6 ms·
I’ve tried twice now, and for the life of me, I have absolutely no idea what this post is trying to say. For an associate professor of communications, the writi
by 40four 4y ago
I’ve tried twice now, and for the life of me, I have absolutely no idea what this post is trying to say. For an associate professor of communications, the writing is absolutely atrocious. I can’t make heads or tails of this rambling multitude of grammatical errors, passive aggressive insults, and buzz-word saturated soup.
I get that it one of a collection of predictions about how media in 2023 will look. But besides the title invoking the usual, repetitive conversations we have about the ‘State of RSS’, I have no idea why it’s here. I might bookmark this just as an example of how not to write a post. Especially if you don’t want to confuse your reader, and actually express a clear thesis.
Regardless, I’m an every day user of NetNewsWire on my phone, and I hope their prediction is right. It is about the only way I consume my news at this point. Even if RSS doesn’t have a revival, it’s fine. As long as all the major news orgs continue to provide RSS feeds, I will be here consuming them.
- jasonlotito 4y ago> I’ve tried twice now, and for the life of me, I have absolutely no idea what this post is trying to say. It's answering the question: "Each year, Nieman Lab asks some of the smartest people in journalism what they think is coming in the new year. Here are their predictions for 2023." > For an associate professor of communications, the writing is absolutely atrocious. I can’t make heads or tails of this rambling multitude of grammatical errors, passive aggressive insults, and buzz-word saturated soup. Is that true? Heads or tails? Seemed trivial to understand this for me. > I get that it one of a collection of predictions about how media in 2023 will look, Oh, and you still don't get that it's saying that 2023 will be the rise of the RSS reader? I thought that was pretty obvious. > I have no idea why it’s here Here on HN? Because someone shared it and people upvoted it. That's how HN works. Or do you mean on the site? I think we've discussed that already. > Especially if you don’t want to confuse your reader, and actually express a clear thesis. I don't think it was meant to convince you of anything. It was merely predictions. A simple question, and simple answers, shared online. It's not complicated. > I might bookmark this just as an example of how not to write a post. I'm doing the same for your comment, for similar reasons. Note: Don't like the tone of this comment? Just reflecting the energy you put out.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- jovial_cavalier 4y agoI agree with GP. "The difference, going into 2023, is that even the Inbox Zero people are going to have a reason to complain. Left without a better way to quickly zoom in and zoom out on the state of the universe (also known as the world according to Twitter), I predict those people will reach a point of frustration in even their ability to manage email." What does this even mean? This is a massive non-sequitur. I stopped reading here.
- reaperducer 4y agoIs that true? Heads or tails? Seemed trivial to understand this for me. I understood it, too. But then, I have a degree in Communications. People on HN think that just because they can understand written source code that they can automatically understand any writing.
- jacktribe 4y agoChatGPT summarized: "Something something Twitter bad."
- symlinkk 4y agoPeople, including the person reading this comment right now, just see “RSS good” in the title and click the upvote button.
- 40four 4y agoYeah, I think you’re right. It rode to the top on the title alone. I might have been a little harsh, but things like this really grind my gears :)