Aaron Read
@aaronread1.bsky.social
Co-owner, Jack of All Trades, and Intrepid Engineer of L&R Broadcast Services...based in Providence RI. Possessor of many opinions about radio, esp public radio. www.landrbs.com
Look, anyone who's been to college in the northeast knows there are a lot of goddamn weirdos out there. A whole goddamn pisspot of them. That's not wild. What's wild is that society keeps trying to make the weirdos into household names. Nobody wants this. Especially the weirdos, I might add.
December 1, 2025 at 4:44 AM
Look, anyone who's been to college in the northeast knows there are a lot of goddamn weirdos out there. A whole goddamn pisspot of them. That's not wild. What's wild is that society keeps trying to make the weirdos into household names. Nobody wants this. Especially the weirdos, I might add.
Yes! It's ridiculous how often editors get a free pass in this nonsense.
November 30, 2025 at 10:04 PM
Yes! It's ridiculous how often editors get a free pass in this nonsense.
@by-cjewett.bsky.social ought to be fired for this. Like, full stop. This is unacceptably poor judgment.
November 30, 2025 at 6:41 PM
@by-cjewett.bsky.social ought to be fired for this. Like, full stop. This is unacceptably poor judgment.
George Lakoff and I pushed this simple and reasonable idea years ago. When I returned to journalism, I realized the problem. Editors care more about SEO and controversy (=clicks) than about whether the headline is destroying truth. Incentive is to bait engagement at all cost.
November 30, 2025 at 4:15 PM
Reposted by Aaron Read
Btw we already had someone to do 11.7% of work tasks, they were called "a secretary" and the suits decided it was cheaper to make everyone do their own emails and schedules.
But you can add up any number of secretaries and still not get one programmer, or architect, or nurse.
But you can add up any number of secretaries and still not get one programmer, or architect, or nurse.
November 29, 2025 at 10:01 PM
Btw we already had someone to do 11.7% of work tasks, they were called "a secretary" and the suits decided it was cheaper to make everyone do their own emails and schedules.
But you can add up any number of secretaries and still not get one programmer, or architect, or nurse.
But you can add up any number of secretaries and still not get one programmer, or architect, or nurse.
There's an easy reality check here: if you think there's real money to be made by putting your journalism on Facebook, Tiktok or YouTube, what's going to stop them from immediately modding the platform so 99% of the money goes to them and not you? (Hint: this has ALREADY HAPPENED several times.)
November 30, 2025 at 4:56 AM
There's an easy reality check here: if you think there's real money to be made by putting your journalism on Facebook, Tiktok or YouTube, what's going to stop them from immediately modding the platform so 99% of the money goes to them and not you? (Hint: this has ALREADY HAPPENED several times.)
This isn't my wheelhouse so my knowledge here is very thin. So I wonder if it's generational that I would've expected the opposite; that the publication paying the freelancer would own all the rights?
November 30, 2025 at 4:52 AM
This isn't my wheelhouse so my knowledge here is very thin. So I wonder if it's generational that I would've expected the opposite; that the publication paying the freelancer would own all the rights?
Everyone hates this, of course, b/c it introduces direct responsibility of your own product in success or failure. And the latter is, of course, far more likely. That's just reality now, but it's far less pleasant to accept that than to chase youtube likes and handwave away your dwindling budget.
November 30, 2025 at 4:50 AM
Everyone hates this, of course, b/c it introduces direct responsibility of your own product in success or failure. And the latter is, of course, far more likely. That's just reality now, but it's far less pleasant to accept that than to chase youtube likes and handwave away your dwindling budget.
The answer, of course, is simple: stay on the distribution networks you control. Period. If your journalism is good enough, people will come to you. If not, they won't.
November 30, 2025 at 4:48 AM
The answer, of course, is simple: stay on the distribution networks you control. Period. If your journalism is good enough, people will come to you. If not, they won't.
Even fairly value-neutral online networks like http/web or email tend to crapped on by managers in favor of chasing the hopium dragon WE GOTTA GO WHERE THE PEOPLE ARE. And it never, ever, NOT EVER works out in favor of the journalism entity.
November 30, 2025 at 4:46 AM
Even fairly value-neutral online networks like http/web or email tend to crapped on by managers in favor of chasing the hopium dragon WE GOTTA GO WHERE THE PEOPLE ARE. And it never, ever, NOT EVER works out in favor of the journalism entity.
Arguably the biggest problem in journalism today is the thoughtless & amazingly self-destructive lemming rush to abandon their own value-neutral distribution networks (print, radio/TV signals) in favor of heavily biased/hostile networks owned by bad-faith entities (social media).
November 30, 2025 at 4:43 AM
Arguably the biggest problem in journalism today is the thoughtless & amazingly self-destructive lemming rush to abandon their own value-neutral distribution networks (print, radio/TV signals) in favor of heavily biased/hostile networks owned by bad-faith entities (social media).
I would not have guessed that was the deal. Interesting!
November 27, 2025 at 4:14 AM
I would not have guessed that was the deal. Interesting!
What they please...within the confines of whatever your contract with them allows, of course. But I would think the point is that normally the contract would stipulate, in some way, that "their" content lives on "their" servers.
November 27, 2025 at 12:26 AM
What they please...within the confines of whatever your contract with them allows, of course. But I would think the point is that normally the contract would stipulate, in some way, that "their" content lives on "their" servers.
I suppose the tricky bit is when someone, like a GBH, is paying you to write commentaries for their site...that kind of means they own the content and therefore can do with it what they please. Including condemn it to internet purgatory due to sloppy content transitions to new CMS's.
November 27, 2025 at 12:25 AM
I suppose the tricky bit is when someone, like a GBH, is paying you to write commentaries for their site...that kind of means they own the content and therefore can do with it what they please. Including condemn it to internet purgatory due to sloppy content transitions to new CMS's.
I had similar issues with all my Engineers Corner articles at RIPR/TPR. Just recently I got the last of them off archive.org and repost em all on my own website because they weren't migrated to the new CMS due a spiteful now-ex editor. Lesson learned: commentaries go on MY site and you link to it.
November 26, 2025 at 8:16 PM
I had similar issues with all my Engineers Corner articles at RIPR/TPR. Just recently I got the last of them off archive.org and repost em all on my own website because they weren't migrated to the new CMS due a spiteful now-ex editor. Lesson learned: commentaries go on MY site and you link to it.
Very cool, but also $300. 😭
November 25, 2025 at 9:34 PM
Very cool, but also $300. 😭
I don't deny TLJ has ideas, but I think they mostly made no sense and went nowhere narratively. That was at least 50% why TROS retconned them. The other 50 was because TROS is a terrible movie made by (terrible) committee. 🤷♂️
November 25, 2025 at 5:15 PM
I don't deny TLJ has ideas, but I think they mostly made no sense and went nowhere narratively. That was at least 50% why TROS retconned them. The other 50 was because TROS is a terrible movie made by (terrible) committee. 🤷♂️
Also TLJ was drowning under the weight of McGuffins. Suddenly going to hyperspace means you can't escape? Munitions that arc like cannonballs / fall like bombs **in space where there's no gravity**? Oh you can just suicide ram via hyperdrive and always destroy your opponent?
November 25, 2025 at 5:13 PM
Also TLJ was drowning under the weight of McGuffins. Suddenly going to hyperspace means you can't escape? Munitions that arc like cannonballs / fall like bombs **in space where there's no gravity**? Oh you can just suicide ram via hyperdrive and always destroy your opponent?
Exactly. Isn't it an unforgiveable sin in filmmaking to have a subplot that ends up having no impact on the main plot?
November 25, 2025 at 5:11 PM
Exactly. Isn't it an unforgiveable sin in filmmaking to have a subplot that ends up having no impact on the main plot?
Also, having worked at places that screwed their employees over wages to avoid layoffs (mostly due to ego) and having worked at places that laid people off and readjusted output expectations to balance the budget? I'll take the latter every time. Cutting wages RAPIDLY breeds resentment.
November 25, 2025 at 4:55 AM
Also, having worked at places that screwed their employees over wages to avoid layoffs (mostly due to ego) and having worked at places that laid people off and readjusted output expectations to balance the budget? I'll take the latter every time. Cutting wages RAPIDLY breeds resentment.
(there's some wiggle room in this concept, but it's about elevendy-billion times more true than 90+% of nonprofit news outlets want to accept it is)
November 25, 2025 at 4:54 AM
(there's some wiggle room in this concept, but it's about elevendy-billion times more true than 90+% of nonprofit news outlets want to accept it is)
Also, FWIW, I disagree 100% with the fundamental premise. Revenue is, whether you're a nonprofit or not, a measure of your journalism's impact. If you can't make enough to support a living wage, your journalism is flawed. Cutting wages is form of denial over this undeniable fact.
November 25, 2025 at 4:53 AM
Also, FWIW, I disagree 100% with the fundamental premise. Revenue is, whether you're a nonprofit or not, a measure of your journalism's impact. If you can't make enough to support a living wage, your journalism is flawed. Cutting wages is form of denial over this undeniable fact.
I want to state right up front: it's mostly talking about how LEADERSHIP is taking pay cuts more than the staff. I tend to focus on public radio, but's it's become obscene how much CEO's are paying themselves while demanding staff make effectively minimum wage.
November 25, 2025 at 4:52 AM
I want to state right up front: it's mostly talking about how LEADERSHIP is taking pay cuts more than the staff. I tend to focus on public radio, but's it's become obscene how much CEO's are paying themselves while demanding staff make effectively minimum wage.