4 ms·
The source, https://www.nplusonemag.com/issue-49/essays/casual-viewing/ https://www.nplusonemag.com/issue-49/essays/casual-viewing/, seems like a much better ar
by jsnell 2y ago
The source, https://www.nplusonemag.com/issue-49/essays/casual-viewing/ https://www.nplusonemag.com/issue-49/essays/casual-viewing/, seems like a much better article.
But it is hilarious in a meta kind of way that a bottom feeder "summarize real writing done by others, and slap on a clickbait headline" website pretends to have the moral high ground on this issue. I wonder what the guidance they give t to their writers is, and what metrics they're pushed to improve.
- dang 2y agobelated note: we changed the URL from https://www.worldofreel.com/blog/2024/12/27/netflix-tells-writers-to-have-characters-announce-what-theyre-doing-just-in-case-viewer-is-busy-doing-something-else https://www.worldofreel.com/blog/2024/12/27/netflix-tells-wr... to the article it is reporting on. Thanks! Submitters: "Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter." - https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- paulgb 2y agoThanks, this is a much better article!
- Dylan16807 2y agoThat article has a lot of quality but it also has a lot of telling the history of Netflix. Of the eight sections, I'd only really recommend the first plus a paragraph, then 6-8, maybe 5-8. I wouldn't call the OP clickbait, it's a reasonable title for the focus of the article. And I appreciate it having focus.
- thrwthsnw 2y agoThe shorter article is better.
- macleginn 2y agoThis article is very informative article, but it is funny that it seems to imply that Netflix is somehow essentially evil, compared to the artsy heros of the 90s, such as Harvey Weinstein's Miramax.