Dude, who even knows.
Post with 26 notes
Been thinking about that WB exec who told me around 2008 that the reason there weren’t more “black” TV shows even though there was a pent-up demand was that a network’s real customers aren’t viewers but advertisers and there weren’t enough that wanted a specifically black audience (tho there were for children, teen, young adult, elderly, male, female, rich, poor, etc.)
Makes me wonder how much the rise of “identities” in recent online media has to do with algorithmic advertising where the content and the ads are decoupled so you go for breadth and intensity of audience with a “black” or “feminist” theme (or any other vertical, like “sports” or “cars”) and then the algorithm serves each viewer individually optimized ads for like, Dyson vacuums or furniture or vacations, depending
(And also I wonder if something of the reverse didn’t happen with GamerGate, that games journalism turns on “previews” and insider stuff that’s advertising as far as the studios care, rare and in-demand content to readers, and cheap, subsidized content to the editors, with tighter ties and more effort than traditional media ad placement. So studios felt bound to Polygon and Kotaku cause they had the readers, and readers felt bound cause they had the exclusives, and as it shaded from “yay AAA vidya!” to walking simulators and colonialism thumbsuckers*, the entry costs prevented competitors from capitalizing and everyone just got angry and resentful instead?)
* ‘cause it’s come up twice, “thumbsucker” is an old journalism term for what today would be called a “think piece”
Post reblogged from argumate with 176 notes
“the show must go on!” has an unspoken second half of “or else we’ll have to refund the tickets!”
Chat with 40 notes