MSM “The Worst That It’s Ever Been”: Inside Sports Illustrated’s Winter of Discontent

[zeker]

Oh Hell No

yep

hell no on both of them

top one looks like a boy

btm one, looks like Michelin Man's side chick

not a white wall, but def over inflated.

 

[Southside]

yep

hell no on both of them

top one looks like a boy

btm one, looks like Michelin Man's side chick

not a white wall, but def over inflated.

There is an upside.
Who the hell reads Sports Illustrated anymore anyway?

Sports, other than the ones I play, are dead to me - well, at least ones where the players kneel......

 

[Calhounshd]

Been a very long time since I subscribed. Like as a teen. Professional sports and social issues. No thanks.

Very right there ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
If people are fed up with sports (i.e. politics, ridiculous salaries and ticket prices), they are not too inclined to buy and read a story about sports.
How is attendance, both in the arena and on TV, doing these days?

 

[Blacknarwhal]

You would be right about my primary industry, not being a writer. But one of my "things" is reading. Which puts me on the other side of the equation. As a client, or a target of a click.

And I am a veracious reader. About 6-9 months ago, I started on the Reacher series. Just got in books 27-29, and am half way through 27. And those aren't the only books I've read during that time. Have read entire Bible commentaries. And at present have about 6 that I go back and forth on, on a weekly basis. And I read ton's of articles every week. Articles that are well written by authors I have come to know and look for, get my click. Author's who cover the same subject, but don't write them up very well, don't. They usually have a bunch of gibberish mixed in to make it a long article. I even read and debate left wing articles. Mostly for knowing where the left is coming from, not in support.

So that is my reason for "write better". As a reader, well written books and articles get my clicks. Most gibberish mix with a few highlights of this or that, don't. And once someone is a good writer whether that's Lee Child, Preston and Child, Mark Twain, Molly Hemingway, Johnathan Turley, or Pepe Escobar, I have a tendency to look for their books and articles.

So from a readers perspective a well written book or article gets more clicks.

That would be the problem in a nutshell.

"Well-written books and articles get my clicks."

First, "well-written" is highly subjective. Your well-written may be a million other people's pretentious. Second, your clicks alone would not keep a website afloat. Getting your clicks are comparatively meaningless. And it's virtually impossible to predict which articles will get said clicks in advance.

 

[mzkitty]

Yeah, ol' Martha's looking pretty good now.

 

[CaryC]

First, "well-written" is highly subjective.

While that is about 25% true the other 75% is an excuse.

All the book authors I mentioned are No. 1 on the New York Times best seller list. Which has no impact on whether I like them or not. But rather is a reflection of a well written story. People like well written stories.

The book I read in between the Reacher books was "The Woman in White" and was a big hit, before the New York Times had a list. 1860 England.

Most of the articles I read are mostly in same venue as being "right". But the authors I follow, are followed by millions of others. And I don't guess there are any lefties that follow them. So that may be subjective. Which may be more in the way of a genre.

And like wise the genre of SI won't be followed by a lot of people. And if SI wants to build more clicks in the genre - sports stay away from politics no matter how well written.

And the fear of AI is in the writers worries. I can tell you, I've read some sermons written by AI, and they stink. You guys worried about AI, is the same worry factory workers have about robots. Yep going to happen. Simply due to sick day, vacation and medical insurance same for factory workers. But that doesn't mean they can do the job better.

Welcome to the 21st century. Where everything is subjective.

 

[packyderms_wife]

...I'm gonna guess that writing isn't your primary industry.

You can't just "do better" in a field where results are mostly random. Nobody knows in advance what people will click on and what they won't. The whole concept of SEO was an attempt to cheat the system for your own ends. Now everyone's doing it, and with everybody cheating, no one can. The problem is that very few--including those who actually sign the paychecks--have figured that out yet. So SEO is still king of the hill because everyone thinks if they STOP cheating they lose.

Meanwhile, "go somewhere else" doesn't work out real well in a field where a lot of places share the same values. You'd have to completely change fields, and there's only so much compatibility of skills.

Though I do agree with you about SI's plans; personally, I think the problem is one of advertising. You need everyone to agree to go back to the old system, where you sell ads at flat rates based on size. No click-throughs, no trackers, nothing. But you'd need EVERYBODY to agree to that, because whoever leaves in the algorithms and such has a huge advantage. They mean more value for the advertisers, and they won't voluntarily accept less. They have to be forced into it by having no other options.

mining information is NOT cheating!