

jack9 9y ago
It's lacking substance as the GP indicated. I read through it and have no problem asserting that.
- mercer 9y ago
  It's probably one of the most nuanced articles on the topic I've read in a while. Could you elaborate why you felt it lacked in substance?

eganist 9y ago

This is actually the exact sort of long-form journalism I would expect from an outlet with proper pedigree, and it's the sort of hard-to-monetize journalism which BuzzFeed funds with its separate clickbait business model. This is Palanti(e)r journalism from them. Your comment suggests you didn't even click the link.

zrobotics 9y ago
While I may not like it, I am glad that buzzfeed has managed to find a way to support good journalism. I almost wonder if they wouldn't be better off segregating these pieces from the rest of their content, as it seems to me that there are likely two entirely different audiences for each type.
baud147258 9y ago
I've discovered the buzzfeed homepage in my language, in French, which mostly article like those in more mainstream publications. Still I've skimmed a few and they looked good.