Asklemmy

47238 readers

1073 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 6 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Why do people fell for bullshit news websites tricks? (programming.dev)

submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I saw the same thing happen twice already.

Once with Lugi and the other with Tesla. Websites see the traffic that their news bring, so they dedicate 55% and more of their website to cover them in the most dumb way possible.

How many articles do we need about Tesla cars being destroyed or vandalized? At a certain stage it becomes silly and more importantly, the websites covering them is a capitalist websites who would not give a shit about this topics if it did not bring them money.

My question is not about the websites, my question is about the people who read and share their articles, why do they do that? How do they fell for this over and over?

Just to be clear, I am not talking about the articles who deliver new info about the event, I am specifically talking about the article that keep recycling the same info without adding anything new or even offer a new analysis. (The Verge for example)

all 5 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Every article has the potential to be the first one someone is seeing. I think your post has within it an assumption that the same people read all the articles over and over. ~~Even if some large percentage of the people reading it have already read previous articles there is some value in knowing "this is still happening, wow" in regard to Tesla, or "so that's the stage of the case against Luigi were at now, ok."~~

~~In a way it's like finding new trees in the same forest.~~

I crossed out the end because half way through writing I forgot you weren't talking about new information lol

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 weeks ago

This is why I click on every article about eggs I see. (And any other topic that I personally feel needs to be louder)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

Dopamine.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 weeks ago

How many articles do we need about Tesla cars being destroyed or vandalized?

Well we need something to break up all the bad news