2 ms·

Contrasting the tone of innocence the larger publications use around these institutions feels perfectly within a journalistic mandate.

by DANmode 5mo ago

SllX 5mo ago
Nobody is disputing that it is a legitimate choice. It is also legitimately off-putting. If their audience is into it though, good for them.
- DANmode 5mo ago
  Honestly, I was surprised to see this take. Their tone just makes me miss the original The Intercept and other used-to-be-heavy-hitters. Were they also too punchy for you? (I sound possibly sarcastic, but am genuinely curious)
  - SllX 5mo ago
    I read The Intercept rarely and never saw enough of them to form any kind of take on their “typical” headline-style. 404 Media has been popping off everywhere though—including here-since they launched. This may sound pre-judgmental, but a headline is an advertisement & marketing for the article. A headline can get someone in that might otherwise have skipped the article, but it can just as easily dissuade people who might otherwise be interested in the subject matter.
    - DANmode 5mo ago
      Meanwhile the NBC headline can make the story seem like a normal matter of course.
cryzinger 5mo ago
For new and under-reported (or otherwise downplayed) stories, I think it's understandable and maybe even good. But when every single story has a breathless, scandalized headline, it gets exhausting fast, and it's hard for me to know what to pay attention to. I remember last year 404 put out a clickbait-y story about the shitty "covert" websites that the CIA used to communicate with spies they'd recruited in Iran, even though it was old news at that point. If you only read the headline (as many people do...) you'd think it was a startling new development.
- DANmode 5mo ago
  > it's hard for me to know what to pay attention to. If it’s a decent institution? All of what they’re reporting on! =]

2 ms·

Contrasting the tone of innocence the larger publications use around these institutions feels perfectly within a journalistic mandate.

by DANmode 5mo ago

Contrasting the tone of innocence the larger publications use around these institutions feels perfectly within a journalistic mandate.

SllX 5mo ago
Nobody is disputing that it is a legitimate choice. It is also legitimately off-putting. If their audience is into it though, good for them.
- DANmode 5mo ago
  Honestly, I was surprised to see this take. Their tone just makes me miss the original The Intercept and other used-to-be-heavy-hitters. Were they also too punchy for you? (I sound possibly sarcastic, but am genuinely curious)
  - SllX 5mo ago
    I read The Intercept rarely and never saw enough of them to form any kind of take on their “typical” headline-style. 404 Media has been popping off everywhere though—including here-since they launched. This may sound pre-judgmental, but a headline is an advertisement & marketing for the article. A headline can get someone in that might otherwise have skipped the article, but it can just as easily dissuade people who might otherwise be interested in the subject matter.
    - DANmode 5mo ago
      Meanwhile the NBC headline can make the story seem like a normal matter of course.
cryzinger 5mo ago
For new and under-reported (or otherwise downplayed) stories, I think it's understandable and maybe even good. But when every single story has a breathless, scandalized headline, it gets exhausting fast, and it's hard for me to know what to pay attention to. I remember last year 404 put out a clickbait-y story about the shitty "covert" websites that the CIA used to communicate with spies they'd recruited in Iran, even though it was old news at that point. If you only read the headline (as many people do...) you'd think it was a startling new development.
- DANmode 5mo ago
  > it's hard for me to know what to pay attention to. If it’s a decent institution? All of what they’re reporting on! =]