4 ms·
This isn't the first time I've seen NYT cancellation process in my social feeds. It has to be a negative feedback loop cycle. People that read HN are absolutely
by JMTQp8lwXL 6y ago
This isn't the first time I've seen NYT cancellation process in my social feeds. It has to be a negative feedback loop cycle. People that read HN are absolutely the type that would consider paying for NYT (or at least the two cohorts have great overlap).
This cancellation process never considered the impact of internet cancel culture and rage reactions. It's far easier to damage a brand than it is to build it up.
- kortilla 6y ago> People that read HN are absolutely the type that would consider paying for NYT (or at least the two cohorts have great overlap). Unlikely considering the general popularity of articles highlighting their incompetence/malfeasance. See: slatestarcodex articles of the last week
- gostsamo 6y agoHow often do you see NYT articles on the front page? It is very rarely for me.
- hctaw 6y agoThey've been trending the last couple days.
- gostsamo 6y agoLast couple days have only one story from NYT with ore than 100 upvotes. I didn't bother with checking further than second page of results, but though there are lots of submissions, rarely they get more than a couple of upvotes. https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=nytimes.com https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=nytimes.com
- ma2rten 6y agoHere is an easier way of checking that: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastMonth&page=0&prefix=false&query=nytimes.com&sort=byPopularity&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=pastMonth&page=0&prefix=fa...
- tasubotadas 6y ago> People that read HN are absolutely the type that would consider paying for NYT (or at least the two cohorts have great overlap). ?? I automatically assume that articles that are written by NYT, NewYorker, and The Guardian are complete BS and should be ignored. 0 journalism found there. Wanna spend money somewhere? Spend it on The Atlantic or Bloomberg.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- wycy 6y agoInteresting grouping. I would've put The Atlantic and The New Yorker in the reputable group, and Bloomberg in the BS group.
- tasubotadas 6y agoCancer: CNN, FoxNews, Vice, The Guardian, Business Insider Bad: NewYorker, New York Times, The Information Not Bad: The Economist Good: The Atlantic, Axios, Bloomberg, The Politico (at least in the EU) Very good: Reuters
- LordAtlas 6y ago> I automatically assume that articles that are written by NYT, NewYorker, and The Guardian are complete BS and should be ignored. Can you please elaborate on why you feel that way?
- mancerayder 6y agoThe OP's claim is a little strong but in my case, it's a narrative and opinion pieces that melt in with the news. We used to have international and domestic news, and an Opinions section that had the narrative. Now, we have opinions mixed in all three, inflammatory headlines, and missing data (one-sidedness), with more extreme assertions in Opinions. For a younger person, perhaps they wouldn't notice? I have been reading NYT and Guardian since the early 2000s, and canceled the NYT this summer when they failed to report really major events in NYC that didn't match narrative (looting and rioting that was directly observable for two days). I realized at that point we had a real problem. The Guardian has always been more openly activist, and I have a lot of respect for their Snowden work. But Trump being in the front page for four years was a bit much. I'm pretty happy with Reuters and to a lesser degree Bloomberg (whom I pay per month 7 times what I was paying for the NYT subscription).