We are losing some of our best writers for “content”

We are drowning in a sea of listicles, hoping that when we come up for air we may catch a glimpse of something that actually matters. Probably not though.

serge
serge
Nov 6 · 4 min read

Content is everything and content is nothing. One thing we can all agree on is that people crave content, unfortunately, after that, it becomes impossible to reach an accord on what precisely content is. What is good content? What is bad content? Does it have to abide by the rules of either extreme or can all of it simply cohabitate in a vacuum of human discourse?

What we can agree on is that some people aren’t actually looking for content. At least not in the way we’ve come to understand it. What people look for are clicks which lead to advertising dollars, which lead to… I guess some sort of sense of cosmic relevance that what you’re doing matters. They’re looking for your attention and when attention is at a deficit, they’re looking in a way to monopolize it. For example, “pivoting to video.”

Content mills are neither new nor unique phenomenon. Most things on the internet construct themselves for quick consumption. Rather than engaging with someone for a long, well thought out period of time, the emphasis is on that quick hit of temporary consumption. And it’s costing us some of our best writers and thinkers.

We see it repeatedly, most recently when Deadspin saw another exodus of employees following a “stick to sports” mandate from G/O Media. Hiding behind “ad revenue” and other corporate-speak, that notably, everyone but these exec types sees for the bullshit that it is, the people “in charge” have driven some of the best writers out, restaffing with those willing to toe the line for below acceptable pay.

While yes, our attention spans are notably shorter since the dawn of the internet, we are not doing ourselves any favors. Everything has to be explained, understood and deconstructed in a length of three tweets, otherwise, it’s not worth writing about. There is this underlying, and factually incorrect, belief that people aren’t willing to connect with something that requires a more thorough examination. How would we know if we are ready for this type of thought when we rarely get a chance to experience.

So here we are, wading in the ankle-deep platitudes that may never run the risk of hurting shareholders (unless, of course, the company on your list of bottom 10 Halloween candies is pouring a significant ad spend onto your site). We haven’t as much taken our capacity to understand and engage with complex and long-form thought, as we simply committed to killing that type of thought without as much as a second examination.

As we reach breakneck speeds, the emphasis has shifted from better to faster. Platforms like Twitter condition us to get a take out of the door and worry about validity later over elaborating on an idea that may add to the conversation. Lest someone beat you to the punch. Sure, quantity has a quality all of its own, but at what price?

I applaud those still willing to operate under the assumption that human curiosity and natural inquiry deserve a seat at the table. Those who address their work not as “content,” but as meaningful cultural contributions to the ever-evolving zeitgeist. Those willing to spend a little bit of time on the issue, rather than “move on to the next one.” And I think most of us do too. The problem is that no one like us is in the room where decisions get made.

Even in my neck of the woods, some very talented people lost their jobs very suddenly. And while I’m not willing to speculate whether it was simply poor planning, lack of foresight or anything in between, I believe I can speak freely when I say it just sucks.

Alas, we must all play the game. Even the best of us have made use of the hellish bird platform to try and resurrect a modicum of thought in modern discourse. With threads and ongoing discussions that turn into debate chains, we daily demonstrate the appetite for a more explorative approach to ideas that may not simply be relegated to “surface reading.” I wouldn’t go as far as to say we yearn for it, but we are willing to engage.

The problem is, and always will be, the lack of a legitimate platform upon which to take on this battle. Surely, “doing the right thing” and teaching these devils has a certain moral cache to it, but last time I checked, my landlord doesn’t accept that form of payment. So it’s fall in line or look for a new avenue while you watch overworked and underpaid recent grads break their heads over the next Top 10 of something or other.

There’s probably a deeper and more philosophical argument I can make here about “enlightening the masses” and discourse being the path to understanding, but I’m not a first-year Philosophy student, so let’s not go off on too many tangents.

The core here is that there is a deep rift between those actually developing great content and those who steer the ship. For one, the latter have never been on the opposite side. The invasion of the tech bro is officially in full swing and we’re quietly sacrificing some of our best thinkers at the altar of shareholder profit backed up by reasoning hidden in some suspect numbers.

It is probably more important that we support the publications and writers doing meaningful work under constant threat of this type of dismantling. Otherwise, all we’ll be left with is a collection of pre-cut editorials critically devoid of any original or critical though. And that wouldn’t be a place I’d want to end up.

serge

Written by

serge

Lost boy. Found thoughts.

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade