Tbf it was a rain shower on the Binley road."Here's why"
"This is why"
"Here's how"
"Why this"
Just start things like that and job done.
I notice there was an article about a reaction to a mum pissing in the shower the other day, awful attempt at being the lad bible.
"Here's why"
"This is why"
"Here's how"
"Why this"
Just start things like that and job done.
I notice there was an article about a reaction to a mum pissing in the shower the other day, awful attempt at being the lad bible.
"Here's why"
"This is why"
"Here's how"
"Why this"
Just start things like that and job done.
They must have read your post Nick and are now taking the piss?
Coventry News: The latest Coventry news updates from CoventryLive
September is the ninth month of the year in the modern day Gregorian calendar.
But why does it have the prefix "sept"?
Have you ever wondered?
The month kept its original name from the Roman calendar.
In that calendar, septem means “seven” in Latin marking it as the seventh month.
September was named during a time when the calendar year began with March.
This is why its name no longer corresponds with its placement in the Julian and Gregorian calendars.
Stone him!I work for a digital media company that has a rather large following on social media. Each month, we have meetings to come up with new ways to promote our content on the social pages and website to get more clicks. We will tweak the way we word headlines or taglines on the story.
Without fail, the Telegraph - sorry, Coventry Live - will copy it every single month. I only started noticing it last year, when they began the "Here's why XXX..." and "City fans all had the same hilarious/angry/bemused reaction to [insert thing that happened]" articles. So I just wanted to say sorry to everyone, for being a small part of inspiring the mess that is the current Cov Tel website and social pages.
I work for a digital media company that has a rather large following on social media. Each month, we have meetings to come up with new ways to promote our content on the social pages and website to get more clicks. We will tweak the way we word headlines or taglines on the story.
Without fail, the Telegraph - sorry, Coventry Live - will copy it every single month. I only started noticing it last year, when they began the "Here's why XXX..." and "City fans all had the same hilarious/angry/bemused reaction to [insert thing that happened]" articles. So I just wanted to say sorry to everyone, for being a small part of inspiring the mess that is the current Cov Tel website and social pages.
This may sound naive but could your organisation focus less on 'getting clicks' and more on genuine quality content that happens to bring in readers? Web-based marketing seems to think that clicks are the be all and end all, the basis of success etc.
Out of interest, does thie site get any 'bonus' revenue based on the number of clicks it gets? Obviously it is not the same as described above as you are not producing/churning content for clicks as the basis of your existence, unlile the other publications mentioned.It depends on the type of site it is I guess.
What clicks onto the site? No nothing. I don't agree with clickbait so do try and remove any thread titles that look that way.Out of interest, does thie site get any 'bonus' revenue based on the number of clicks it gets? Obviously it is not the same as described above as you are not producing/churning content for clicks as the basis of your existence, unlile the other publications mentioned.
"THIS is what Sky Blues Talk's Nick has to say about clickbait...."What clicks onto the site? No nothing. I don't agree with clickbait so do try and remove any thread titles that look that way.
My posts put people off enough, I'd rather they weren't mislead into reading some of them!"THIS is what Sky Blues Talk's Nick has to say about clickbait...."
There was a CT "All you need to know" about the Grand Slam 2018 gig at the Butts last week - absolutely fuck-all information other than what they had got from elsewhere on social media about start times!!
We do both. Every day we put out incredibly written 2,000-word features from well-known writers, but they don't perform anywhere near as well.This may sound naive but could your organisation focus less on 'getting clicks' and more on genuine quality content that happens to bring in readers? Web-based marketing seems to think that clicks are the be all and end all, the basis of success etc.
We do both. Every day we put out incredibly written 2,000-word features from well-known writers, but they don't perform anywhere near as well.
People all clamour for better journalism, more quality sport-writing, but when 100,000 people click on a story written by one of our staff writers with the title "Why Liverpool fans are furious with X player after game vs Y Team" and only 8,000 people click on a "Lucas Moura: In-depth Interview and look at the Brazil star's career" that we paid a freelancer £250 to write - you tell me which one the people really want and what the better business decision is.
"Why Liverpool fans are furious with X player after game vs Y Team"
No you have to click !Tell us then
We do both. Every day we put out incredibly written 2,000-word features from well-known writers, but they don't perform anywhere near as well.
People all clamour for better journalism, more quality sport-writing, but when 100,000 people click on a story written by one of our staff writers with the title "Why Liverpool fans are furious with X player after game vs Y Team" and only 8,000 people click on a "Lucas Moura: In-depth Interview and look at the Brazil star's career" that we paid a freelancer £250 to write - you tell me which one the people really want and what the better business decision is.
Thought Chrissie Hynde was a-f*cking-mazing! Ultimate rock-chick at 66 years of age, and not a note wrong or re-keyed from the originals! One off the bucket list for me! (Oh and the original line-up drummer Martin Chambers was playing too).I went to the same GrandSlam gig buton Newark not Cov. Simple Minds absolutely rocked it, it's such a shame they do not get the recognition and respect that their work and shows demand. Pretenders (real name Chrissy Hynde and some session players) did a good job too.
Do the companies you sell banners/skyscrapers etc to not ask any questions about engagement or do they just purely base their decision on your click rate?
If 100k people click through and only spend 2 seconds on your page before bouncing, there's less chance of them seeing your customer's ad.
As you've mentioned, if people want better quality articles they need to stop click on all the dogshit '5 things you need to know about X' articles.
I've highlighted a very pertinent point...and there's a way that sites get around it: by not getting into the story straight away. A lot of sites now (us included) will have 3-5 paragraphs of build-up before finally revealing the key piece of information a reader clicked on for. They serve ads after the build-up. Done. Longer engaged time on the site, more adverts viewed and served, more money.
It's not perfect, but this is how it is.
I have no doubt that people already have - and have no doubt that it pisses viewers off. It's not the way I'd want to run a site, but this is what the company does and we just have to make it as good (read: Profitable) as possible.I think that's a bit shortsighted. How long do you think it'll be before everyone cottons on to that? I got bored of the pre-buildup rehash/waffle and frustrated that it seemed like 'stories' were being created primarily to get clicks, not as a way of reporting actual news.
I've highlighted a very pertinent point...and there's a way that sites get around it: by not getting into the story straight away. A lot of sites now (us included) will have 3-5 paragraphs of build-up before finally revealing the key piece of information a reader clicked on for. They serve ads after the build-up. Done. Longer engaged time on the site, more adverts viewed and served, more money.
It's not perfect, but this is how it is.
That works in the short term but if you're hoping for return visits, which a site like the Telegraph certainly is, you don't want your users getting pissed off that the site takes hours to load and starts playing video's automatically with adverts popping up all over the place.I've highlighted a very pertinent point...and there's a way that sites get around it: by not getting into the story straight away. A lot of sites now (us included) will have 3-5 paragraphs of build-up before finally revealing the key piece of information a reader clicked on for. They serve ads after the build-up. Done. Longer engaged time on the site, more adverts viewed and served, more money.
Was just asking the question rather than having a go.
In terms of online, the Telegraph have totally devalued themselves as a news outlet, with the regurgitation of paraphrased Metro articles, repetitive content and ladbible style clickbait titles. Won't be long before they bring in the latest 'watch ten seconds of this video to unlock the article' shite.
Surely the bubble will burst eventually - people just won't bother going on there anymore.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?