Theoretically altruistic journalism
The latest episode of the “You’re Wrong About” podcast focuses on phones, and makes the argument that phones are generally a good thing for people to have — even teens.
Included in the show was a discussion on the potential ban of TikTok, where they shared:
And it’s not about improving these systems or improving the world and improving the things that young people, when you actually pull young people and you say, what are you concerned about? And they bring up things like climate change, gun control, covid, you know, Palestine, Israel, like foreign wars that we’re spending billions of dollars on that. Those are the things that they’re bringing up. They’re not like, actually yeah, if you could just block TikTok, that would be great. No young people are against all of this. This is a movement driven by boomers.
The challenge they raise is that when articles come up that want to make things “better” (like banning TikTok), even if they’re wrong it can feel good to share them because you think you’re doing something good. The episode talks a lot about “moral panics” from the past; things that sound scary but are completely untrue, like making sure your Halloween candy doesn’t have razors in it, or worries about kids eating Tide Pods. It feels good to help, but it’s completely worthless.
Or, as host Sarah Marshall says, it’s “theoretically altruistic journalism”.
We see it from our friends on social media, too, and it’s a big source of scams. A popular one are the “lost pet” scams that are going around. Someone will share a story of a lost pet, and it will be shared thousands of times. After a few days, the original post will turn into an actual scam and will already be out on those thousands of feeds.
People sharing those are coming from a place of good. They’re trying to do the right thing, and it’s theoretically altruistic sharing. It can be easy to get sucked into sharing a story to try to help others out, but it’s even better to share stories that you know are true.
As for the original bit of theoretically altruistic journalism, check out the full episode of their show to dig further into why phones might not be the menace that many are portraying them as.
Creating “zero click” content
Creating “zero click” content As I mentioned a few weeks ago, a growing problem with Google is the number of “zero click” searches on there — searches that don’t lead to another click, because Google answered the question for you. It’s generally a good thing for users, but it’s a bad thing for companies wanting to get more website traffic. In the case of Google, there’s not much you can do. In other cases, though, it might be best to just lean into this trend. Most social media sites quietly ...
Grateful in the macro and the micro
Grateful in the macro and the micro When you ask someone what they’re grateful for, you often get the same kinds of things – health, family, friends, etc. Those are all wonderful things, and we should all be grateful for them, but being grateful for smaller things can sometimes have a bigger impact. In a recent episode of “My First Million”, the hosts (Sam Parr and Shaan Puri) interviewed Gary Vaynerchuk and it was a fascinating conversation. I encourage you to listen/watch the entire thing w...
Shortform for long books
Shortform for long books I’ve been using Blinkist for some book summaries for a few years now, and it’s great! However, I’m noticing a growing problem in the gap between long books and Blinkist, in that the “Blinks” just aren’t long enough to really share the heart of the book. Blinkist and most related platforms are proud of the fact that they give you “15 minute summaries”. Those are a fantastic way to get an overview of a book, but then they leave a bit gap between that 15 minute summary a...
Theoretically altruistic journalism
The latest episode of the “You’re Wrong About” podcast focuses on phones, and makes the argument that phones are generally a good thing for people to have — even teens.
Included in the show was a discussion on the potential ban of TikTok, where they shared:
And it’s not about improving these systems or improving the world and improving the things that young people, when you actually pull young people and you say, what are you concerned about? And they bring up things like climate change, gun control, covid, you know, Palestine, Israel, like foreign wars that we’re spending billions of dollars on that. Those are the things that they’re bringing up. They’re not like, actually yeah, if you could just block TikTok, that would be great. No young people are against all of this. This is a movement driven by boomers.
The challenge they raise is that when articles come up that want to make things “better” (like banning TikTok), even if they’re wrong it can feel good to share them because you think you’re doing something good. The episode talks a lot about “moral panics” from the past; things that sound scary but are completely untrue, like making sure your Halloween candy doesn’t have razors in it, or worries about kids eating Tide Pods. It feels good to help, but it’s completely worthless.
Or, as host Sarah Marshall says, it’s “theoretically altruistic journalism”.
We see it from our friends on social media, too, and it’s a big source of scams. A popular one are the “lost pet” scams that are going around. Someone will share a story of a lost pet, and it will be shared thousands of times. After a few days, the original post will turn into an actual scam and will already be out on those thousands of feeds.
People sharing those are coming from a place of good. They’re trying to do the right thing, and it’s theoretically altruistic sharing. It can be easy to get sucked into sharing a story to try to help others out, but it’s even better to share stories that you know are true.
As for the original bit of theoretically altruistic journalism, check out the full episode of their show to dig further into why phones might not be the menace that many are portraying them as.
Creating “zero click” content
Creating “zero click” content As I mentioned a few weeks ago, a growing problem with Google is the number of “zero click” searches on there — searches that don’t lead to another click, because Google answered the question for you. It’s generally a good thing for users, but it’s a bad thing for companies wanting to get more website traffic. In the case of Google, there’s not much you can do. In other cases, though, it might be best to just lean into this trend. Most social media sites quietly ...
Grateful in the macro and the micro
Grateful in the macro and the micro When you ask someone what they’re grateful for, you often get the same kinds of things – health, family, friends, etc. Those are all wonderful things, and we should all be grateful for them, but being grateful for smaller things can sometimes have a bigger impact. In a recent episode of “My First Million”, the hosts (Sam Parr and Shaan Puri) interviewed Gary Vaynerchuk and it was a fascinating conversation. I encourage you to listen/watch the entire thing w...
Shortform for long books
Shortform for long books I’ve been using Blinkist for some book summaries for a few years now, and it’s great! However, I’m noticing a growing problem in the gap between long books and Blinkist, in that the “Blinks” just aren’t long enough to really share the heart of the book. Blinkist and most related platforms are proud of the fact that they give you “15 minute summaries”. Those are a fantastic way to get an overview of a book, but then they leave a bit gap between that 15 minute summary a...
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Subscribe to Mickey Mellen
Subscribe to Mickey Mellen
<100 subscribers
<100 subscribers
No activity yet