HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

thunk

no profile record

comments

thunk
·17 năm trước·discuss
RFS1 asks what the content site of the future might look like. I think what it might be driving at is a deeply entertaining and aesthetically pleasing narrativization of some hardcore data-mining and pattern recognition on current events -- a real-time story spun by smart people with writing and design and artistic chops. It'd be news as art and serial novel and near-future prediction -- news as a thing of beauty. It would have to be something people are willing to pay well for, because to succeed at its purpose it would have to be ad-free. If this is at all true, it's pretty rad. But, well, it isn't so much a startup as a sort of content band. It would depend sooo heavily on the artistic sensibilities of the founders. Perhaps that's why you want a greater hand ...
thunk
·17 năm trước·discuss
Hrm. Well, you don't write for the auction site any more than eBay sellers work for eBay. You're your own brand, and win or lose source-cred on your own merits. And it's called "stringerbell.com" :)
thunk
·17 năm trước·discuss
I think this would actually produce higher quality and better paid journalism than the current system. Since there's no formal approval process required to enter the market, good journalists who were previously stymied by old-style institutional filtration will have their day. And since journalism under this system is essentially free-agency, the possibility of bidding wars for pieces by (forgive me) "rockstar" journalists is highly probable, and provides a powerful incentive to do groundbreaking work. A journalist who's scored a comfy gig under the current system has no such incentive.
thunk
·17 năm trước·discuss
But the solution is simpler, and the consumer's definitely not paying. I mean, everyone's a stringer now, right? Sites run on ads and buy content from stringers through an auction market that takes a cut of each transaction. You are that auction site. Competitive bidding for genres of content; reputation indices to incentivise quality journalism -- most of the details have been worked out already in other contexts. I mean, it's so brain-dead it must've been tried already, right? What am I missing?