4 ms·

Ugh. This looks painful http://www.businessinsider.com/the-aol-way#-16 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-aol-way#-16 No wonder he quit. Any self-respecting wr

Ugh. This looks painful http://www.businessinsider.com/the-aol-way#-16 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-aol-way#-16 No wonder he quit. Any self-respecting writer wouldn't want to stay on.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
- mkr-hn 16y ago
  There's a difference between maximizing profit and making enough to run a respectable operation. The better websites will post a lot of short, less than stellar articles to get search traffic and revenue, but still post good articles regularly. Ars Technica is a good example.
  - blackysky 16y ago
    Ars Technica does have stellar articles and they are not so short... I just think that it is sad that the main strategy is maximizing profit through page views over quality and creative writing... maybe I am crazy but that's my point view...maybe the actual system is broken...
    - mkr-hn 16y ago
      Most systems seem to develop perverse incentives given enough time.
- sp332 16y ago
  Yeah, I would. I already pay for Ars Technica, and I think Engadget would be a good complement.
petercooper 16y ago
Most full-time, high volume writers or journalists are used to this - it's not a question of self respect any more than questioning the self respect of someone who works in WalMart. You can still take pride in (and enjoy) your work even if it's under someone else's direction. On a much smaller scale, I, a small-time 'problogger', do the same. Monitoring trends, tracking things I know will be coming up.. For example, it's in my calendar that next Thursday it'll be 18 years since Matz started to develop Ruby - you can be sure I'll be writing about it ;-)
- fjw 16y ago
  Sure, it certainly helps to pay attention to trends and write on what people care about, but when your entire operation is centered around writing articles with the sole intention of attracting page views, you know there's something wrong. While I agree that you can take pride in your work even under someone else's direction, AOL's plan seems to involve mindless "slave-driven" writing - something I'm sure Paul is sick of and that I would be sick of as well.

Ugh. This looks painful http://www.businessinsider.com/the-aol-way#-16 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-aol-way#-16 No wonder he quit. Any self-respecting writer wouldn't want to stay on.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

mkr-hn 16y ago
There's a difference between maximizing profit and making enough to run a respectable operation. The better websites will post a lot of short, less than stellar articles to get search traffic and revenue, but still post good articles regularly. Ars Technica is a good example.
- blackysky 16y ago
  Ars Technica does have stellar articles and they are not so short... I just think that it is sad that the main strategy is maximizing profit through page views over quality and creative writing... maybe I am crazy but that's my point view...maybe the actual system is broken...
  - mkr-hn 16y ago
    Most systems seem to develop perverse incentives given enough time.
sp332 16y ago
Yeah, I would. I already pay for Ars Technica, and I think Engadget would be a good complement.

petercooper 16y ago

Most full-time, high volume writers or journalists are used to this - it's not a question of self respect any more than questioning the self respect of someone who works in WalMart. You can still take pride in (and enjoy) your work even if it's under someone else's direction. On a much smaller scale, I, a small-time 'problogger', do the same. Monitoring trends, tracking things I know will be coming up.. For example, it's in my calendar that next Thursday it'll be 18 years since Matz started to develop Ruby - you can be sure I'll be writing about it ;-)

fjw 16y ago
Sure, it certainly helps to pay attention to trends and write on what people care about, but when your entire operation is centered around writing articles with the sole intention of attracting page views, you know there's something wrong. While I agree that you can take pride in your work even under someone else's direction, AOL's plan seems to involve mindless "slave-driven" writing - something I'm sure Paul is sick of and that I would be sick of as well.