I really do hate nypost. News really does end up on the worst shit-sites. Click on an article about X. Imediately get served a video about everything else, as the highest attention grabing content on the page. And the strategy is to get one of the worst pages on the internet associated with a story where people have a bias in one direction or another. So then there is at least one community of people on the internet who will support the content and will take any opposition to the content as taking the wrong side on the story. But what if the content itself or the delivery is shit?
Should people have an infinite toleranace for shit-sites just because it has a headline they like?
This is fullfulling the prediction I made in my post. That if you rightly shit on a site for it as a website people will assume this is a tribal dispute. It's a shit website. Garbage like blasting an unrelated video at people shouldn't be able to ride on people's tribalism. I don't care what their politics are. They run a very shitty website.
This is what news orgs do. They stoke people up on tribalism and then use that to permit themselves to run sites worse than most linked to by actual spammers. If you look at the medical blog spam that was posted to Saidit, at least they didn't blast off topic video at you, and then continue to play it at you when you scroll past it trying to avoid it.
X as in 'blank'. I gave specific cricisms in both comments. Even before you asked for them.
I did answer your question. I answered it before you even asked it. Then I answered it after you asked. And now you are asking why I don't answer the question? Look through it. Look for a specific criticism. Then look where I first raised it.
But you go to nypost.com and click on an article but then a different article opens? That is a legit criticism but it looks like that only happens to you.
Log in
I really do hate nypost. News really does end up on the worst shit-sites. Click on an article about X. Imediately get served a video about everything else, as the highest attention grabing content on the page. And the strategy is to get one of the worst pages on the internet associated with a story where people have a bias in one direction or another. So then there is at least one community of people on the internet who will support the content and will take any opposition to the content as taking the wrong side on the story. But what if the content itself or the delivery is shit?
Should people have an infinite toleranace for shit-sites just because it has a headline they like?
One of best news sites actually
Do you have any specific criticisms
And not just about X I mean nypost
I trust the NYPost more than NYTimes or MSNOW.
Agree I'm wondering if he trusts them and doesn't like nypost cuz of that.
This is fullfulling the prediction I made in my post. That if you rightly shit on a site for it as a website people will assume this is a tribal dispute. It's a shit website. Garbage like blasting an unrelated video at people shouldn't be able to ride on people's tribalism. I don't care what their politics are. They run a very shitty website.
This is what news orgs do. They stoke people up on tribalism and then use that to permit themselves to run sites worse than most linked to by actual spammers. If you look at the medical blog spam that was posted to Saidit, at least they didn't blast off topic video at you, and then continue to play it at you when you scroll past it trying to avoid it.
NYPost is pure AIDS.
You said you clicked an article on x tho. So it's x's fault. I asked for specific criticisms.
If you could anticipate that why not just be more clear and/or answer the question.
X as in 'blank'. I gave specific cricisms in both comments. Even before you asked for them.
I did answer your question. I answered it before you even asked it. Then I answered it after you asked. And now you are asking why I don't answer the question? Look through it. Look for a specific criticism. Then look where I first raised it.
Huh you editted it . Pretty sure it said X.com
But you go to nypost.com and click on an article but then a different article opens? That is a legit criticism but it looks like that only happens to you.