←back to thread

The man who killed Google Search?

(www.wheresyoured.at)
1884 points elorant | 1 comments | 23 Apr 24 16:43 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
neilv ◴[23 Apr 24 17:48 UTC] No.40134839[source]▶
I think this article would work better if it were written entirely like textbook traditional investigative journalism. And less like the modern TV opinion personality, or the random strong-opinion Web comments in which many of the rest of us (including myself) indulge.
replies(8): >>40134879 #>>40135262 #>>40135594 #>>40135904 #>>40136387 #>>40136703 #>>40137636 #>>40138408 #
taco_emoji ◴[23 Apr 24 18:43 UTC] No.40135594[source]▶
this is such a tiresome criticism. "this would be better if it were more boring" yeah okay and 4 people would read it and 2 of them would fall asleep during
replies(2): >>40136831 #>>40141115 #
its_ethan ◴[23 Apr 24 20:24 UTC] No.40136831[source]▶
And your criticism of him is what? Encourage more sensationalism? Because there's so much evidence of that being such good and healthy way for journalism/news to operate?
replies(1): >>40140227 #
1. barfbagginus ◴[24 Apr 24 03:32 UTC] No.40140227[source]▶
It may have been somewhat sensationalist and over the top. But it was also very authentic, and freaking hilarious. Much more entertaining to read than if it hadn't been snarky and catty.

So no don't go for pure sensationalism. Go for authentic voice and humor coupled with hard facts and sound arguments. That's what makes it powerful.