|
MadDogMike posted:Mostly I just want ads that don't cripple my ability to actually see the content I'm there for. *Maybe* something brief like those "skip after 5 seconds" YouTube ads is tolerable, but don't play pop-up hell or cover my drat screen with an ad with a tiny little x that can't be clicked or make the page take 5 minutes to load, 4.5 minutes being all the ad crap. In short, Internet ads are delivered EXACTLY like internet scams, so there is no reason for consumers to treat them any differently. Now that we're out of the era of 14" 1024x768 CRTs, people would probably be fine with ads that are unobtrusive headres/footers/sidebars - but because online ads are so heavily based on garbage tactics and outright malware people are blocking everything ad-related.
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
Lol vote for Hillary you loving tards, that is literally your only option according to your broken psychology.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 03:33
|
|
|
Sethex posted:
To be clear just emulate the news parts and not the systematic coverup of child sexual abuse parts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 06:37
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:To be clear just emulate the news parts and not the systematic coverup of child sexual abuse parts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 06:41
|
|
|
Rent-A-Cop posted:To be clear just emulate the news parts and not the systematic coverup of child sexual abuse parts. Moving to a better but imperfect model is better than the status quo/ commercial news media.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Isn't the BBC funding whipped by the Tories/the establishment in general? In any case, I'm not sure any organization, much less a media one, covering up long-running child sexual abuse is one to emulate. Clearly something isn't working there. It's a dangerously stupid thing to suggest that state funded public media with a mandate for impartiality and public interest somehow leads directly to covering up child abuse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 18:54
|
|
|
Dr. Fishopolis posted:It's a dangerously stupid thing to suggest that state funded public media with a mandate for impartiality and public interest somehow leads directly to covering up child abuse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
So... journalism is hosed, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:So... journalism is hosed, right? It sure as poo poo is now, yea. Can't wait till we find out what "loosening" up our libel laws means!
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:It sure as poo poo is now, yea. Can't wait till we find out what "loosening" up our libel laws means! Trump may want to do that, but he can't, unless four more Supreme Court justices die and he appoints five Peter Thiels.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Silver2195 posted:Trump may want to do that, but he can't, unless four more Supreme Court justices die and he appoints five Peter Thiels.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Silver2195 posted:Trump may want to do that, but he can't, unless four more Supreme Court justices die and he appoints five Peter Thiels. Ginsberg won't last the next 8 years, maybe not the next 4.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
FactsAreUseless posted:So... journalism is hosed, right? Nah, he'll say some vaguely intimidating things and every major media outlet will immediately fall in line and tone their criticism way down, which he will deem tolerable and graciously allow them to continue to exist. Hell, there have already been early examples of that, like HuffPo removing their canned "reminder that Trump is a horrible racist" line from every Trump article. Mainstream media will still probably be a little snippy with his administration though, because Breitbart is going to get all the exclusives and leaks now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
Huzanko posted:Ginsberg won't last the next 8 years, maybe not the next 4. That still leaves 7 justices who are in favor of leaving NYT v. Sullivan intact. Main Paineframe posted:Nah, he'll say some vaguely intimidating things and every major media outlet will immediately fall in line and tone their criticism way down, which he will deem tolerable and graciously allow them to continue to exist. Hell, there have already been early examples of that, like HuffPo removing their canned "reminder that Trump is a horrible racist" line from every Trump article. Mainstream media will still probably be a little snippy with his administration though, because Breitbart is going to get all the exclusives and leaks now. This, on the other hand, is a genuine possibility.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Nah, he'll say some vaguely intimidating things and every major media outlet will immediately fall in line and tone their criticism way down, which he will deem tolerable and graciously allow them to continue to exist. Hell, there have already been early examples of that, like HuffPo removing their canned "reminder that Trump is a horrible racist" line from every Trump article. Mainstream media will still probably be a little snippy with his administration though, because Breitbart is going to get all the exclusives and leaks now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 20:39
|
|
|
The biggest effect on the media, I think, isn't going to be Trump himself. Rather than that, it's going to be the fact that Trump won even though he openly demonized and spurned the mainstream media. The media tends to assume that the populace supports its right to exist and have a privileged position, and after Trump won despite openly blacklisting and threatening journalists while encouraging his rallies to shout pure hate at the reporters covering it, I think they're going to be rethinking that and adjusting their business accordingly. Trump will come and go, but the angry crowds shouting abuse at the TV cameras don't have term limits to worry about, and I think it's seriously going to disturb the main media organizations into reshaping their empires - after all, being unpopular is bad for business.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 21:12
|
|
|
I can't wait to see all these assholes all turn up at the whitehouse press correspondent's dinner and nicely play along and not even for a minute act like they have any culpability for what just happened.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
The media gave him like a billion dollars worth of free advertising. Trump is the result of "news as entertainment" as much as anything. I feel bad for erosion of the first amendment but on the other hand maybe news can be boring again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 08:30
|
|
|
We are going to see a lot more of these 'alternative media' outlets over the next few years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
It's going to be really interesting watching the media fall in line behind Trump's narratives over the next few years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:It's going to be really interesting watching the media fall in line behind Trump's narratives over the next few years. Yeah, I can't see the democrats putting up the same kinda counter narrative opposition as the republicans did to Obama. Do you think it's the democrats incessant calling for unity and bipartisanship? If Schumer came out and said the same thing McConnell did about Obama being a one term president, people would flip their poo poo. Without an ounce of shame, republicans would say how the democrats are being overly partisan.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Bueno Papi posted:Yeah, I can't see the democrats putting up the same kinda counter narrative opposition as the republicans did to Obama. Do you think it's the democrats incessant calling for unity and bipartisanship? If Schumer came out and said the same thing McConnell did about Obama being a one term president, people would flip their poo poo. Without an ounce of shame, republicans would say how the democrats are being overly partisan. i think the dems would be smart to fight him where they can, but let him gently caress up and gently caress up bad, because its all on the GOP now because they have full control with a petty brute at the helm. if they are smart they will rebuild as a populist and progressive(not the ivory tower,snarky "thinkpiece" type) and try to unite everyone who will get hosed by him.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Bueno Papi posted:Yeah, I can't see the democrats putting up the same kinda counter narrative opposition as the republicans did to Obama. I think it would be wrong if they did. "Country above party" is the only hope they have of rebuilding their brand.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
CasualTR posted:We are going to see a lot more of these 'alternative media' outlets over the next few years. Welcome to where the EU has been for the last 5 years. Alt-right media outlets spreading exaggerations and complete fantasies that radicalize the population which are then perpetuated across borders through the Russian Times which eventually feeds back into the national alt-right media and further distorts the alt-right narrative away from the truth.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The biggest effect on the media, I think, isn't going to be Trump himself. Rather than that, it's going to be the fact that Trump won even though he openly demonized and spurned the mainstream media. The media tends to assume that the populace supports its right to exist and have a privileged position, and after Trump won despite openly blacklisting and threatening journalists while encouraging his rallies to shout pure hate at the reporters covering it, I think they're going to be rethinking that and adjusting their business accordingly. Trump will come and go, but the angry crowds shouting abuse at the TV cameras don't have term limits to worry about, and I think it's seriously going to disturb the main media organizations into reshaping their empires - after all, being unpopular is bad for business. So going along with this idea: do Trump supporters remain as outwardly aggressive and continue to proliferate after he's been elected, or do they fade into the background as time goes on? Aesop Poprock fucked around with this message at 00:59 on Nov 14, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:So going along with this idea: do Trump supporters remain as outwardly aggressive and continue to proliferate after he's been elected, or do they fade into the background as time goes on? Seems like the liberal and democratic side is acting more hostile after Trumps election.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2016 21:40
|
|