Following the previous post on the future of journalism, the big news in media today is the sale of Business Insider to Axel Springer.
If I have anything to say about BI is that I try to avoid it, especially because of their tabloid headlines that I find more on the line with adverts you can find on sensationalistic websites rather than relevant titles on trustworthy publications. Unfortunately this is a trend on the web to gain more traffic, even for the most trusted sources — I’m looking at you Bloomberg.
So maybe I unconsciously link BI’s headlines to adverts ?
There’s also the way they sometimes present the content, by “slicing” major news/reports into bullet points or stupid slideshows. I understand why they do so, but that’s not my kind of journalism. If I don’t want to take much time with news I open FastFT, NYT Now, The Economist Espresso or WSJ What’s News where articles, while short, are well written and contain much of what I need to know about the subjects.
If a long, investigative newspaper article meanders without purpose, Business Insider will mercilessly slice and dice the article and cut to what is most essential. If you don’t give your audience what they want, someone else will[.]
No, Business Insider isn’t my kind of town. If I’m looking for some male-alpha business writings I go straight to ZeroHedge.com.
For my part, I let the original title of the article, though I may shorten it. Where I differ from them — quiet a bit actually, as I’m not a reporter myself — is that I tend to avoid quoting the most sensationalist piece of an article. I prefer to convey a bit of mystery that may encourage you to read the whole article elsewhere.