Pulitzer Prize Winners Moving to PR: What Does That Say About Future Journalism?

Re:Pulitzer Prize Winners Moving to PR: What Does That Say A... by tjoff on Saturday April 21, 2018 @06:11AM (#16890798)

It most certainly has changed for the worse.

Because with everything clickbait there is no reason to focus on content since articles without it "sell" just as well. And since good content doesn't bring money anymore why bother?

As a user it becomes much harder to find good content, which reduces the usefulness and desire to read and continue the subscription.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pulitzer Prize Winners Moving to PR: What Does That Say A... by mijamo on Saturday April 21, 2018 @08:53AM (#16891250)

I disagree strongly. Shocking headings were already common in the 1800s. If anything the quality and diversity has gone up in the last years.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pulitzer Prize Winners Moving to PR: What Does That Say A... by gepi79 on Monday April 23, 2018 @10:09AM (#16903491)

Thanks to the internet.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Pulitzer Prize Winners Moving to PR: What Does That Say A... by tjoff on Saturday April 21, 2018 @09:28AM (#16891347)

Sure, front page headlines has always been subject to this.

But with the internet everything is the front page, and stories only get promoted based on how clickbaity they are. I can look past the top headline, this is several orders of magnitude worse.

Paywalls made this much worse, now every single link has to sell you a subscription. Which is bad enough if you don't pay for a subscription but absolutely devastating if you actually paid for content that only serves as bait for people that don't.

[ Parent | on HN ]