In November 2011, Paul Frampton, a theoretical particle physicist, met Denise Milani, a Czech bikini model, on the online dating site Mate1.com. She was gorgeous — dark-haired and dark-eyed, with a supposedly natural DDD breast size. In some photos, she looked tauntingly steamy; in others, she offered a warm smile. Soon, Frampton and Milani were chatting online nearly every day. [...]
Frampton had been very lonely since his divorce three years earlier; now it seemed those days were over. [...] At 68, he dreamed of finding a wife to bear him children — and what a wife. He pictured introducing her to his colleagues. One thing worried him, though. She had told him that men hit on her all the time. How did that acclaim affect her? Did it go to her head? But he remembered how comforting it felt to be chatting with her, like having a companion in the next room. And he knew she loved him. She’d said so many times.
2. Журналист Нейт Тейер опубликовал свою переписку с редакторами The Atlantic, в которой ему предложили опубликовать вариант уже готовой статьи на сайте The Atlantic за бесплатно.
We unfortunately can’t pay you for it, but we do reach 13 million readers a month. I understand if that’s not a workable arrangement for you, I just wanted to see if you were interested.Его это предложение возмутило, и не только его - 500 комментариев и скандал в журналистских кругах. В ответ на это сетевой редактор журнала Алексис Мадригал написал интересную, подробную запись о том, как журналы пытаются выжить в эпоху интернета, и как это у них не очень получается: A Day in the Life of a Digital Editor, 2013.
Let me give you this hypothetical. You are a digital editor at a fine publication. You are in charge of writing some stuff, commissioning some stuff, editing some stuff. [...] And your total budget for the year is $12,000, a thousand bucks a month. (We could play this same game with $36,000, too. The lessons will remain the same.) What do you do?
Here are some options:
1. Write a lot of original pieces yourself. (Pro: Awesome. Con: Hard, slow.)
2. Take partner content. (Pro: Content! Con: It's someone else's content.)
3. Find people who are willing to write for a small amount of money. (Pro: Maybe good. Con: Often bad.)
4. Find people who are willing to write for no money. (Pro: Free. Con: Crapshoot.)
5. Aggregate like a mug. (Pro: Can put smartest stuff on blog. Con: No one will link to it.)
6. Rewrite press releases so they look like original content. (Pro: Content. Con: You suck.)
Don't laugh. These are actual content strategies out there in the wilds of the Internet. I am sure you have encountered them.
3. Statistics for Cigarette Sellers. Эндрю Гельман рассуждает об этичности, с точки зрения статистика, работы на табачные компании. Он избегает морализаторства и рассказывает подробно о нескольких интересных примерах такого сотрудничества.
At one point, Rubin writes, “When I was first contacted by a tobacco lawyer, I was very reluctant to consult for them, for the standard ‘politically correct’ reasons …” I think this is a bit glib. The phrase “political correctness” typically refers to attempts to restrict speech or ideology that is deemed offensive. Cigarette companies, on the other hand, actually make cigarettes, which actually do give people cancer. Now, I’m not saying it’s immoral to work for tobacco companies, or to supply cigarettes to people who want them, or even that it’s immoral to advertise cigarettes with the
goal of inducing people to start smoking—I have no particular authority or inclination to set myself up as some sort of moral arbiter on this issue—but to dismiss such concerns as “political correctness” minimizes the issues here, I think.