Are we stuck with clickbait for as long as the internet as we know it is around?

[SwampBastard]

I assume the answer is yes, but I hope the answer is no. You see it everywhere, even on ResetEra, and I hate it. I know I'm not alone here, but I also know it's used so widely because it works. Are we stuck with it until the medium changes completely, or until the marketers find something even more sinister and effective? Is there any reason whatsoever for me to be hopeful that I'll live to see an internet without clickbait?

I expect and welcome a bunch of clickbait-y replies.

 

[Deleted member 4367]

It gets results. That's the unfortunate reality.

 

[Era Uma Vez]

As long as clicks pay the bills, yes.

 

[____]

You Won't Believe The Answer

Spoiler

:(

 

[Jarrod38]

Clickbait companies fear the OP.

 

[thewienke]

That, endless scrolling, and autoplay videos that you can't disable (fuck you CNN).

 

[BarryFishFinger]

You won't believe my opinions on the matter, my second opinion will shock you!

Spoiler: Like & subscribe

Nah. It's as old as time, suckering people in on the promise of something more exciting/interesting/controversial. I don't see it ever going away.

 

[Deleted member 4367]

The annoying thumbnails on YouTube increase views an unbelievably depressing amount. A few streamers i follow have talked about it. They know it's stupid looking and they also know it works very well.

 

[Hrodulf]

No. We're stuck with clickbait as long as it's successful, which it always will be.

 

[BAD]

It will get worse because people ad block even the sites that try to make revenue sources and ads non-intrusive. Users don't care and will take or use anything, so sites have to take advantage of that to survive. Nobody really wants to pay for writing and journalism so it is on the decline.

 

[Skel1ingt0n]

YOU WON'T BELIEVE WHAT INTERNET USERS ARE STUCK WITH!


Also:

 

[Yoss]

Before clickbait we had sensationalist headlines and tabloid news. There's always going to be a market for making news entertaining instead of informative.

 

[Brazil]

You either do clickbait or you fail, unless you're already blessed with a captive and loyal audience.

It's not that people click on clickbait trash more than they do regular stuff; people don't click on the regular stuff at all.

Most of the people doing clickbait shit aren't happy about it; they just have to do what they have to do to keep their jobs and income.

 

[Border]

The only reason that yellow journalism ended was because newspapers were threatened by radio and television, and decided they needed better standards. It will take some kind of technology that is competitive with the internet to turn things around for online journalism.

Either that, or a shift to a revenue model that isn't completely driven by clicks and advertising. I'd like to think that reputable news organizations could probably live off of a subscription or donation model, particularly the ones that are already quite prestigious. Something like Apple News is quite promising, but I am not sure how well that service is doing.

 

[Maple]

Unfortunately.

And title clickbait is only part of the problem. So many videos and articles these days are made over petty squabbles and personal conflicts.

It reminds me of MGS2 when it's talked about how much junk data is accumulating every second of the day, preserved forever in all its triteness.

 

[New Username]

Edit: Deleted post

 

[Brazil]

I'd like to think that reputable news organizations could probably live off of a subscription or donation model, particularly the ones that are already quite prestigious.

Click to shrink...

That's not feasible on a large scale. There's only so much 'small money' to go around when it comes to things like this - usually enough to fund small independent publications and newsletters, but never an entire newspaper. Most enterprises would have to rely on big donors (as they do nowadays with big advertisers), which naturally would undermine the credibility of the journalism they produce.

 

[entremet]

You get what you incentivize.

 

[Sunster]

Yes we will because click-bait goes deeper than just the internet. It's always been around in one form or another.

 

[Border]

That's not feasible on a large scale. There's only so much 'small money' to go around when it comes to things like this - usually enough to fund small independent publications and newsletters, but never an entire newspaper. Most enterprises would have to rely on big donors (as they do nowadays with big advertisers), which naturally would undermine the credibility of the journalism they produce.

Click to shrink...

I think what they would need to do is also begin to offer something additional that your average clickbait site cannot. Maybe content, maybe a service. Something that's longform, and cannot really just be hijacked by other outlets the way a story or interview can.

In a world where people can clear six figures in donations by streaming videogames, I have to think there's room for journalism that provides some kind of compelling extras.

 

[Ravelle]

It's just marketing in the internet ways, it's all about pulling eyeballs.

A lot of youtube creators with good channels have been boned by the algorithm and basically were forced ( to increase revenue) to use clickbait titles that don't even fit under the thumbnails, weird faces and bright colored arrows etc.

But it's nothing new, Tabloids, Newspapers all did this too.

 

[ScampyDamp]

Sadly yes.

 

[Midgarian]

I'm immune to clickbait, just like I'm immune to bullshit in general. I have an instinctual intuitive reaction to them. It's like I'm wired oppositely, I get turned away from clicking something if it has a clickbait title or clickbait thumbnail.

 

[Spinluck]

Of course.

Something something, human nature.

 

[Narroo]

Unfortunately.

And title clickbait is only part of the problem. So many videos and articles these days are made over petty squabbles and personal conflicts.

It reminds me of MGS2 when it's talked about how much junk data is accumulating every second of the day, preserved forever in all its triteness.

Click to shrink...

And it's oh so depressing. Makes you wonder if that AI was really the villain or not, given how things have turned out. I mean, under the Patriots we wouldn't have gotten Trump...maybe a perpetual war machine but that doesn't seem to be changing any time soon either.

 

[samoyed]

It is a function of the limits of the human attention span and the filtering of information into "interesting" and "boring" subcategories, and not inherent to the internet. Humans will not stop responding to clickbait anytime soon for the simple reason that they would no longer be recognizably human.

Competition for clicks intensifies the proliferation of clickbait, and if you wanted to reduce competition you'd need to disrupt market capitalism somewhere.

Even without market competition, people will compete for attention for socio-cultural reasons and find ways to maximize that attention.

 

[iswasdoes]

For as long as the internet is ad funded - yes, traffic equals money and click bait will be major influence of the type of content we het

 

[Poppy]

it's pretty sad to see websites you like fall into this over time as the need for revenue becomes more apparent

i assume that's just the way it is

 

[Tanerian]

As long as it drives revenue.. yes.

It's like asking the same things about commercials on TV.

Clickbait will exist so long as it works.
It works really well.

 

[samoyed]

The parable of the boy who cried wolf is applicable to the phenomenon of clickbait. It is an old, nearly universal feature of human society and the only real solution is conditioning people not to do it like how we teach our kids not to cry wolf. Now imagine how difficult that conditioning would be if little Timmy got a nickel every time he cried wolf and you arrive at the current dilemma.

 

[Compbros]

Clickbait isn't inherently bad, it's just used so poorly and forcibly to get clicks. Any headline that entices you is technically clickbait, for example "I bought this... interesting looking Spider-Man themed knife", that is a title that will grab your attention and potentially make you click it. Bad clickbait is "I bought this Spider-man knife and.....", that gives you incomplete information to entice you to click into the thread to get the complete info or "You won't BELIEVE the look of this knife", this tells you almost nothing beyond there being a knife that may look strange but it's to pique your curiosity to make you click it.

 

[Dirtyshubb]

The annoying thumbnails on YouTube increase views an unbelievably depressing amount. A few streamers i follow have talked about it. They know it's stupid looking and they also know it works very well.

Click to shrink...

This is what I never understand.

Like, apparently everyone hates them, content creators hate them but in practice it works!

Who are these sad fucks who see a shitty thumbnail with someone pulling a pretend shocked look and a giant red arrow pointing to absolutely nothing and think "that's what I want to watch"?

Even though I know it works and appreciate creators wanting to get more views, seeing someone start using them instantly puts me off.

 

[NihonTiger]

Unless consumer habits change, yes.

They're really continuing on traditions that other forms of media used all too well.