-
modern websites are a pain to navigate with popups, paywall, ads, heavy tracking that slows down navigation, autoplaying video ads etc
-
modern journalism = let’s just report whatever the person or company says without fact checking, contextualizing or taking a stance. I believe this is done because it takes less effort and because it makes sure that the news org doesn’t anger any of the persons/organizations it has tides with (for ads or direct funding)
The comments solve both problems, as lemmy is ad- and tracking-free and the people in the comments are mostly real people usually without any vested interests in the things they’re discussing.
So OBVIOUSLY I only read the comments. I’ll get the content of the article indirectly as it’s being discussed.
This is absolutely true. I get more information and understanding from the discussion in the comments than I do the article. Using other platforms I want to read what people are discussing about the article than the article itself. Brings more depth to the conversation and the article.
When I see a lot of 💩 on the site, I use Firefox’s reader mode.
archive.md, 12ft.io or the “Bypass paywalls clean” extension for paywalls
I have Ublock origin to block the tracking.
Not necessarily a bad thing though.
Think of it this way: There’s value in having access to a list of curated content others have deemed “worth reading or looking at”. But there is just as much value in engaging in some banter, provided it doesn’t lead to outright war in the comments.
I admit, it is tiresome trying to seriously discuss a topic when people haven’t actually read the article, but there is still an upside to a topic triggering at least enough interest to where people actually want to engage.
Same as it ever was
I read comments first mostly because a lot of posted articles are behind a paywall or i have to turn off my adblockers and maybe someone posted a tldr
Shoot, they won’t just be posting a tl;dr, but a commentary on it, and sometimes really good context from their field or experience. It’s basically the article, but written by a more intelligent journalist who is a part of whatever is being reported on, not just observing from interviews and phone calls (and lame corporate website ‘about us’ pages).
Exactly - no fluff or dancing around, they get right to the point and make concrete assertions. Then if they’re wrong, people will correct them, and you get a debate that (hopefully) brings up various subtleties and connected issues for a more holistic view.
Then if I’m still intrigued, I read the source
There weren’t enough tik toks in the article
