SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Verizon has announced that it will be acquiring AOL for $4.4 billion. Those of us that remember AOL from the dial-up days when all noobs used it might wonder what it possibly has worth that kind of cash today. Lowell McAdam, Verizon chairman and CEO, said:
"AOL has once again become a digital trailblazer, and we are excited at the prospect of charting a new course together in the digitally connected world. At Verizon, we've been strategically investing in emerging technology, including Verizon Digital Media Services and OTT, that taps into the market shift to digital content and advertising. AOL's advertising model aligns with this approach, and the advertising platform provides a key tool for us to develop future revenue streams."
A NPR blog has an excerpt from a paywalled WSJ article which further explains:
"Verizon has said it plans to launch a video service focused on mobile devices this summer. The company has offered few details, but last month Chief Financial Officer Fran Shammo said the service will offer a mix of paid, free and ad-supported content and won't try to replicate traditional TV.
"The service will feature shorter snippets rather than 30 or 60 minute shows. It also could include multicast programming—a sort of broadcast service that uses cellular airwaves—for delivering live content like sports and concerts, along with on-demand viewing."
NPR also notes:
Many people probably still associate AOL as one of their first Internet service providers. But more than two decades later, AOL is more of a media company: It owns The Huffington Post, TechCrunch, MapQuest and Moviefone. According to the company, it is the fourth largest online property in the U.S. with 200 million monthly visitors to its sites.
What does SN think? Can this deal possibly be worth it?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @10:33PM
gewg_, it's well known that The Huffington Post is one of your favorite digital rags.
How do you reconcile the fact that it is being tossed around between bigger and bigger corporate players over time, with the anti-corporate leftist ideals that you hold so dear?
Do you ever worry that maybe the leftist slant they put on things isn't because there's any merit to leftism, but it's done just to make money by showing ads to those who are deluded into believing leftist ideals?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @11:00PM
Mod the parent up. It has some good questions.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @11:18PM
What's the point of the "Disagree" mod if it doesn't force the mod to explain how he or she disagrees with the comment?
(Score: 2, Informative) by kurenai.tsubasa on Wednesday May 13 2015, @01:27AM
One will note that the disagree mod holds no score. No +1, no -1. This is meant to head off troll/flamebait/overrated that would otherwise be used to indicate disagreement. Of course, nothing's stopping us mods (ok, this UID doesn't quite have the karma to get frequent mod points yet) from using troll/flamebait/overrated to indicate disagreement, but selecting disagree is a much more agreeable way of doing that.
It can also ask the community at large to provide either the nature of the disagreement or perhaps, more productively, further evidence why one should not disagree with the post marked “disagree.”
So… doing my part… (this comment is still largely offtopic and should probably get -1, feeding the trolls).
GGP is likely modded -1 troll because it's nothing more than an ad homenim. (Also note there are 2 -1 troll mods and 1 underrated mod, so ⅓ of mods who felt the need to rate that comment disagreed that it should be -1.) What I can't understand is why offtopic wasn't used. I have no idea what this story has to do with gewg_ or huffpo. Would you or another AC care to elaborate (or a UID if I'm completely missing something)?
Hope that helps.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @02:36PM
You were asking for this to get modded -1 Disagree, you know.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @11:24PM
It doesn't have any good questions, and you made the comment.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @11:57PM
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @01:14AM
LOL...That Huffington Post is a "leftist" publication"
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @05:59AM
Conservative Logic: Anything that isn't at least as far right as Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, etc = leftist communist fascist nazi totalitarian SJW conspiracy
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Magic Oddball on Wednesday May 13 2015, @06:31AM
ALL of the major news/discussion sites — Salon, Ars Technica, Slate, Wired, you name it — have been owned by corporations for ages now. But hey, if you you feel so strongly that a comment should be modded up, make an account and use your own freaking mod points.
If you're holding back due to concern over privacy, spam, tracking, etc. then use a proxy/VPN to access the site, ad-blocking with privacy filters, and mailinator or a similar email service. If even *that* isn't enough, then you probably shouldn't even be visiting the site for fear something somewhere watches.
(Score: 2) by janrinok on Wednesday May 13 2015, @07:30AM
(Score: -1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @11:08PM
It's discouraging to see the moderation here being used to stifle discussion, instead of encouraging it. This site is becoming more and more like Slashdot every day. Maybe that's not a coincidence. Maybe this style of site, with this style of moderation, tends to converge to a point where the moderation does more harm than it does good.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Tork on Wednesday May 13 2015, @12:00AM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @11:12PM
That comment raises some good points, and should be modded up. Why is so much of the left-wing media in America owned by massive corporations?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @11:17PM
> Why is so much of the left-wing media in America owned by massive corporations?
Because so much of all media in America is owned by massive corporations.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Wednesday May 13 2015, @12:03AM
Correction: All Media the world over is owned by Corporations, other than that part owned by Governments.
Of the two, I can't figure which I trust less.
Nobody in their right mind would publish any kind of news paper, radio, television under their own name. The first lawsuit to come down the road would have them living in their cars on the street.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @11:16PM
It's really getting to be a pain in the ass having to change to -1 all the time just to see good comments that have been downvoted for no reason.
(Score: 2, Offtopic) by aristarchus on Tuesday May 12 2015, @11:40PM
It's really getting to be a pain in the ass having to change to -1 all the time just to see good comments that have been downvoted for no reason.
No, this:
It's really getting to be a pain in the ass having to change to -1 all the time just to
seehidegoodstupid off-topic comments that have beendownupvoted for no reason.There, FTFY!
Now you see how your whining about being an idiot in the minority has totally succeeded in derailing (only temporarily, we assure you) any discussion of a pertinent corporate move that may have significant repercussions for the tech industry? This is standard protocol for manipulating on-line discussion of actual issues. Hmm, could Verizon be that evil? Hire ACs to red-herring Soylent News?
(Score: 2) by t-3 on Wednesday May 13 2015, @12:49AM
No, I think this is MikeeeUSA throwing a fit because nobody else wants to fuck kids.
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Wednesday May 13 2015, @02:06AM
Seconded.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Tork on Wednesday May 13 2015, @01:20AM
🏳️🌈 Proud Ally 🏳️🌈
(Score: 4, Insightful) by janrinok on Wednesday May 13 2015, @07:40AM
You're trolling well today. But, to answer your question. 1. If you log in you can set the threshold to whatever level you want - you would not have to keep changing it. It's a 'pain in the ass' because you have chosen to do it that way. 2. Childish posts such as yours - including all the replies to your own posts that you think nobody has recognised - are marked down because they contribute absolutely nothing to the discussion. They are not 'downvoted for no reason' - it's the price you pay for wasting the time of the other community members.