7 ms·

The writer says "we" this and "we" that, as if everyone is enraptured by . . . I don't know who the Kardashians are beyond their name. I can't name a song by Ju

• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• SQueeeeeL 7y ago
  This is a big problem with the culture section of the Times. They really don't think/write for the average consumer. Last week a saw them use the word "Staning" in an article, it's really baffling editorial decisions. (Staning refers to the song the character Stan, from a 20 year old Eminem song, whose an obsessed fan)
  • mpalmer 7y ago
    Here's a fun thought - what if you (or the readership you defend) are no longer the average consumer?
    • mantap 7y ago
      Newspapers don't tend to target the average consumer though. They carve out a readership, because people want to read what they want to read.
      • mpalmer 7y ago
        Sure, and when you get down to it, there is no single prototypical average consumer that it's profitable to market to. Publications create their own average consumer. Fair to say though that the Times's own 'average' has definitely shifted over the last decade.
  • throwawayhhakdl 7y ago
    No I just think the average consumer is defined by the (mathematical) mode of consumer tastes. Like mainstream TV, it is designed for the most common individual which is a pretty bland person with terrible taste... but it’s a shrinking population. In past generations the mode was likely also the majority
  • ohlookabird 7y ago
    You could also see this as a chance to see how others see the world.
  • trexmix 7y ago
    From my perspective (mid 20's), 'stanning' is a pretty ubiquitous word/idea. Many people use it pretty casually and those who don't are likely familiar with what it means in general (even without the context of the Eminem song). Those in touch with culture would be even more likely to recognize it.
    • saberience 7y ago
      From my perspective, someone who bought the Marshall Mathers MP when it came and loved the song Stan (I'm mid 30s). I would say "Stanning" isn't ubiquitous at all, in fact, I've never heard of it until today. Just did a quick check around my office (Fintech company)(mostly 25-35) and no one had heard of it. So yeah, I don't think it's that commonly used.
      • owlninja 7y ago
        Mid 30s here as well, I see this used on the internet all the time - especially in rap circles
      • theNJR 7y ago
        Same demographic, and I too just heard this word for the first time.
      • SolaceQuantum 7y ago
        I'm well familiar with stanning (fintech, 26). It's ubituitous in certain circles and certain subscultural values, so if you don't hold them and don't participate in it you probably don't know it. Also, I don't think fintech is anywhere remotely close to "an average consumer" population to judge whether or not tabloid/instagram relationship applies to large swaths of people.
      • Multiplayer 7y ago
        When you have teenagers, your cultural consciousness will be reset to the much, much faster flow of that age. And you will return to the era of non-stop slang and hipness. Stan-ing is very much a common term for Gen-z. And they have stan accounts. And I sort of get it. :) This happens gradually, but started in full force at my house around age 15. I have 3 boys, 13-18. It's an incredible amount of fun.
  • imgabe 7y ago
    Is it a problem? I don't think so. The business section of the Times doesn't write for the "average consumer" (whatever that is). They write for people who are especially interested in business. The sports section writes for people who are interested in sports. Likewise the culture section write for people who are especially interested in celebrities. It's ok for people to have different interests.
  • deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  • Larx-3 7y ago
    For those wondering, "Stanning" is a portmanteau of the words "Stalker" and "Fan", meaning overly obessed fandom of some celebrity. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Stanning https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Stanning
    • rchaud 7y ago
      That actually sounds much more logical of an explanation than the link to the Eminem song. I discovered the term back in the Tumblr days of 2013 or so and was surprised to hear it was related to a then 13-year old song.
  • deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
• saiya-jin 7y ago
  There is whole world of people who don't care about Kardashians or similar pop persons, we are just not so loud about it and don't need to. Ie I don't have an Instagram, never will, even though I produce thousands of pretty cool pictures from travels and adventures that my inner circle often considers beyond their imagination. People having this 'sheepish' mentality and having little of their opinion (or will to form their own opinion through fact-checking), instead taking opinions of others is nothing new - look at folks following fashion. People literally telling you how to dress, what is cool, what you should think and feel - yes its really that dumb, there is no nice way around that. Its also a bit of membership signaling - you are part of desired group, 'better' than rest. I guess you see what I mean. In ignorance of this crowd mentality lies one's strength of one's mature personality. It could have played a great deal during evolution of human species as social one, but these days, it mostly leads to rather boring, unsatisfied lives.
  • mpalmer 7y ago
    > In ignorance of this crowd mentality lies one's strength of one's mature personality. Now who's signaling that they're better than the rest?
• chaosbutters 7y ago
  scrolling through the news on different subreddits is quite fun and informative. Quick and easy way to get caught up on local and world news, sports, politics, etc. So all scrolling isn't bad
• DontGiveTwoFlux 7y ago
  The foil in this article were tabloids and paparazzi. I imagine you were not the one rifling through People magazine before Instagram, much in the same way you don’t follow these people now. Yet, these tabloids had cultural cachet among many, and no longer hold the same spot. Why is that? The answer appears to be Instagram, an app. Quite interesting, indeed.
• josefresco 7y ago
  They participate in social media for the same reason you blog, speak, write books and ... participate in social media.
  • johannes1234321 7y ago
    No, I don't think "participation in social media" is the goal. For me blogging etc. is about either showing off (my work etc.), helping others with similar issues, self-expression etc. Following "stars" on social media is about being close to ones idols, to see some life one can aspire to (oh they are so great!) or to help onselfs ego (oh that star isn't better than me as well ..) Same old voyeuristic reasons as all the magazines. For the "stars" and "influencers" it is a way to build their brand under more control than with traditional media. Social media is just the medium. Just as one isn't reading magazines to read magazines, but one reads a specific magazine to have some form of satisfaction.
• keiferski 7y ago
  Well, this is Hacker News, so it's probably unlikely that anyone here is particularly a fan of the Kardashians or Justin Bieber. Having said that, I think this is a good example of the fact that "there are opportunities in markets I'm not personally familiar with" - a problem quite common among programmers and technical people. Kim Kardashian has 150 million Instagram followers. Justin Bieber has 122 million. Both monetize their followings for ungodly sums of money. You don't need to like them (and I certainly don't), but there are definitely startup lessons here worth learning.
  • swiley 7y ago
    I think there’s a moral concern about this particular market. That’s reasonable, some markets may very well have moral issues because of hidden costs or externalities or because of the unreasonable power it gives certain groups of people (CFCs, fentanyl, targeted advertising, killing for hire etc.) These people would probably do better to spend that time improving themselves or looking at the amazing things and people near them that they could actually interact with, or if they have to idolize someone at least doing it to someone worth idolizing like an accomplished artist or philosopher. There’s a concern that I think I share with GP: these things are designed to put the viewer into a kind of consuming unsatisfied state that makes it easier to sell them things, and that’s probably a bad thing. I’m not sure celebrities are so bad, often good ones have good things to say. It’s not like we don’t have our own either: every time FB or RMS sneezes it gets posted on hackernews a dozen times.
    • BoorishBears 7y ago
      >These people would probably do better to spend that time improving themselves or looking at the amazing things and people near them that they could actually interact with, or if they have to idolize someone at least doing it to someone worth idolizing like an accomplished artist or philosopher. How can you get this message to the unwashed masses with a horse that tall? I mean, where do you get off telling people who is worth idolizing? People have idolized less accomplished, less personable, less accessible people than those two since before media was a thing. To me Stallman is a toe-jam eating crackpot with no social skills and an embarrassment to all those who support him and does little to nothing worth idolizing, yet I'm in a forum where I'd probably find no shortage of people who idolize him. I'm not a fan of Justin Beiber... but are you really going to tell me he's not an accomplished artist? Man does the tone of this comment just rub me the wrong way. If following your advice means getting into a headspace where you don't cringe at the thought of telling people who's "worth idolizing"... maybe those fans are on to something...
• waylandsmithers 7y ago
  Yes- my impression of their list of things that characterized the past decade had a very young/city/liberal focus. I probably understood about half the list. Sometimes the NYT can be very local.
• dunnevens 7y ago
  I'm sure you have personal interests which would make others roll their eyes at you just as you're rolling your eyes at them. We all have our things, big and trivial, that get us through the day and through life. I think part of growing up is learning not to be smug and belittle the interests of others when those interests diverge from your own. It was for me. The person scrolling away is probably dealing with some sort of grief & stress like most of us are. The fact she takes a few minutes out of her day to look at something fun and meaningless doesn't make her a lesser person.
  • spodek 7y ago
    To clarify, I'm not rolling my eyes at them. I don't know them or think about them. The article spoke as if I did.