3 ms·
No you are not missing anything. This is a more recent bait-and-switch method of writing articles. I'm not sure where it comes from but if I had to be extra pes
by FLeXMurphy 16d ago
No you are not missing anything. This is a more recent bait-and-switch method of writing articles. I'm not sure where it comes from but if I had to be extra pessimist, I'd say it is a trope among failed writers. Sometimes they use narrative devices that work best in novels, but they end up being applied to normal every-day articles and the result is something that seems out of place.
Arguably if HN is to use LLMs to curate and administer submissions and comments (which it has been doing already), one would hope they can short-circuit this for all of us and scan the article/blog post, providing a summary directly underneath the submission/comment reply box. Reason being is, a lot of the time many paragraphs are spent belaboring one or two points that would best work in a tl;dr way and jump over these narrative passages, framings and backstories that serve very little to the points themselves.
- Hbruz0 16d agoWell, isn't it related to writing ?
- kevin_thibedeau 16d agoThis is New Yorker style. Paint an elaborate scene and get to the point later on.
- analog31 16d agoNo. The New Yorker never gets to the point. — Long time subscriber.
- delis-thumbs-7e 15d agoHow should have the author written the article then for it to work better?