
'Expert Twitter' Only Goes So Far – Bring Back Blogs - ingve
https://www.wired.com/story/opinion-expert-twitter-only-goes-so-far-bring-back-blogs/
======
joelrunyon
I've been on this train for a long, long time.

If you don't own your platform, you don't own your content.

Register your domain, install wordpress, start your own blog.

We actually created [https://startablog.com](https://startablog.com) to drive
this point home, teach people how to do it and even have a team that will do
it for you for free if you need the help (lots of people still find the WP
install process intimidating).

~~~
imglorp
When would one choose WP over a static site generator? I just want to publish.
I don't want to host something that needs patching and sysadmin and all that.

~~~
jedimastert
> I don't want to host something that needs patching and sysadmin and all
> that.

You mean like running your own webserver? Why would I do that instead of just
getting a web host that'll take care of all of the sysadmin for you?

With a lot of web hosting platforms all you'll need is to just press a button
on a web site, then all you'll have to deal with is the wordpress interface

~~~
thomaslord
Part of my current job is handling the technical side of managing Wordpress
sites (we have people who do the design/content writing/page building, but I
get pulled in for "why isn't this plugin working" or "why is the site slow"
type stuff).

For my personal sites I've always done something custom or a static site
generator. That definitely requires some more in-depth setup on the frontend,
but the long-term maintenance is drastically reduced compared to Wordpress.
Sure you don't need to know the command line, but unless you log in weekly to
check for plugin updates, make sure you properly vet your plugins, and either
get lucky or spend a bunch of time on site optimization, your site will
probably be slow and, at some point, get hacked.

You can pay for more hands-on hosting that includes managing a lot of that
stuff, but all of a sudden the costs get a lot higher. For a personal blog, I
don't want to pay $30/month for hosting.

------
beager
One interesting aspect of Twitter is that the restriction on tweet length
requires serialization of complex ideas. Faced with this, authors are forced
to either simplify their ideas or spread them out across tweets. An emergent
dynamic of the platform, as a result, is that ideas get misrepresented, nuance
gets lost, and people get irritated. That irritation turns into argument and
rebuttal. And since argument and constructive discourse show up as the same
thing on the P&L of a social network, that dynamic of Twitter is tolerated,
tacitly enabled, or even deliberately built upon.

~~~
hintymad
Twitter's competitor Weibo launched a feature called "Long Weibo" years ago.
It's essentially a blog service, except that Weibo would display the first 140
characters of a long post as if it is a tweet, and a reader needs to click on
an icon to expand the tweet into a full article. It's a really nice feature.
Clean time line as before, users who hate changes won't get bothered, but
those who crave for longer writings get blogs for free. Better yet, an author
gets to publish her thoughts in a single place and to engage readers as usual.

Why Twitter doesn't at least try this feature in an opt-in way beats me.

~~~
ObsoleteNerd
Well they kind've do. Tweet-chains. If someone replies to their own tweet to
create a series of Tweets, Twitter groups them into a chain and puts a "Show
This Thread" link to expand it. It's the same thing in practice.

~~~
TheDong
It is not the same thing in practice. It doesn't allow as natural paragraph
formatting or sentence flow since the break-up interval for the text is
dictated.

It makes it harder for people to reply to the chain (do you reply to the first
or last?). The same problem exists for retweets; if someone retweets a tweet
partway through the thread, it doesn't behave as neatly as you describe iirc.

Also, there's just a difference for the author. Writing a paragraph of text
like this comment, where I get to go back through it and edit it as I go, add
and remove paragraphs... It results in me creating a more carefully edited and
thoughtful piece of writing. With the tweet threads, someone either has to
write the tweets one at a time (and can't edit previous ones) with twitter
dictating the breaks, or they have to do paragraph-oriented editing locally,
and then figure out how to break it up correctly for tweets (which is non-
trivial actually! URLs take up a difficult-to-predict-naively number of
characters, so it's not naively 140 chars if you have urls, etc).

Basically, twitter's model facilitates a different sort of writing and reading
than a single long post does, even if they are just both a bunch of letters.

~~~
aaron-lebo
Just to back you up, your post is 1022 characters.

If you were limited to 280:

 _Some discussions have nuance that cannot be expressed in 280 characters.

Yes, when expressing a simple idea or an idea you understand very well, you
should be able to do so concisely.

However, when providing information to someone else about a complicated
subject, or trying to_

It's artificial scarcity, that doesn't really benefit the reader that much,
and certainly not the writer.

------
nullc
The infinite scroll addiction pipeline has segmented the online world largely
into two parts: Drooling scroll zombies on twitter/facebook/reddit/etc, and
people who don't partake at all.

The audience of people who might read your blog but who aren't stuck on a
scroll treadmill is too small to bother, especially with the death of many
popular rss readers.

~~~
Noctem
“Drooling scroll zombies” is a wildly and unnecessarily uncharitable
description of people that visit websites and apps that you (apparently) don’t
enjoy.

Disparaging entire mediums makes little sense. There is both enlightening and
mind-numbing content on social networks, blogs, television, and books. Are
people that read many books drooling page-turning zombies? Is scrolling
through blogs inherently superior to Twitter scrolling?

~~~
nullc
> Disparaging entire mediums makes little sense

I think it makes a lot of sense when the medium is purpose designed and highly
optimized to maximize additive shallow interaction.

Sorry, I've had too many meetings and dinners disrupted by too many different
people who couldn't stay off the phone to keep pretending it isn't a problem.
... and had far too many informative long form works ignored by their target
audience (members of which also just spent our last meeting glued to facebook
scroll).

~~~
Noctem
It is entirely possible to curate a Twitter feed of: experts in nearly any
subject, gossip, sports, pornography, spiritual guidance, comedy, hate speech,
or journalism. The same can be said of bookshelves. It is also possible to
consume both excessively or in inappropriate situations. There are young
members of my extended family who are regularly scolded for trying to read
books during meals.

The rudeness of your guests does not justify passing judgment on millions of
people with an almost infinitely broad spectrum of usage patterns, and makes
about as much sense as criticizing those who read words on paper.

------
aazaa
The article mentions the 15-20 tweet roll as being cumbersome, and it is.

But a bigger issue is at work here - censorship. Twitter is being pulled in
two opposite directions. It's a platform in which authoritative content is
hosted. For example, the president conducts foreign policy through Twitter.
And Twitter is also a platform where bots try to influence elections, people
post images of dubious taste, and plain old lies are told.

Twitter has been leaning ever-harder into the role of curating authoritative
content. The idea of verified identities as a prerequisite to post has been
floated, and will no doubt resurface.

All of this leads to a dead-end. Twitter won't be able to afford to host
anything remotely controversial (i.e., interesting) for fear of upsetting the
thought police.

The same problem applies to Facebook, Medium, and all the others.

The reason to blog is simple. Because sooner or later a rational human
exploring the bounds of human knowledge through writing will post something
that will make one or more powerful people scared, angry, or offended. A blog
makes retaliatory deplatforming much more difficult to pull off.

~~~
AgentME
>Twitter won't be able to afford to host anything remotely controversial
(i.e., interesting) for fear of upsetting the thought police.

What interesting controversial content are they banning specifically?
Ethnonationalist propaganda?

I'm really annoyed by the common effect where people complaining about
censorship on the big platforms always complain about it in vague abstract
terms, because that gets a lot more support than complaining about people
getting banned for targeted harassment or encouraging forcible removal of non-
whites... Shout-out to a pithy evergreen tweet on this:
[https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/105039166355267174...](https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1050391663552671744).

~~~
iateanapple
> What interesting controversial content are they banning specifically?

They ban interesting content all the time - a very recent example is they
banned the AYTU Bioscience page where they talk about an experimental covid
treatment.

YouTube censored their videos as well.

~~~
AgentME
I think they have an understandable reason for that (too much harmful
misinformation about covid going around, they don't have enough eyes to sort
it out, and at their scale it's probably net harm reduction to put a simple
wordfilter on it for now), but I'm a lot more sympathetic to arguments along
these lines in particular. I could believe that moderation is more effective
on smaller userbase-scales because it reduces the need to adopt blanket
policies like this. I don't think it does the issue justice to reduce the
problem down to just that there's too much/little censorship as the earlier
post did.

~~~
busymom0
Look up Lindsey Shepard of Canada and why she was banned.

Also the Aytu ban was pushed by a NYTimes writer and twitter often bends their
rules to that. Aytu bioscience is a publicly traded company with deals with
one of the largest hospitals on tech they have been working on since 2016.
They even have a SEC filing from this week of their deal on the tech which
twitter and YouTube both banned because a nytimes reporter complained (bias
against the president).

------
lkrubner
Bring back Technorati, circa 2004. I miss it very much. Decentralized blogs
need some centralized point to keep track of conversations. Pingbacks didn't
work because they lacked verification and therefore were immediately overrun
with spam. Technorati offered validity. If I wrote something good and there
were 500 pingbacks, and 490 of them were spam, Technorati made visible the 10
good ones, and let me see the reputation level of the 10 good ones. I want
that again.

~~~
awiesenhofer
Totally agree! I wonder, what would/should a modern reimplementation look
like? Shouldn't be that hard to do or am i missing something?

------
notacoward
The obstacle is not the format but the ease of sharing. Yes, I've had a blog
since ~2000, I know there are some ways to share others' content on your own
blog, but it never became as easy or readily consumable as a retweet.

Ironically, I think the reason is recognizable from epidemiology. The network
of twitter followers is just denser than the network of bloggers ever was or
likely ever will be. Even the very best blog posts still tended not to spread
even an order of magnitude as well as a good tweet thread. As much as I hate
the format, I don't think blogs can or will displace it.

~~~
aaron-lebo
The network is a boon and bane.

The network allows things to go viral, but I don't think a retweet or tweets
are very consumable. Twitter has an atrocious UI. I think when people do these
threads tweet storm things, it's way way less readable than essays people were
writing a thousand of years ago. I close the page when I encounter those and
shake my head at how redundant all the extra stuff is between each sentence.
Who naturally writes like that? It's almost like we are going backwards.

The only reason Twitter is big and the network has the power it does it
because by a chance of history it got celebs on it in the middle of the last
decade. I think content creators, especially devs, should be aware that there
are a lot of us (dozens of us!) that won't touch Twitter with a ten foot pole.
I don't go out of my way to read Tweets and I never ever check out someone's
Twitter feed because I can't stand the site and the narcissism it fuels.

It's like America Online keywords. Someday it will be a dead piece of history.
Twitter, what's that, grandpa?

We're funneling our content through platforms that amplify those who talk the
most and/or have the patience to comb through that. How many voices are
excluded because people don't want that?

~~~
notacoward
> The network is a boon and bane.

Couldn't agree more. Some good info gets distributed that way, but so does
even more crap. It does tax people's ability to filter.

> Twitter has an atrocious UI.

Sure, twitter.com has a terrible UI, but there are many other UIs available
that are better

> there are a lot of us (dozens of us!) that won't touch Twitter with a ten
> foot pole.

There are a lot of us who _do_ use Twitter too. I'm connected to probably over
a hundred fellow developers, sysadmins, computer scientists, etc. One step
away through them are _thousands_ , and we do learn from each other every day.
(More so than here, that's for damn sure.) Avoiding Twitter means missing out
on that, just like using _only_ Twitter would mean missing out on blog
content. It's a high price to pay for fashion, and people who avoid or dump on
Twitter for that reason seem to outnumber those who do so out of genuine
principle by a large margin.

------
smitty1e
Blogs never left, as a technical matter.

Go to Wordpress and get your dog-gone blog on.

~~~
Reason077
Blogs died the day Google killed Google Reader.

OK, they're still out there, but they rely on Twitter and sites like Hacker
News to drive traffic. The RSS-driven native blog ecosystem is nothing like
what it was in the Reader days.

~~~
smitty1e
I migrated to [https://feedly.com](https://feedly.com)

One might find a clear point of inflection on blog traffic with the demise of
Google Reader, but basically people just quit writing blog posts when the new
wore off.

Children (parenthood) wiped out a lot of my discretionary time, for example.

------
jml7c5
On Twitter, there is a single type of content (a tweet). With blogs, there are
two types of content (posts and comments). While it seems like a small
difference, it changes behavior and appeal. When Alice comments on Bob's blog
post, Alice is on Bob's "territory". Her comment is not an equal blog post in
response. It will primarily be seen by Bob's audience, and most of her own
readers will be unaware of it.

On Twitter, there is discoverability. As you browse, you frequently jump
across profiles, and are continuously recommended users to follow.

On Twitter, there is brevity. In general, blogs are not designed for hundreds
of short posts.

On Twitter, you do not have to pay for hosting, nor do you have to manage
anything.

So there are a mix of technical, social, and network effects. Until these
problems are overcome with a single solution, Twitter will retain its
stranglehold on content.

\---

Personally, I wish Twitter would just remove post length restrictions and make
it a proper micro-to-macro blogging service. (To be clear: I'm not a fan of a
Twitter monoculture, I hate their UI, they make getting data difficult, their
site is _painfully_ slow, and they are often user-hostile. But it's been years
and no micro-to-macro blogging service has overtaken them, and at this point
it'd be better to have something dastardly that works, than something
dastardly that doesn't.)

~~~
qqssccfftt
> Personally, I wish Twitter would just remove post length restrictions and
> make it a proper micro-to-macro blogging service.

I would rather not wade through 10000 word thesises and then sentence by
sentence "takedowns" in the response

~~~
jml7c5
Well, you'd only see the first line or two. They'd be tap/click to expand.

------
andy_ppp
Medium had such a great stab at doing this before they completely lost their
way. I think someone should make another attempt at this, there doesn’t need
to be a billion dollar company here to still get very rich and, more
importantly, make something people want...

~~~
ketzo
Genuine question: why do people dislike Medium so much? I see a lot of hate
for it.

~~~
zem
they ran smack into the common failure mode of building up a large audience
and then trying to use that as leverage for user-hostile monetisation tactics.

~~~
chipotle_coyote
I was going to say "that's not entirely fair," but I suppose it basically is
fair. It's at least worth noting that they still really do seem to be trying
to find ways to make it viable for independent writers to get paid for their
writing -- their user-hostile monetization tactics are about trying to get you
to sign up for that paywall, and that paywall gives a chunk of its revenue to
authors who choose to put their stories behind it. The real tragic irony of
Medium is that it's quite plausible they've made every poor decision with the
best of intentions.

------
askafriend
You can bring them back, but I don't have time or attention span for 100
blogs.

I still like Twitter for getting a broad range of thoughts quickly. I view it
as a very rough pulse of public consciousness. Not a research paper or word
from God.

~~~
ThreeFx
You don't have to, with RSS you have your own feed.

------
softwaredoug
Sadly many blogs are often content mill level boilerplate followed by 1-2
sentences of real content. I think people begin to associate blogging at
unknown domains as suspicious, given the wide variability in actual content
per word on the page.

A series of tweets won’t have this problem, people aren’t trying to game SEO.
They’re gaming social media which has a different set of incentives for
good/bad

------
asdfadfaf
No one has mentioned substack ([https://substack.com/](https://substack.com/))
yet. It's a product that seems to be on the right track. More generally I
think getting a newsletter from a trusted source is a much better way to be
informed than Twitter threads because Twitter in general encourages a weird
mind-meld type of narratives where everyone just talks about the same thing
24/7 because everyone is liking, retweeting, and thinking about the same set
of ideas in 280 character chunks.

~~~
freddie_mercury
How are they on the right track? They've taken over $17 million in funding
from VCs, meaning they need a ~$170 million exit in the next 7 years, meaning
they need to monetize like crazy.

Everyone loved Medium, too, in their Year 3 when they were just burning VC
cash and nobody there cared about being a profitable, sustainable business.

~~~
look_lookatme
Substack is different in that they are a kind of Patreon meets Medium (with
the newsletter angle, but I think on a long enough timeline that's a gimmick).
With regards to what sets them apart from Medium -- in short, they actually
have a revenue story: a cut of subscriptions. Even this is phrasing is wrong
though because IMO a lot of "subscriptions" in this space could effectively be
categorized as "recurring donations" since they are more about supporting
individuals or small collectives and less about pay-for-product.

I'm a little skeptical about the overall size of their market or their ability
to create sustainable revenue opportunities for individual creators in the
long term, but they certainly have more obvious a pathway to revenue than
Medium.

They ought to be investing in low friction, easy to use customer acquisition
tooling for creators btw. Something that doesn't feel like marketing but is,
effectively, marketing. That's where they can apply those millions in
technology and differentiate between Medium. For these "substacks" (btw this
phrase is actively being xeroxed and they should invest in ensuring this is
the case) where people are trying to quit their jobs to become full-time
creators, they need to come with a story and tooling that eases these creators
into the idea that part of their new lifestyle is keeping certain KPIs up and
to the right (without drenching these concepts in growth jargon).

By doing this they can effectively outsource their growth to their customers:
they take the vig from creators and at the same time utilize the creators to
grow their platform. It's a smart idea.

~~~
freddie_mercury
Patreon is a great comparison and, I think, supports my position. Only $35
million in annual revenue after 6 years.

Not a bad business but they've taken $160 million in finding to get there.

Actually, my bigger point was just that the tech industry is full of
businesses that were hot & sexy in their early years and then people got
disappointed when they tried to start being a real business in year 7 or 8 or
9.

Instead of jumping from the Medium hype train to the Substack hype train....it
is probably safer just to get off all the hype trains and assume any given
startup will eventually try to become profitable and screw over old time
customers in the process. You're going to be about 90% right with that as your
default assumption.

------
est
I've been writing blog for almost 15 years. I think blog died because readers
can not support blogs in some way. Many readers became silent subscribers and
that's it. The RSS is only a publishing protocol. It's a good format to
subscribe some notification, updates and such, but it's no match for the two-
way relationship of modern social network.

1\. The user can not directly comment with an RSS nor contact the author in
some way

2\. Author can not gain profit from RSS. Nor the reader app, distributor and
publishers. There needs to be a payment option in RSS style.

Twitter and Facebook are exactly opposite of this, it's built upon layers of
layers of connections and there is no way to enumerate the whole graph. It
gets tired pretty fast and became an echo chamber. Contents tend to get
shorter to grab attention with fragmented information everywhere.

And in the era of mobile phones, making content on a small screen is painful.
But making viral videos are not. I think someday if videos are just easily
indexable and searchable as texts, Tiktok can become the blogging platform of
next generation.

~~~
asdff
You'd think in the era of patreon this would be solved by now in a manner that
is opt in by users who have shown they are willing to pay for online content,
or some other way that doesn't require intrusive paywalls or advertisement.

------
eitland
More generally twitter has spent the last 14 years painting itself into a
corner.

It seems the world need a massively scalable messaging backbone, and when
twitter was created I thought (IIRC, this is a decade ago and I can't remember
if and where I wrote it down) something like that would happen:

Basic Twitter would stay free and there would be all kinds of paid services on
top:

\- it could be extended to allow APIs for machine to machine communication.

\- it could be improved to be used for groups and one to one messaging
(WhatsApp, later Telegram took this market. Google+ had a decent chance to get
a slice of another part of it.)

\- they could charge for API access or for more than what clearly personal
usage (more than a few groups, multilanguage distribution, near realtime
machine to machine communication etc)

When I think about it now here's another one:

\- paid subscriptions to feeds. Examples: news feeds (maybe you pay for access
to your newspapers)

Instead they become what I would describe as a spam distribution machine where
you can follow celebrities.

------
nickthemagicman
And frickin RSS! That was the content collaborator before Twitter.

~~~
themodelplumber
I was surprised at the number of "RSS feed?" emails I got from blog readers
when I started a new blog back in 2015-2016. Adding an RSS button to my blog
long after the big blogging craze felt kind of weird but I use it myself now
too.

------
Icathian
The devil is always in the details. Deciding who pays to host new platforms,
who gets to gatekeep content, etc ad nauseum, would likely sink any such
effort.

Frankly, that seems like a long way to go for what is effectively twitlonger.
If you buy the premise that Twitter is effective at amplifying the right
voices (very much still up for debate), and the problem is the interface for
long-form content, then it seems to need a much simpler UX fix rather than
trying to invent a separate-but-joined platform from whole cloth.

------
aaron695
We tried blogs, they failed (or were superseded)

So, wishing for them to work won't help.

[https://theconversation.com/](https://theconversation.com/) was an attempt at
blogs 2.0 and it's failed. (failed as in an educated longform alternative to
Twitter, it might make money however)

Medium is doing ok.

I think maybe gatekept shortform media might be possible, it's in part what HN
is. I would look at furthering HN to the next level.

------
2OEH8eoCRo0
Should Twitter release an easy static site generator of sorts and host those
user blogs for free so users can post about each others blogs on regular
Twitter? Keeps people on Twitter.

~~~
chipotle_coyote
Doing that _not_ for free is basically Micro.blog's business model; a hosted
account there is actually a hosted Hugo instance.

------
awinter-py
blogs take a long time to write -- if expertise is a product that consumers
use to judge new information, a blog may be too slow

long-form would be interesting if it were a pull-based model (N followers of
some expert want their opinion on some piece of information)

public follower networks are also valuable -- the signal value of one expert
following another is non-zero

------
HugoDaniel
What is your opinion on dev.to ?

~~~
sergiotapia
Full of armchair experts, and top-lists-huge-landing-image ego postings.

Their platform is excellent, their content not so much.

>The most important skill that you should develop to improve your life

This is dev.to in a nutshell.

~~~
rvz
Exactly. Lots of 'self-proclaimed senior field marshals and developers'
sharing their programmer war-stories which often descends to language,
library, editor or OS flamewars.

Not sure how it compares to hackernoon, but it seems they are competing well
towards the nadir of technical decision making and advice.

------
xtat
I mean I agree with the headline but the article seems to just poop on twitter

------
heroina
Why did RSS feeds die?

~~~
Jaruzel
Because large corporates couldn't monetise them with enough ads. Once the
large sites had dropped support for RSS, everyone then followed.

~~~
asdff
Most large sites do still have RSS feeds, I've found. Usually it's strange
when I can't find one.

------
heroina
Why did the RSS feed die?

------
fortran77
It would be nice to see a blog platform like medium without all the pop ups,
pop overs, and paywalls. Just Charge people a few bucks a month to have a blog
and let them have a tip jar.

------
pgt
If you are an expert reading this considering writing a blog - whatever you
do, please don't start publishing on a paywalled medium like Medium.

~~~
yuyangchee98
What alternatives do you recommend? I'm starting to write, and Medium seems
like the best option to me because how else am I going to get readers?

~~~
kirubakaran
Static website (Hugo/Jekyll) that you host yourself and share on Twitter,
relevant subreddits, and Hacker News?

~~~
bpodgursky
This is a far less pleasant and high-variance process than you make it out to
be.

\- Posting on Twitter just begs the "get an audience" question. You can't just
GET followers, it takes months or years of constant content creation, tagging,
hashtagging, etc to get an audience.

\- Subreddits are very hit-or-miss, and a lot of them will flat-out ban you
for posting your own blog content, even if it's non-monetized OC (been there)

\- Hacker News is a single-stream audience, and while occasionally you'll get
onto the front page, more often content dies with a few dozen views. And it's
not an especially differentiated audience.

For someone whose job is content creation, this might be realistic, but you're
asking experts in a field -- whose primary job is research, and being an
expert, not social media outreach -- to spend a huge portion of their time on
audience generation and self-promotion. That's not realistic.

I hate Medium, for a ton of reasons, but it succeeds at making it easy for
one-off or two-off writers to get a large audience without investing years of
work on it. Sure, the audience isn't WORTH a lot to them (they can't monetize
it, and it could get pulled from under them at the drop of a hat), but if the
goal is to spread a message or get a post read, sorry, it's still a very
viable outlet for doing that.

~~~
kirubakaran
That the thing about Faustian bargains. Great in the short term.

------
Funes-
Make it "uncensorable and anonymous blogs" and I'm in.

------
Traster
I don't know if blogs are the answer, but twitter is certainly the website
equivalent of typing into WebMD "Bleeding from the anus".

There's just so little there of value amonst an absolutely swarm of careerists
(see every journo) sociopaths (see anyone replying to a journo) and arseholes
(see anyone replying to anyone they don't follow). This isn't a COVID-19
thing, this is essential to twitter as a platform. And the SV folks know it
too- which is why their libertarian credentials went out the window the second
it got serious.

There's absolutely a problem that there are experts on twitter, because it's
preventing them from being somewhere they can be seen by anyone with an ounce
of sense, but the replacement to twitter needs more connectivity than blogs
(not as much as twitter) and the classical separation of author from consumer.
That's the fundamental problem - you could be Fauci or Trump, you're still
just a twit. Whereas in the past it would be Fauci writing an update on the
HHS website, and Trump being ignored on Sean Hannity's comment section.

------
some_furry
I just started a blog last week.

[https://soatok.blog](https://soatok.blog)

------
rado
Sorry, can't get web publishing advice from Wired.
[https://i.imgur.com/FaX02Aw.png](https://i.imgur.com/FaX02Aw.png)

~~~
golergka
How would you publish it so you would earn enough to pay salaries to all
employees involved?

~~~
asjw
Not using behavioural economics ideas

~~~
golergka
And what original ideas of your own would you use in their stead?

Look, I don't like those popups too. And I, too, prefer media that doesn't do
that. But at the same time, keeping in mind how hard it is to make any kind of
money in that market, I don't have the guts to tell those people how to run
their business.

