4 ms·

Buzzfeed News have been writing serious, in-depth news articles for years now. Here's a great one from 2016 about how Facebook is the internet in Myanmar: https

by MarkMc 5y ago

Buzzfeed News have been writing serious, in-depth news articles for years now. Here's a great one from 2016 about how Facebook is the internet in Myanmar: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/sheerafrenkel/fake-news-spreads-trump-around-the-world https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/sheerafrenkel/fake-news... Unfortunately their brand is tainted by the reddit-meme listicle crap of their sister site. I'm surprised they haven't changed their name yet.

Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
TIL Buzzfeed & Buzzfeed News are separate websites, When ever I saw a URL pointing to Buzzfeed News I assumed its the former - A daily mail with lesser NSFW images, So never bothered to click. Good to know that the latter is doing some good journalism, But perhaps a rebranding is due?
- dannyw 5y ago
  Maybe it's a generational thing? I'm in my 20s and I'm much more likely to click on buzzfeed news than the new York times or something. Also like many of my friends, I get about 90-100% of my news from Reddit. I just don't care about visiting individual publications. Doesn't appeal to me.
  - tomcam 5y ago
    > I get about 90-100% of my news from Reddit What subs?
    - 5etho 5y ago
      not op but me, politics and worldnews, also other anti-capitalistic subs
      - skinnymuch 5y ago
        Did you mean “also other” as in different actual anti capitalist subs? The two mentioned are huge subs that are at best neoliberal and do not stray far from actual status quo quandaries. As a casual Reddit user, I know Chapo got banned. I know technically the reasons weren’t for its politics, but lol... Anyway. Are other anti capitalist subs that much against the status quo? Edit: I liked your pithy comment about being lower class and nothing wrong with that in the Pine phone thread.
  - Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
    I think that's because you knew what Buzzfeed News was and if we see other HN comments it looks like many 'here' thought Buzzfeed News publishes only contents like '15 Hedgehogs With Things That Look Like Hedgehogs'; But that's Buzzfeed and not the News site. It's intriguing that a click bait platform decided to create an investigative journalism site but with the same brand. It's definitely not aimed to get those who don't visit Buzzfeed but to leverage their existing audience, Then again why would someone interested in 'What Is Your Inner Potato?' be interested in reading about human rights abuses?
    - pests 5y ago
      Why wouldn't they be? Just because people read dumb things doesn't mean they are dumb themselves.
      - Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
        I didn't say that, My statement was regarding technical nature of user's interest. I'm genuinely curious about Buzzfeed's rationale to build a factual news site when their brand represented anything but that i.e. 'Going against what their recommendation engine would typically suggest for their users'.
        Talanes 5y ago
        Because youth culture loves to exist in dichotomy. The stupid clickbait site and the proper news sight being part of the same thing is the appeal. Similar reasoning to how comedy/news has become a booming format. Doing something stupid and doing something serious at the same time is the zeitgeist.
        Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
        That's very interesting, If true then the recommendation engine would have indeed identified the supposed dichotomy thereby justifying the decision to stick with their brand.
      - 5y ago
  - kortilla 5y ago
    > Also like many of my friends, I get about 90-100% of my news from Reddit. Doesn’t letting a democratic process decide what news you see worry you? That leads to severe echo chamber problems.
    - makomk 5y ago
      The problem with getting your news from Reddit isn't just the democratic process, if I remember rightly the moderators of the default news subreddits outright spread partisan misinformation using them.
    - contriban 5y ago
      One could argue that viewers count-driven news are just as democratic, except that people vote by viewing/opening/sharing links instead of clicking an upvote button. Same goes for the echo chamber comment: Most newspapers are not bipartisan either. Reading Reddit is like reading a single source, in a way.
  - Angostura 5y ago
    I first found out that they were two different operataions when Buzzfeed News started getting invited on to the BBC's news discussion programmes
  - skinnymuch 5y ago
    It has to be a mix of things. Anecdotally, regular Reddit usage penetration isn’t that high. Especially not [nearly] all news. It’s def there though and def higher than many other platforms.
YeBanKo 5y ago
They have been doing it since the inception in 2011
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
notatoad 5y ago
i think the main reason for the existence of buzzfeed news is to bring some legitimacy to the buzzfeed brand, so their staff can feel good about working for a pulitzer prize winning organization instead of a clickbait farm even though the clickbait farming brings in all the money. rebranding buzzfeed news would defeat the purpose.
fito 5y ago
Also, “Buzzfeed” is a genuinely silly name to have for a news site.
danmur 5y ago
Wow ok, I did not know that. I thought I'd become tainted somehow because I liked a few articles I read.
H12 5y ago
Frankly, at least with the USAs current regulatory setup, I can't think of a better business model to sustain true investigative journalism. Without the giant clickbait money engine that is BuzzFeed, I'd be really surprised if BuzzFeed News would be profitable enough to operate independently.

by MarkMc 5y ago

Abishek_Muthian 5y ago

TIL Buzzfeed & Buzzfeed News are separate websites, When ever I saw a URL pointing to Buzzfeed News I assumed its the former - A daily mail with lesser NSFW images, So never bothered to click. Good to know that the latter is doing some good journalism, But perhaps a rebranding is due?

dannyw 5y ago
Maybe it's a generational thing? I'm in my 20s and I'm much more likely to click on buzzfeed news than the new York times or something. Also like many of my friends, I get about 90-100% of my news from Reddit. I just don't care about visiting individual publications. Doesn't appeal to me.
- tomcam 5y ago
  > I get about 90-100% of my news from Reddit What subs?
  - 5etho 5y ago
    not op but me, politics and worldnews, also other anti-capitalistic subs
    - skinnymuch 5y ago
      Did you mean “also other” as in different actual anti capitalist subs? The two mentioned are huge subs that are at best neoliberal and do not stray far from actual status quo quandaries. As a casual Reddit user, I know Chapo got banned. I know technically the reasons weren’t for its politics, but lol... Anyway. Are other anti capitalist subs that much against the status quo? Edit: I liked your pithy comment about being lower class and nothing wrong with that in the Pine phone thread.
- Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
  I think that's because you knew what Buzzfeed News was and if we see other HN comments it looks like many 'here' thought Buzzfeed News publishes only contents like '15 Hedgehogs With Things That Look Like Hedgehogs'; But that's Buzzfeed and not the News site. It's intriguing that a click bait platform decided to create an investigative journalism site but with the same brand. It's definitely not aimed to get those who don't visit Buzzfeed but to leverage their existing audience, Then again why would someone interested in 'What Is Your Inner Potato?' be interested in reading about human rights abuses?
  - pests 5y ago
    Why wouldn't they be? Just because people read dumb things doesn't mean they are dumb themselves.
    - Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
      I didn't say that, My statement was regarding technical nature of user's interest. I'm genuinely curious about Buzzfeed's rationale to build a factual news site when their brand represented anything but that i.e. 'Going against what their recommendation engine would typically suggest for their users'.
      - Talanes 5y ago
        Because youth culture loves to exist in dichotomy. The stupid clickbait site and the proper news sight being part of the same thing is the appeal. Similar reasoning to how comedy/news has become a booming format. Doing something stupid and doing something serious at the same time is the zeitgeist.
        Abishek_Muthian 5y ago
        That's very interesting, If true then the recommendation engine would have indeed identified the supposed dichotomy thereby justifying the decision to stick with their brand.
    - 5y ago
- kortilla 5y ago
  > Also like many of my friends, I get about 90-100% of my news from Reddit. Doesn’t letting a democratic process decide what news you see worry you? That leads to severe echo chamber problems.
  - makomk 5y ago
    The problem with getting your news from Reddit isn't just the democratic process, if I remember rightly the moderators of the default news subreddits outright spread partisan misinformation using them.
  - contriban 5y ago
    One could argue that viewers count-driven news are just as democratic, except that people vote by viewing/opening/sharing links instead of clicking an upvote button. Same goes for the echo chamber comment: Most newspapers are not bipartisan either. Reading Reddit is like reading a single source, in a way.
- Angostura 5y ago
  I first found out that they were two different operataions when Buzzfeed News started getting invited on to the BBC's news discussion programmes
- skinnymuch 5y ago
  It has to be a mix of things. Anecdotally, regular Reddit usage penetration isn’t that high. Especially not [nearly] all news. It’s def there though and def higher than many other platforms.

YeBanKo 5y ago

They have been doing it since the inception in 2011

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

notatoad 5y ago

i think the main reason for the existence of buzzfeed news is to bring some legitimacy to the buzzfeed brand, so their staff can feel good about working for a pulitzer prize winning organization instead of a clickbait farm even though the clickbait farming brings in all the money. rebranding buzzfeed news would defeat the purpose.

fito 5y ago

Also, “Buzzfeed” is a genuinely silly name to have for a news site.

danmur 5y ago

Wow ok, I did not know that. I thought I'd become tainted somehow because I liked a few articles I read.

H12 5y ago

Frankly, at least with the USAs current regulatory setup, I can't think of a better business model to sustain true investigative journalism. Without the giant clickbait money engine that is BuzzFeed, I'd be really surprised if BuzzFeed News would be profitable enough to operate independently.