1. 12

Linked because it shows some interesting techniques (practices) being used for “hacking” consumer attention (hence the cogsci tag) using various design decisions (naming, etc.).

Please flag this away if you don’t think it is technical enough to warrant an appearance here, or if you don’t think it will have a productive discussion.

  1.  

  2. 6

    This is also part of the reason why I’m so damned grouchy about news submissions here and advertising.

    1. 1

      I don’t think it is a big problem here, but I’d love if lobste.rs countered this trend by rejecting all clickbaity/loaded headlines, even if they are the title of the article. I’ve seen a lot more blog posts in the past year that try to ride this trend, and I think it is toxic overall.

      1. 3

        It’s one of those things that is never a big problem until it’s a huge problem, and irreversible.

        It’s cumulative dosing over time, kinda like lead poisoning. Also like lead poisoning, it leads to brain damage.

    2. 3

      If you’re interested in a deep-dive into the history of these techniques, Tim Wu’s “The Attention Merchants” is well worth a read.

      1. 2

        I really enjoyed Wu’s The Master Switch, so I’ll try and give that a shot. :)

      2. 3

        I agree that it’s skirting the edges of relevance, and it’s not all that technical, but it is a really interesting piece.

        1. 4

          I’m not a huge fan of separating technology from its impact and use (and a lot of these techniques touch technology at a great many places), so I’m very happy to see such things here.

        2. 2

          This is how your natural self-preservation instinct is being sold for profit!!!!

          a picture of food

          Marketing has been a thing for centuries. We know that our brain isn’t adapted to living in a post-industralised city. This medium post is itself guilty of what it is accusing others.