ReportWire

Tag: BuzzFeed

  • No Faces, No Farts, No Fun: The Strangest House Rules We Somehow Survived

    Every family has at least one rule that made zero sense — something so weird it still lives rent-free in your head like a landlord from the Twilight Zone.

    Maybe it was meant to “build character.” Maybe it was just Mom and Dad doing their best in a world without YouTube parenting tutorials. Either way, people online started comparing their most bizarre childhood house rules, and it’s like opening a time capsule full of lactose intolerance, control issues, and fear of thunderstorms.

    Let’s unpack the highlights before someone makes us drink a glass of milk.


    1. The Thunderstorm Blackout Policy

    “No turning on the lights during thunderstorms.”

    Apparently, the lightning gods were tracking your kitchen light switch like NORAD.
    My guess? Someone’s grandma once told them flipping a switch during a storm summoned Zeus. The rest of us just sat in the dark wondering if the TV static was coming for us next.


    2. The No-Faces Dress Code

    “No wearing clothing with ‘faces’ on them . . . no Mickey Mouse, no kitty cats, nothing alive. Only objects. Soccer balls, pumpkins, sure. But no faces.”

    Imagine explaining that one to your friends: “Sorry, can’t wear Mickey today, Mom says he’s too sentient.”
    And the loopholes! A jack-o’-lantern has a face and it’s a pumpkin. That’s like theological debate territory for 8-year-olds.


    3. The Great Milk Conspiracy

    “We had to drink a huge glass of milk every morning because it would make us grow tall. But I was lactose intolerant.”

    So instead of growing tall, you just grew… gassy.
    This was the era when milk ads told us bones were made of calcium and lies. “Got Milk?” Yeah, and a stomachache to go with it.


    4. The Family Cup of Doom

    “We had one drink cup by the sink. Everyone used it. It went in the dishwasher every two days.”

    So basically, a bacteria-sharing program before Venmo.
    That cup saw more DNA exchange than a dating app. Somewhere, a germ colony still tells its grandkids stories about the Great Kitchen Cup of ’94.


    5. The Wet Feet Prohibition

    “No stepping on the bathmat with wet feet.”

    Right, because the entire point of a bathmat — to absorb water — was lost on this household.
    Nothing like tiptoeing across tile like a cat burglar just to avoid breaking the sacred terry-cloth covenant.


    6. Curtain Duty at Dawn

    “The curtains had to be opened first thing in the morning so the neighbors wouldn’t think we slept in.”

    There it is — the Midwest Olympic event known as “performative productivity.”
    Heaven forbid Mrs. Jenkins across the street thinks you woke up at 7:15. Open those blinds and show the world your Protestant work ethic!


    7. The Towel Modesty Mandate

    “We weren’t allowed to walk from the bathroom to our bedrooms after a shower in just a towel. Even if no one else was there.”

    This one screams family that got too into modesty sermons.
    Somewhere, there’s a teenage version of you freezing in the hallway, clutching a washcloth, whispering “why can’t I just be clean and dry?”


    8. The F-Word Ban (That’s Fart)

    “We had to leave the room to fart. And ‘fart’ was a curse word.”

    You know a household’s strict when bodily functions have exile protocols.
    Imagine silently walking out mid-Monopoly game, shamefully releasing a “curse” in the hallway, then returning like nothing happened. That’s Catholic guilt with acoustics.


    9. The Dysfunctional Family Denial Rule

    “I wasn’t allowed to watch anything that depicted a dysfunctional family.”

    So… every show ever?
    Guess that explains why some of us thought Full House was a documentary. Nothing says “we’re fine” like banning the Brady Bunch for being too real.


    10. The Plastic Bag Economy

    “I had to bring home the plastic sandwich bags from my lunch to be reused. They were washed and dried overnight.”

    Classic 1980s depression-era energy — the kind that thought plastic lasted forever (and unfortunately, they were right).
    Today it’s eco-friendly. Back then it was just one slippery Ziploc short of madness.


    11. The Friendship Ledger

    “I wasn’t allowed to invite a friend over a second time until THEY invited me to their house. My mom kept track.”

    Ah yes, the early beta version of social networking — complete with reciprocity metrics.
    Your mom basically invented the Facebook algorithm before Zuckerberg. “You may not host Jake again. He hasn’t engaged with your content.”


    So Why Did They Do This?

    Part superstition, part control, part “we didn’t know better.”
    Our parents were raising kids in a world without Google, and with way too much Tupperware. They just made rules that sounded reasonable at the time — like “don’t stand in lightning” or “recycle sandwich bags” — and overcorrected from there.

    But here’s the real twist: those bizarre rules shaped us. They made us question authority, develop sarcasm as a defense mechanism, and occasionally say things like, “You’re not barefoot before Easter, are you crazy?”


    The Takeaway

    Every generation swears they’ll be the “cool” parents — until their kid’s TikTok trend involves eating glue or dancing at a gas station. Then suddenly, you’re the one shouting, “No lights during thunderstorms!”

    So go ahead and laugh at these rules. Then realize:
    Somewhere out there, your kid is already screenshotting your weirdest one for Reddit in 2045.

    Jim O’Brien

    Source link

  • Sophie Turner Makes Naughty Bedroom Confession! – Perez Hilton

    Sophie Turner is making her bedroom preferences known!

    While on Buzzfeed‘s series where celebs read thirst tweets, the Game of Thrones actress got really candid when a specific post read:

    “Sophie Turner can top me”

    Well, don’t expect that anytime soon! Because she set the record straight:

    “Would I be top? I don’t think I am top. I think I’m bottom.”

    Is it out of the equation FOREVER, though? Well… Sophie cheekily added:

    “I’ll let you know, I’ll come back to that one.”

    Ooh la la! Peregrine Pearson, watch out!

    Related: Sophie Accidentally Caused An A-List Couple To Call Off Their Engagement!

    In another post the 29-year-old read, it said:

    “Every character that Sophie plays just gives top energy and I love it.”

    That seemed to excite Sophie, because she replied:

    “Really?! I really like that I give top energy. And that’s why I love acting ’cause it takes you to a place that you’ve never been before. I think I’m a bottom. To be a top is just a dream come true, thank you so much, everyone.”

    Ha! We mean, you never know. Nothing wrong with trying new things, Sophie!

    Watch for yourself around the 4:13 mark (below):

    Reactions, Perezcious readers? Sound OFF (below).

    [Image via Buzzfeed Celeb/YouTube/Sophie Turner/Instagram]

    Perez Hilton

    Source link

  • Buzzfeed Scams Readers with Bizarre ‘The Notebook’ Event Hoax (18 Photos)

    Buzzfeed Scams Readers with Bizarre ‘The Notebook’ Event Hoax (18 Photos)

    Earlier today, Buzzfeed reported on a busted 20th Anniversary Celebration of The Notebook in Akron, Ohio, eerily similar to viral event fails like Willy’s Chocolate Experience and the Bridgerton Ball (you know, the sort of stuff that garners lots and lots of clicks).

    In the AI-assisted hoax, Buzzfeed claimed The Notebook event organizers promised “historically accurate costumes, prizes, a VIP photo booth, and more” but delivered a wretched cavalcade of busted decorations, thrown-together activities, and ugly photo ops.

    The made-up story included a faux flyer listing $300 ticket prices accompanied by fabricated images of the event.

    ATTN: This article contains spoilers for The Notebook.

    Laura Lee

    Source link

  • BuzzFeed Revenue Fell Sharply in 2023 as CEO Jonah Peretti Figures Out Turnaround Plan

    BuzzFeed Revenue Fell Sharply in 2023 as CEO Jonah Peretti Figures Out Turnaround Plan

    BuzzFeed co-founder and CEO Jonah Peretti.  Bennett Raglin/Getty Images for BuzzFeed Inc.

    BuzzFeed (BZFD)’s content and advertising revenue fell sharply in the last three months of 2023 but managed to turn a slim profit of $3.5 million, the company said in its 2023 fourth-quarter and full-year earnings report today (March 25). Quarterly revenue came at $75.7 million, down 26 percent from the year prior. Full-year revenue fell just as much to $252.7 million. 

    One bright spot is that time spent by BuzzFeed’s audience on its media products grew 3 percent in 2023 to 306 million hours. However, time spent on BuzzFeed content on its third-party platforms declined by 32 percent last year. All the earnings numbers exclude the pop culture media brand Complex, which BuzzFeed sold in February and was classified as “held for sale” in the December report.

    Almost a year ago, BuzzFeed shuttered its newsroom, BuzzFeed News, and let go all 180 employees as a result. The media company’s co-founder and CEO Jonah Peretti said he’d over-invested in BuzzFeed’s news brand trying to keep it afloat to no success. Since the decision, Peretti has spoken about shifting the company’s focus to content creators and artificial intelligence (A.I.) instead.  During the earnings call, he said A.I. will first impact the programmatic and affiliate lines of revenue for the company, but also shared some of his vision for future uses of the technology in content creation.  

    “Our teams are starting to create content that feels more alive that has intelligence embedded in it that can interact with people that can personalize the experience for different people,” Peretti said on a call with analysts today.” And all of that is the very beginnings of what I think is the new medium and for content companies, particularly digital media content companies like BuzzFeed that is going to be a huge driver of future growth as that new medium starts to emerge.”

    At the end of 2023, the struggling digital media company had $36 million in cash and $128 million in debt, partly stemming from its $300 million acquisition of Complex 2021. At the time of the acquisition, BuzzFeed took out a $150 million loan from several hedge funds that’s due this year. On the earnings call, CFO Matt Omer said $31 million of that loan is still outstanding. “The unsecured lenders do have an option to call the debt in December this year,” Omer said. “However we expect that we’ll be able to work with them in advance of the date of the call option.”

    BuzzFeed sold Complex for $109 million in February. Peretti said that the offload would help BuzzFeed invest more into its remaining brands, including HuffPost, which is now the company’s only news offering. He also said the sale would aid BuzzFeed’s A.I. innovation goals.

    BuzzFeed has also gone through some leadership changes in the last few months. The company’s chief financial officer Felicia DellaFortuna left in November to take on the same role at Enthusiast Gaming. Two months later, in January, its president Marcela Martin resigned to pursue other opportunities. DellaFortuna’s role was filled immediately by Omer, who was formerly finance and treasurer chief, while Martin’s was absorbed by other executives in the company.  

    BuzzFeed Revenue Fell Sharply in 2023 as CEO Jonah Peretti Figures Out Turnaround Plan

    Nhari Djan

    Source link

  • Vice Media reportedly preparing to file for bankruptcy

    Vice Media reportedly preparing to file for bankruptcy

    Vice Media offices display the Vice logo in Venice, California.

    Mario Tama | Getty Images

    Vice Media Group, the company behind popular media websites such as Vice and Motherboard, is preparing to file for bankruptcy, the New York Times reported on Monday, citing people with knowledge of its operations.

    The media firm has received interest from five companies and might consider a sale to avoid bankruptcy, the NYT report said, adding that in the event of a bankruptcy, which could happen in the coming weeks, Vice’s debtholder Fortress Investment Group could end up controlling the company.

    related investing news

    CNBC Pro

    “Vice Media Group has been engaged in a comprehensive evaluation of strategic alternatives and planning. The company, its board and stakeholders continue to be focused on finding the best path for the company,” the company spokesperson told Reuters in an emailed statement.

    Its potential bankruptcy comes as several other media and technology firms have had to downsize in recent months due to a challenging economy and a weak advertising market.

    Earlier this month, BuzzFeed said it would shutter its news division, which gained renown for its irreverent and probing coverage, but ultimately succumbed to the challenges of its digital-first business model.

    Some big internet companies are increasingly being viewed as defensive names: Investment bank

    Last week, Vice Media said it will cancel popular TV program “Vice News Tonight” as part of a broader restructuring that will result in job cuts across the digital media firm’s global news business, capping years of financial difficulties and top-executive departures.

    Vice Media was among a group of fast-rising digital media ventures that once commanded rich valuations, as they courted millennial audiences. It rose to prominence alongside its provocative co-founder, Shane Smith, who built his media empire from a single Canadian magazine.

    Source link

  • “I Was Pretty Utopian”: With BuzzFeed News in the Grave, Ben Smith Reflects on Digital Media’s Convulsions

    “I Was Pretty Utopian”: With BuzzFeed News in the Grave, Ben Smith Reflects on Digital Media’s Convulsions

    Maybe I should have waited a week to interview Ben Smith. It was Friday, April 14, when I drove out to Smith’s place in Brooklyn, where he lives in a neighborhood that feels like you’re in some leafy suburb, full of picturesque Victorian homes. I’d schlepped out there to gab with Smith about his new book, Traffic, out now from Penguin Press, in which his former boss Jonah Peretti lands at the center of the narrative. (Nick Denton too, but more on that later.) 

    In the book, a postmortem of the mid-aughts digital-media revolution, we follow Peretti from his origins as a Huffington Post cofounder famous for a viral 2001 stunt-email to Nike, to his rise at BuzzFeed as one of the towering CEOs of the digital age. BuzzFeed is where Smith worked as Peretti’s editor in chief for eight years. Together, they built BuzzFeed News from the ground up and transformed it into a Pulitzer Prize–winning brand that became a talent farm for legacy institutions like The New York Times, which, case in point, hired Smith as its media columnist in 2020.  

    So we were sitting on Smith’s porch talking about BuzzFeed, and of course neither of us knew that, in another six days, BuzzFeed News would be a goner, the latest in a series of grim cost-cutting measures at Peretti’s 17-year-old company, which is struggling with macroeconomic pressures, the shifting content-distribution landscape, and the ongoing fallout from a disastrous IPO. Still, one of my inquiries turned out to be prescient. 

    A few weeks earlier, I’d gotten an email from Jill Abramson, the former Times executive editor who’d made BuzzFeed a major character in her own book several years back. Before heading off to Brooklyn, I texted Abramson and asked if I could read Smith her email and get his response. She said sure: 

    Is it because we are all charmed by Peretti, that the scandalous swindle that was his long-awaited IPO hasn’t been truly investigated? Key questions: How much dough did he make on the deal? How much did Ben Smith make on his stock? One viral Nike chain of emails many years ago has turned into an epic mess. Was Peretti’s ‘genius’ a complete chimera all along?

    “I mean, if she’s saying the stock is at a dollar,” said Smith, “that’s exactly true.” He picked up his phone to double-check. “96 cents.” He also declined to quantify the return on his BuzzFeed equity: “I do not share the millennial compulsion to disclose your personal income.”

    And the part about whether Peretti simply had us fooled this whole time?

    “No, Jonah actually is a genius,” Smith countered. “Like, I think he saw around the corner, and saw social media, and saw these changes coming, but overestimated the degree to which he could kind of channel them, or control them. I always felt like I was working with somebody who could kind of see the future a bit. But he’d also never run a news organization. And so, often he would be able to say, ‘Hey, here’s what the world’s gonna be like in five years,’ which is an incredible insight. And I’d be like, ‘Okay, what do we do right now?’ He’d be like, ‘I don’t know, we gotta figure it out.’ But he really could see around corners.”

    The following week, as Peretti’s announcement circulated far and wide, Smith would end up elaborating on these thoughts in a BuzzFeed News requiem published by his new digital media organization, Semafor, cofounded last year with ex-Bloomberg honcho Justin Smith. 

    “The end of BuzzFeed News,” Smith wrote, “signals a vast shift in digital media that those of us who live inside it are feeling intensely right now, the end of one era and the beginning of another. Peretti had built BuzzFeed into a traffic juggernaut by being among the first to see the rising social web. But BuzzFeed never found a new path when that trend turned against us—when consumers found their Facebook feeds toxic, not delightful; when platforms decided news was poison; and when Facebook, Twitter, and the rest simply stopped distributing links to websites…. Those of us lucky enough to be building from scratch in this new moment have to realize that the old way of thinking about news—based in text on the World Wide Web and distributed primarily on social media—has passed. But the demand to understand what’s happening in the world hasn’t gone away.”

    Back on Smith’s porch, I picked his brain on other topics that have lately bewitched the media commentariat. AI in newsrooms? 

    “These things are language tools and we should use them to the degree that they’re valuable. I’ve found ChatGPT is really good at copyediting, and I don’t really see a problem with asking it to find typos. We’re not using it to write articles or anything like that. To me the most interesting use cases are in video, where lots of kinds of animation are very, very technical and very, very expensive, and there’s no way a newsroom of our size, or probably yours, could produce an animated mini documentary that costs a hundred thousand dollars.” 

    Joe Pompeo

    Source link

  • “F–k Him, He Loses”: The Inside Story of How Disney’s Attempt to Buy BuzzFeed Fell Apart

    “F–k Him, He Loses”: The Inside Story of How Disney’s Attempt to Buy BuzzFeed Fell Apart

    While I receded into a corner, alternately spaced out and laughing hysterically, and while Steinberg begged, Peretti grew even more abstracted than usual. He conducted a kind of Socratic dialogue with Steinberg in which he seemed at times to be talking to himself. He asked why Steinberg really wanted to do the deal, and Steinberg scrambled to give whatever answer would push Peretti toward yes. You just want money, right? Yes, Steinberg said. But is it really money you want? Or is it status? You don’t just want a house—you want it in the right part of the Hamptons, right? Sure, yes, status. Steinberg tried to lead Peretti back toward the wisdom of the deal—but Peretti seemed to be exploring his own motives, wondering what he actually wanted as he towered over Steinberg, laughing. Peretti didn’t seem to care about money, and he had a kind of reverse snobbery about the status money would buy. He didn’t even like the theme parks, Peretti told his appalled deputy. Steinberg was crushed and furious at me and at Frank; he believed, probably rightly, that if the three of us had been unified, we could have brought Peretti along. Steinberg and I both stumbled to bed, convinced Peretti would turn the deal down.

    Back in New York, when the details came in, it became clear that this was an offer that Peretti, almost, couldn’t refuse. Disney was the most admired media company in the world, with a record of well-managed acquisitions like Marvel and Pixar. The price on offer was $450 million with the potential of earning $200 million more, an extraordinary sum for a company that had priced itself at less than half that just nine months earlier, and whose connection to Disney—a company obsessively protective of its image and its wholesome brands—was just a series of posts like “21 Completely Bizarre Moments in Disney History” (number five: “When Donald Duck promoted condoms during WWII”). Iger was persuasive. Peretti, Steinberg, and Lerer met nightly in the latter’s Upper West Side living room, and Lerer heard them both make their cases—Steinberg’s to sell, Peretti’s about the risks of being stifled by Disney and the potential upside he still saw in the company’s independence. Lerer knew Peretti would bridle at being pushed too hard, so he tried to nudge his protégé toward saying yes. The deal really was, by any normal standard, a no-brainer. On October 29, Peretti and Lerer flew back to Los Angeles, this time staying in Lerer’s preferred hotel, the Chateau Marmont. At nine the next morning, they met Iger and Mayer to go back over the details we’d discussed in the same building five days earlier. Then they all shook hands, and at least some of the men left the room thinking the deal was done. And then, on the flight back, Peretti turned to his seatmate: He didn’t think he could do it. Lerer, incredulous and quietly furious, told Peretti to call Iger and end the talks that day.

    Peretti thought it would be more honorable to call it off in person, and so he instead called Iger to say that he wasn’t committed and he’d like to meet again—and suggested they talk after Peretti’s planned speech to Disney’s management retreat in Orlando 12 days later. Peretti was still feeling his old partner Lerer’s anger when he traveled to Disney World in Orlando on November 13 to speak to the company. The event was, for some 250 Disney higher-ups—the people who get to skip the lines at the theme parks—a nearly sacred gathering, running Thursday to Sunday at the sumptuous Grand Floridian Resort. Iger’s smooth public persona dominated the gathering. Executives worked out at 4 a.m. in hopes of running into him at the gym and, if they didn’t see him, returned at 6 a.m. They were the people who ran theme parks in Asia and cruise lines in Europe, and sold content in Latin America and Australia. They signed up for essentially mandatory and strangely competitive sporting events like softball. When Peretti looked down at them from the stage in the grand ballroom, he saw people dressed like their boss, strenuously casual in shorts and collared T-shirts, ready to pretend to be relaxed.

    As they gathered, Mayer mentioned to Sherwood that Peretti had asked to meet privately after the speech, shooting his colleague a quizzical look that said “weird guy.” But if that was how he wanted the signing ceremony to go, that was fine. As they watched Peretti deliver his speech, trepidation grew for the executives who had worked on the deal. While Iger had staged Peretti’s speech in a marquee slot to welcome him to the family, the BuzzFeed founder didn’t seem to have prepared with any special care. There were no particular references to Disney, to his audience, his future colleagues. Those who had watched his speeches on YouTube recognized recycled jokes—his yarns about the Nike email and Black People Love Us! and his slides of corgis. As Peretti delivered one of his standard, edgy monologues—he liked to ask whether Mormons were better than Jews and explain that the real difference was about the quality of their distribution networks—an HR executive blanched and told the person sitting next to her that they might have a problem.

    Peretti knew he could make himself, his investors, and many of the people who worked for him rich. He knew that the decision was still his to make, and while he was leaning against accepting Disney’s offer, he took the stage without quite having decided. But the reception of his speech confirmed his decision. Peretti had never gotten fewer laughs in his life. He had a vision of himself having to explain the internet to these suits for the rest of his career while they stared blankly back at him and missed his jokes. The thing he had valued from the start when he built a company in his own image was freedom—his own and others’, sometimes to a fault. Peretti couldn’t see himself as an officer on this tight ship. He thought of something his old friend and investor Chris Dixon once said to him: Do you know how many lame rich guys there are, and how few people who really build something? Peretti just couldn’t do it. He walked offstage and into a room with Iger and Mayer. There, he told them apologetically that his heart wasn’t in it. The deal was off. There had been a car ready to take him to celebrate; Peretti took it to the airport.

    Iger, who could blow up and regain his cool within seconds, was furious that Peretti had walked away from the deal—and equally puzzled that Peretti had accepted the speaking invitation first.

    “Fuck him, he loses, that company will never be worth what it would have been worth with us,” he said to another executive. But there was no looking back. Four months later, Disney announced it would buy Maker Studios, which helped YouTube stars like the gamer PewDiePie sell advertising, for roughly the same $500 million it had considered spending on BuzzFeed.

    For Lerer, Peretti’s theatrical decision marked the first break with his protégé. Steinberg was heartbroken. He thought Peretti was out of his mind and realized simultaneously that BuzzFeed was Peretti’s company. The next thing Steinberg did, he vowed, would be entirely his own. He started racking up appearances on CNBC, studying how business news got made. Frank and I were relieved by Peretti’s decision, which meant we could go back to making videos and breaking news. We fully believed that the winds of history were at our backs, and that we’d look down at the pittance Disney offered us one day and laugh. And Frank and I weren’t the only ones who admired Peretti’s balls. In Silicon Valley, that self-effacing boldness and egotism were catnip. And the charts of traffic and revenue pointed ever upward. Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, legendarily, had turned down a $1 billion offer from Yahoo! in 2006, defying many of his advisers. Peretti could now go and tell his Disney story to the same people, show off his traffic, take their money, and keep growing.

    Peretti’s decision didn’t look like a mistake at first. BuzzFeed and its generation of media—Gawker, Vice, Vox—kept growing, playing central roles in the decade’s culture and news. Even as their revenue numbers began to miss their targets, the growth fueled by Facebook and the sheer sense of destiny kept the hot financial markets open to raise more money, in retrospect, than they’d be worth.

    As their businesses weakened and their brands aged, they rode different paths down the hype cycle. Hulk Hogan and Peter Thiel destroyed Nick Denton’s Gawker empire. Vice, the best brand and the least credible business of the group, has collapsed under the sheer weight of its own $5.7 billion valuation and appears to be ready to be sold off for parts. Vox has steered carefully through the wreckage and recently raised $100 million on terms similar to the ones it was offering in 2014.

    BuzzFeed, which had by then swallowed HuffPost, was the only one to make it to the public markets, riding the very end of the SPAC craze in 2021 to a messy public offering. I’d spent eight years leading a newsroom that, at its best, broke some of the biggest, most serious stories in the world without leaving behind our roots in some of the weirdest parts of the internet. But I was gone by then, writing for The New York Times, where I’d managed to make trouble for various of the other characters in my book, an occupational hazard in writing about media when your sources, targets, and colleagues are the same people. In one of my first pieces, I wrote about Iger’s apparent return to power at Disney as COVID-19 spread— an article that infuriated his successor, Bob Chapek, and led to Iger’s temporary ouster. In one of my last, I wrote about Watson’s Ozy Media, which had gone from fake-it-till-you-make-it start-up tactics to an astounding set of alleged felonies. We covered his arrest this year at my new media outlet, Semafor.

    Ben Smith

    Source link

  • Why the End of BuzzFeed News Feels Like a Betrayal

    Why the End of BuzzFeed News Feels Like a Betrayal

    On Thursday morning, the same morning that BuzzFeed News issued a 4/20-themed push notification about overdoing it on weed, BuzzFeed CEO Jonah Peretti announced the company’s decision to shut down the 11-year-old news wing of his viral-baiting, social-media-age-defining website. BuzzFeed News, the plucky, Pulitzer-winningdossier-publishing outlet that shaped the public conversation on everything from sexual assault to millennial burnout to the British royal family—and exposed the alleged misdeeds of the likes of UberR. Kelly, and Ellen DeGeneres, amongst others—would soon cease publication. According to an internal memo, BuzzFeed will focus its news efforts in HuffPost, Peretti’s first national media venture, which BuzzFeed acquired in 2020. 

    I’ve written before on the outsize impact (both real and simply felt) of BuzzFeed-related news. (Disclaimer: It was always both for me, as an employee there from 2017–2021.) At its height, many of its writers and editors, by dint of their professionalized mastery of virality, became online brands unto themselves—at least among the media-obsessed set. (It is significant that the Twitter legacy check mark also finally began to vanish on this same day.) But BuzzFeed news, the lowercase kind, has always hit differently because of its role as a canary in the digital media coal mine; the abrupt shuttering of BuzzFeed News, the outlet, is likely the clearest-signaled end to the most decorated era of the internet thus far. 

    Founded in 2011 under the umbrella of its listicle-and-quiz-obsessed parent website, and eternally beleaguered by accompanying cat-website jokes and that uppercase letter f, the newsroom grew quickly under the direction of editor in chief Ben Smith to become the emblem of millennial journalistic possibility, both in the US and abroad. I still remember the particular mix of jealous derision and anticipation that my journalism school professors used when discussing BuzzFeed News; for those in search of a full rundown of the lore of the newsroom’s golden age, Smith’s forthcoming book, Traffic, couldn’t possibly be timed better for release at the beginning of next month. 

    BuzzFeed News was, in retrospect, the ultimate fantasy of the 2010s digisphere. As part of the BuzzFeed brand, which was valued at $1.5 billion at something like its high-water mark in 2015, the newsroom fulfilled the latter half of Peretti’s mission to spread “joy and truth” online. The potential math of converting clicks into cash that would fund hard-hitting investigative journalism felt like the ultimate proof of concept for content making in that fertile, Facebook-centric era. 

    Of course, over time, as Facebook and other tech platforms morphed into peevish landlords prone to turning off the heat, an advertiser-driven model to keep BuzzFeed News sustainable looked less feasible. During my time as a civilian reader and as an employee at the parent company, it was always understood that the frothy “dot-com” side, along with the e-commerce and video divisions, was what made the work of BuzzFeed News possible. Truth and joy had never felt more symbiotic. 

    Hence, I think, the resulting (and much-begrudged) BuzzFeed culture, which imbued the company and the newsroom with a sense, especially amongst the overwhelmingly millennial workforce, that the opportunity to work there was a kind of social compact that transcended the terms of conventional employment. While edgier competitors like Vice and Gawker were famed for their shocking internal hijinks, BuzzFeed at large felt like a rarefied, wholesome place where you could sincerely engage with the CEO in a public channel or hold forth on a Slack debate over whether it was ethical for the cafeteria to stock plastic straws (better for people with disabilities, worse for the sea turtles). In the words of one of the giant react buttons pinned to each of its articles and office walls: OMG. 

    At the start of the year, things had been looking up for BuzzFeed: The arrival of ChatGPT, for anyone acquainted with Peretti’s obsession with ever-iterable content generation, felt like a long-awaited boost for a company that has always prided itself on seizing on the latest technology to shape its work. In another universe, BuzzFeed News might have found such uncharted online environs to be a new way to prove the grand malleability of its journalistic mettle. How depressing—and perhaps demonstrative—that it wasn’t even given the chance. 

    BuzzFeed’s general jolliness, compounded by the expected growing pains of a former start-up, made BuzzFeed and BuzzFeed News the subjects of intense public scrutiny whenever, well, capitalism happened in the form of cutbacks and layoffs (hence, too, the newsroom’s highly public unionization efforts). The furor coming today from current and former BuzzFeed News staff, along with other BuzzFeeders subject to the 15% cuts implemented throughout the company, reveals a shared sense of betrayal that the realities of digital media have laid bare: For every employee who’s dedicated themselves in service of the place synonymous with the internet’s optimistic spirit of experimentation comes the realization that such experiments require a great degree of gambling with people’s livelihoods. 

    Or, as the writing on the wall would say: WTF? 

    Delia Cai

    Source link

  • BuzzFeed News is shutting down, as parent company cuts 15% of jobs

    BuzzFeed News is shutting down, as parent company cuts 15% of jobs

    BuzzFeed is shutting down its BuzzFeed News operation, with CEO Jonah Peretti writing in a company memo that it “can no longer continue to fund” the site. 

    The company, known for a millennial-friendly site filled with listicles and viral videos, said it is also cutting 15% of its employee base, or about 180 workers. BuzzFeed News is the section of the site that produces journalism and news coverage, such as recent articles about the shooting at a Sweet 16 party in Alabama.

    The outlet won a Pulitzer Prize in 2021 for reporting on the mass detention of Muslims in China.

    Peretti’s decision comes as BuzzFeed’s revenue plunged 27% in the fourth quarter, prompting the business to tumble into the red. He underlined the challenges the company is facing in the memo, sent Thursday morning to his employees, adding that BuzzFeed must cut jobs and reduce spending as a result.

    “We’ve faced more challenges than I can count in the past few years: a pandemic, a fading SPAC market that yielded less capital, a tech recession, a tough economy, a declining stock market, a decelerating digital advertising market and ongoing audience and platform shifts,” Peretti wrote in the memo, which was shared with CBS MoneyWatch. 

    He added, “I made the decision to overinvest in BuzzFeed News because I love their work and mission so much.”

    The company said there are “ongoing discussions about the future of BuzzFeedNews.com,” but that it plans to preserve the section’s work on the site. 

    “No jobs are being replaced by AI”

    BuzzFeed had started tapping artificial intelligence for writing quizzes and articles, some with the byline “Buzzy the Robot.” Some of the pieces are travel-focused, with Buzzy recommending locations like Stanley, Idaho, which it deemed “a small-town slice of outdoor adventure.”

    “No jobs are being replaced by AI,” the company told CBS MoneyWatch. 

    It added that BuzzFeed and its subsidiary HuffPost will offer roles to some BuzzFeed News journalists, while the company is also starting discussions with the News Guild union about the layoffs.

    Read Peretti’s memo in full below. 

    Hi all, 

    I am writing to announce some difficult news. We are reducing our workforce by approximately 15% today across our Business, Content, Tech and Admin teams, and beginning the process of closing BuzzFeed News. Additionally, we are proposing headcount reductions in some international markets.

    Impacted employees (other than those in BuzzFeed News) will receive an email from HR shortly. If you are receiving this note from me, you are not impacted by today’s changes. For BuzzFeed News, we have begun discussions with the News Guild about these actions.

    As part of today’s changes, both our CRO Edgar Hernandez and COO Christian Baesler have made the decision to exit the company. I’m grateful to both of them for their passion and dedication to Complex and to BuzzFeed, Inc. Christian will be with us through the end of April, and Edgar through the end of May to help with the transition.

    Marcela Martin, our President, will take on responsibility for all revenue functions effective immediately. In the US, Andrew Guendjoian is our new Head of Sales, and Ken Blom will continue in his role as Head of Revenue Operations. Globally, International Sales will move under Rich Reid, Head of International and Head of Studio, also reporting to Marcela. 

    I have great confidence in this revenue leadership team, and the early plans I’ve seen from them to accelerate performance from our Business Org. We will share more on their plans in the Business All Hands next week (and we are extending an invite company-wide). 

    The changes the Business Organization is making today are focused on reducing layers in their organization, increasing speed and effectiveness of pitches, streamlining our product mix, doubling down on creators, and beginning to bring AI enhancements to every aspect of our sales process.

    While layoffs are occurring across nearly every division, we’ve determined that the company can no longer continue to fund BuzzFeed News as a standalone organization. As a result, we will engage with the News Guild about our cost reduction plans and what this will mean for the affected union members. 

    HuffPost and BuzzFeed Dot Com have signaled that they will open a number of select roles for members of BuzzFeed News. These roles will be aligned with those divisions’ business goals and match the skills and strengths of many of BuzzFeed News’s editors and reporters. We raised this idea with the News Guild this morning and look forward to discussing it further. Moving forward, we will have a single news brand in HuffPost, which is profitable, with a loyal direct front page audience.

    I want to explain a little more about why we’ve come to these deeply painful decisions. We’ve faced more challenges than I can count in the past few years: a pandemic, a fading SPAC market that yielded less capital, a tech recession, a tough economy, a declining stock market, a decelerating digital advertising market and ongoing audience and platform shifts. Dealing with all of these obstacles at once is part of why we’ve needed to make the difficult decisions to eliminate more jobs and reduce spending. 

    But I also want to be clear: I could have managed these changes better as the CEO of this company and our leadership team could have performed better despite these circumstances. Our job is to adapt, change, improve, and perform despite the challenges in the world. We can and will do better. 

    In particular, the integration process of BuzzFeed and Complex, and the unification of our two business organizations, should have been executed faster and better. The macro environment is tough, but we had the potential to generate much more revenue than we delivered over the past 12 months. 

    Additionally, I made the decision to overinvest in BuzzFeed News because I love their work and mission so much. This made me slow to accept that the big platforms wouldn’t provide the distribution or financial support required to support premium, free journalism purpose-built for social media. 

    More broadly, I regret that I didn’t hold the company to higher standards for profitability, to give us the buffer needed to manage through economic and industry downturns and avoid painful days like today. Our mission, our impact on culture, and our audience is what matters most, but we need a stronger business to protect and sustain this important work. 

    Please know that we exhausted many other cost saving measures to preserve as many jobs as possible. We are reducing budgets, open roles, travel and entertainment, and most other discretionary, non-revenue generating expenditures. Just as we reduced our footprint in NYC last year, we will be reducing our real estate in Los Angeles — from four buildings down to one, which saves millions in costs as well as mirrors our current hybrid state of work.

    I’ve learned from these mistakes, and the team moving forward has learned from them as well. We know that the changes and improvements we are making today are necessary steps to building a better future. 

    Over the next couple of months, we will work together to run a more agile and focused business organization with the capacity to bring in more revenue. We will concentrate our news efforts in HuffPost, a brand that is profitable with a highly engaged, loyal audience that is less dependent on social platforms. We will empower our editorial teams at all of our brands to do the very best creative work and build an interface where that work can be packaged and brought to advertisers more effectively. And we will bring more innovation to clients in the form of creators, AI, and cultural moments that can only happen across BuzzFeed, Complex, HuffPost, Tasty and First We Feast. 

    It might not feel this way today, but I am confident the future of digital media is ours for the taking. Our industry is hurting and ready to be reborn. We are taking great pains today, and will begin to fight our way to a bright future. 

    On Monday we’ll begin to have conversations with each division about the way forward. And in the meantime, I hope you can take time for yourselves this weekend.

    Thank you for supporting one another on a difficult day.

    Source link

  • BuzzFeed will lay off 15% of staff, shutter its news unit

    BuzzFeed will lay off 15% of staff, shutter its news unit

    BuzzFeed will lay off 15% of staff and shut down its news unit, BuzzFeed CEO Jonah Peretti wrote in an email to staff Thursday.

    The layoffs will affect BuzzFeed’s business, content, administration and tech teams. The layoffs amount to about 180 people. The company’s staff totaled about 1,200 people as of its most recent securities filing.

    BuzzFeed News, part of the digital media company’s content division, had about 100 employees and lost about $10 million a year, two people familiar with the matter told CNBC last year. Several large shareholders had urged Peretti to shut down its news operations.

    Shares of the company have fallen about 90% since its IPO. They were down more than 27% Thursday, trading around 68 cents.

    Peretti also wrote that revenue chief Edgar Hernandez and operating chief Christian Baesler decided to exit the company.

    BuzzFeed cut nearly 12% of its workforce, or around 180 staffers, back in December 2022. The company said the layoffs came in response to challenging economic conditions and its acquisition of Complex Networks.

    The digital media company scaled back its news operation in an attempt to make BuzzFeed News profitable, resulting in the departure of several editors. The company went public via a special purpose acquisition vehicle last year, which sent shares down nearly 40% in its first week of trading.

    One shareholder told CNBC last year that shutting down the newsroom could amount to $300 million of market capitalization to the stock.

    Peretti also wrote that the company is proposing headcount reductions in some international markets.

    Read the full note from Jonah Peretti below:

    Hi all, 

    I am writing to announce some difficult news. We are reducing our workforce by approximately 15% today across our Business, Content, Tech and Admin teams, and beginning the process of closing BuzzFeed News. Additionally, we are proposing headcount reductions in some international markets.

    Impacted employees (other than those in BuzzFeed News) will receive an email from HR shortly. If you are receiving this note from me, you are not impacted by today’s changes. For BuzzFeed News, we have begun discussions with the News Guild about these actions.

    As part of today’s changes, both our CRO Edgar Hernandez and COO Christian Baesler have made the decision to exit the company. I’m grateful to both of them for their passion and dedication to Complex and to BuzzFeed, Inc. Christian will be with us through the end of April, and Edgar through the end of May to help with the transition.

    Marcela Martin, our President, will take on responsibility for all revenue functions effective immediately. In the US, Andrew Guendjoian is our new Head of Sales, and Ken Blom will continue in his role as Head of Revenue Operations. Globally, International Sales will move under Rich Reid, Head of International and Head of Studio, also reporting to Marcela. 

    I have great confidence in this revenue leadership team, and the early plans I’ve seen from them to accelerate performance from our Business Org. We will share more on their plans in the Business All Hands next week (and we are extending an invite company-wide). 

    The changes the Business Organization is making today are focused on reducing layers in their organization, increasing speed and effectiveness of pitches, streamlining our product mix, doubling down on creators, and beginning to bring AI enhancements to every aspect of our sales process.

    While layoffs are occurring across nearly every division, we’ve determined that the company can no longer continue to fund BuzzFeed News as a standalone organization. As a result, we will engage with the News Guild about our cost reduction plans and what this will mean for the affected union members. 

    HuffPost and BuzzFeed Dot Com have signaled that they will open a number of select roles for members of BuzzFeed News. These roles will be aligned with those divisions’ business goals and match the skills and strengths of many of BuzzFeed News’s editors and reporters. We raised this idea with the News Guild this morning and look forward to discussing it further. Moving forward, we will have a single news brand in HuffPost, which is profitable, with a loyal direct front page audience.

    I want to explain a little more about why we’ve come to these deeply painful decisions. We’ve faced more challenges than I can count in the past few years: a pandemic, a fading SPAC market that yielded less capital, a tech recession, a tough economy, a declining stock market, a decelerating digital advertising market and ongoing audience and platform shifts. Dealing with all of these obstacles at once is part of why we’ve needed to make the difficult decisions to eliminate more jobs and reduce spending. 

    But I also want to be clear: I could have managed these changes better as the CEO of this company and our leadership team could have performed better despite these circumstances. Our job is to adapt, change, improve, and perform despite the challenges in the world. We can and will do better. 

    In particular, the integration process of BuzzFeed and Complex, and the unification of our two business organizations, should have been executed faster and better. The macro environment is tough, but we had the potential to generate much more revenue than we delivered over the past 12 months. 

    Additionally, I made the decision to overinvest in BuzzFeed News because I love their work and mission so much. This made me slow to accept that the big platforms wouldn’t provide the distribution or financial support required to support premium, free journalism purpose-built for social media. 

    More broadly, I regret that I didn’t hold the company to higher standards for profitability, to give us the buffer needed to manage through economic and industry downturns and avoid painful days like today. Our mission, our impact on culture, and our audience is what matters most, but we need a stronger business to protect and sustain this important work. 

    Please know that we exhausted many other cost saving measures to preserve as many jobs as possible. We are reducing budgets, open roles, travel and entertainment, and most other discretionary, non-revenue generating expenditures. Just as we reduced our footprint in NYC last year, we will be reducing our real estate in Los Angeles — from four buildings down to one, which saves millions in costs as well as mirrors our current hybrid state of work.

    I’ve learned from these mistakes, and the team moving forward has learned from them as well. We know that the changes and improvements we are making today are necessary steps to building a better future. 

    Over the next couple of months, we will work together to run a more agile and focused business organization with the capacity to bring in more revenue. We will concentrate our news efforts in HuffPost, a brand that is profitable with a highly engaged, loyal audience that is less dependent on social platforms. We will empower our editorial teams at all of our brands to do the very best creative work and build an interface where that work can be packaged and brought to advertisers more effectively. And we will bring more innovation to clients in the form of creators, AI, and cultural moments that can only happen across BuzzFeed, Complex, HuffPost, Tasty and First We Feast. 

    It might not feel this way today, but I am confident the future of digital media is ours for the taking. Our industry is hurting and ready to be reborn. We are taking great pains today, and will begin to fight our way to a bright future. 

    On Monday we’ll begin to have conversations with each division about the way forward. And in the meantime, I hope you can take time for yourselves this weekend.

    Thank you for supporting one another on a difficult day.

    Jonah

    Source link

  • The digital media rollup dream is dead for the moment — now it’s all about core brand strength

    The digital media rollup dream is dead for the moment — now it’s all about core brand strength

    BuzzFeed CEO Jonah Peretti stands in front of the Nasdaq market site in Times Square as the company goes public through a merger with a special-purpose acquisition company on December 06, 2021 in New York City.

    Spencer Platt | Getty Images

    When a marriage or an engagement fails, it’s common for the participants to take time to work on themselves.

    That’s where the digital media industry finds itself today.

    After years of focusing on consolidating to better compete with Google and Facebook for digital advertising dollars, many of the most well-known digital media companies have abandoned consolidation efforts to concentrate on differentiation.

    “What you’re finding is companies are trying to find a non-substitutable core,” said Jonathan Miller, the CEO of Integrated Media, which specializes in digital media investments. “The era of trying to put these companies together is over, and I don’t think it’s coming back.”

    A 90% decline in BuzzFeed shares since the company went public in 2021, a failed sales process from Vice, the collapse of special purpose acquisition companies, and a choppy advertising market have made digital media executives rethink their companies’ futures. For the moment, executives have decided that more concentrated investment is better than attempts to gain scale.

    “Right now, everyone’s trying to get through a tougher market by focusing on their strengths,” BuzzFeed CEO Jonah Peretti said in an interview with CNBC. “We’re in this period now where we should just focus on innovating for the future and building more efficient, stronger, better companies.”

    What’s happening in the digital media space echoes trends from the biggest media companies, including Netflix, Disney and Warner Bros. Discovery. After losing nearly half their market values, or more, in 2022, those companies have emphasized what makes them different, whether it be distribution, brand or quality of programming, after years of global expansion and mega-mergers. Disney CEO Bob Iger said the word “brand” more than 25 times at a Morgan Stanley media conference this month.

    “I think brands matter,” Iger said. “The more choice people have, the more important brands become because of what they convey to consumers.”

    Making strategic decisions based on consumer demand rather than investor pressure is a pivot for the industry, said Bryan Goldberg, CEO of Bustle Digital Group, which has acquired and developed a number of brands and sites aimed at women, including Nylon, Scary Mommy, Romper and Elite Daily.

    “Too many of the mergers were driven by investor needs as opposed to consumer needs,” Goldberg said in an interview.

    The rollup dream’s rise and fall

    From late 2018 to early 2022, the digital media industry had a shared goal. Pushed by venture capitalist and private equity investors who had made sizeable investments in the industry during the 2010s, companies such as BuzzFeed, Vice, Vox Media, Group Nine, and Bustle Digital Group, or BDG, were talking to each other, in various combinations, about merging to gain scale.

    “If BuzzFeed and five of the other biggest companies were combined into a bigger digital media company, you would probably be able to get paid more money,” Peretti told The New York Times in November 2018, kicking off a multiyear effort to consolidate.

    The rationale was twofold. First, digital media companies needed more scale to compete with Facebook and Google for digital advertising dollars. Adding sites and brands under one corporate umbrella would boost overall eyeballs for advertisers. Cost-cutting from M&A synergies was an added benefit for investors.

    Second, longtime shareholders wanted to exit their investments. Large legacy media companies such as Disney and Comcast‘s NBCUniversal invested hundreds of millions in digital media in the early and mid-2010s. Disney invested more than $400 million in Vice. NBCUniversal put a similar amount into BuzzFeed. By the end of the decade, after seeing the value of those investments fall, legacy media companies made it clear to digital media executives that they weren’t interested in being acquirers.

    Vice Media offices display the Vice logo in Venice, California.

    Mario Tama | Getty Images

    With no strategic buyer available, merging with each other using publicly traded stock could give VC and PE shareholders a chance to cash out of investments that were well past the standard hold time of seven years. Digital media companies eyed special purpose acquisition companies — also known as SPACs or blank-check companies — as a way to go public quickly. The popularity of SPACs picked up steam in 2020 and peaked in 2021.

    Deal flow accelerated. Vox acquired New York Magazine in September 2019. About a week later, Vice announced it had acquired Refinery29, a digital media company focused on younger women. BuzzFeed bought news aggregator and blog HuffPost in 2020 and then acquired digital publisher Complex Networks in 2021 as part of a SPAC transaction to go public. Vox and Group Nine agreed to a merger later that year.

    BuzzFeed, generally thought by industry executives at the time to have the strongest balance sheet with the best growth narrative, successfully went public via SPAC in December 2021. Shares immediately tanked, falling 24% in their first week of trading. The coming weeks and months were even worse. BuzzFeed opened at $10 per share. The stock currently trades at about $1 — a 90% loss of value.

    BuzzFeed’s underwhelming performance coincided with the implosion of the SPAC market in early 2022 as interest rates rose. Other companies that planned to follow BuzzFeed shut down their efforts to go public completely. Vice tried and failed. Now it’s trying for the second time in two years to find a buyer. BDG and Vox, meanwhile, abandoned considerations to go public. Vox instead sold a 20% stake in itself in February to Penske Media, which owns Rolling Stone and Variety.

    The industry turns inward

    Consolidation was always a flawed strategy because digital media could never become big enough to compete with Facebook and Google, said Integrated Media’s Miller.

    “You have to have sufficient amount of scale to matter, but that’s not a winning formula by itself,” Miller said.

    Vice’s deal for Refinery29 is a prime example of a deal motivated by scale that lacked consumer rationale, said BDG’s Goldberg.

    “The digital media rollup has proven successful only when assets are thoughtfully combined with an eye toward consumers,” Goldberg said. “In what world did Vice and Refinery29 make sense in combination?” 

    Vice is engaged in sale talks with a number of buyers that fall outside the digital media landscape, CNBC previously reported. It’s also considering selling itself in pieces if there’s more interest in parts of the company, such as its TV production assets and its ad agency, Virtue.

    Vice is a cautionary tale of what happens to a digital media company when its brand loses luster, Miller said. Valued at $5.7 billion in 2017, Vice is now considering selling itself for around $500 million, according to people familiar with the matter, who asked not to be named because the sale discussions are private.

    A Vice spokesperson declined to comment.

    “In the old days of media, with TV networks, if you were down, you could revive yourself with a hit,” said Miller. “In the internet age, everything is so easily substitutable. If Vice goes down, the audience just moves on to something else.”

    Companies such as BuzzFeed, Vox and BDG are now trying to find an enduring relevancy amid a myriad of information and entertainment options. BuzzFeed has chosen to lean in to artificial intelligence, touting new AI-generated quizzes and other content that fuses the work of staff writers with AI databases.

    BDG has chosen to primarily target female audiences across lifestyle categories.

    Vox has focused on journalism and information across a number of different verticals. That’s a strategy that hasn’t really changed even as the market has turned against digital media, allowing Vox CEO Jim Bankoff the opportunity to continue to hunt for deals. Just don’t expect the partners to be Vice, BDG or BuzzFeed.

    “We want to be the leading modern media company with the strongest portfolio of brands that serve their audiences on modern platforms — websites, podcasts, streaming services — while building franchises through multiple revenue streams,” Bankoff said. “There’s no doubt M&A is part of our playbook, and we expect it will continue to be in the future.”

    Finding an exit

    While executives may be making strategy decisions with a sharper eye toward the consumer, the problem of finding an exit for investors remains. Differentiation may open up the pool of potential buyers beyond the media industry. BuzzFeed’s emphasis on artificial intelligence could attract interest from technology platforms, for instance.

    It’s also possible that there will be an eventual second wave of peer-to-peer mergers. While Integrated Media’s Miller doesn’t expect a future industry rollup, BuzzFeed’s Peretti hasn’t closed the door on the concept if market conditions improve. As executives invest in fewer ideas and verticals, the end result could be healthier companies that are more attractive merger partners, he said.

    “If everyone invests in what they’re best at, if you put them back together, you’d have that diversified digital media company with real scale,” Peretti said. “That helps drive commerce for all parts of a unified company. I think it’s still possible.”

    Disclosure: Comcast’s NBCUniversal is the parent company of CNBC.

    WATCH: Axios’ Sara Fischer on BuzzFeed’s continuing struggles

    Source link

  • BuzzFeed’s CEO says AI could usher in a ‘new model for digital media,’ but warns against a ‘dystopian’ path | CNN Business

    BuzzFeed’s CEO says AI could usher in a ‘new model for digital media,’ but warns against a ‘dystopian’ path | CNN Business


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Over the holidays, while most media executives were perhaps looking to get a reprieve from work, Jonah Peretti was online, fully immersed in experimenting with artificial intelligence.

    The BuzzFeed co-founder and chief executive, who has always raced to test out the latest technologies, was familiar with AI and predictions of how it could one day revolutionize the media industry. In fact, BuzzFeed had dabbled in using it over the years.

    A version of this article first appeared in the “Reliable Sources” newsletter. Sign up for the daily digest chronicling the evolving media landscape here.

    But Peretti, sitting in his California home in late December, started probing how the developing robot writing technology could quickly be infused into the very DNA of BuzzFeed.

    In a phone interview Thursday, Peretti said that as he and a handful of colleagues prototyped how the technology could be used to enhance the site’s hallmark quizzes, interactive articles, and other types of content, he found himself genuinely having fun. “It started to feel like we were all playing,” Peretti recalled.

    That “playful work,” as he described it, soon “led to multiple Google docs full of the implications of the technology and how [BuzzFeed] could build this into our platform and how we could extend it to other formats.”

    Those efforts culminated in Peretti’s formal announcement on Thursday: That BuzzFeed will work with ChatGPT creator OpenAI to assist in the creation of content for its audience and move artificial intelligence into the “core business.”

    Peretti said that he understood people might read the news and conclude that BuzzFeed was, in short, moving to replace humans with robots. But Peretti insisted that is not his vision for the technology, even as he predicted other companies will likely go down that dark path.

    “I think that there are two paths for AI in digital media,” Peretti said. “One path is the obvious path that a lot of people will do — but it’s a depressing path — using the technology for cost savings and spamming out a bunch of SEO articles that are lower quality than what a journalist could do, but a tenth of the cost. That’s one vision, but to me, that’s a depressing vision and a shortsighted vision because in the long run it’s not going to work.”

    “The other path,” Peretti continued, “which is the one that gets me really excited, is the new model for digital media that is more personalized, more creative, more dynamic — where really talented people who work at our company are able to use AI together and entertain and personalize more than you could ever do without AI.”

    Put more simply, Peretti said he envisions artificial intelligence being used to enhance the work of his employees, not replace them.

    The example the company provided is the BuzzFeed quiz. Typically, a human would write the questions and perhaps a dozen responses that would be delivered to the user based on their inputs. But, with AI, the staffer could write the questions and the software could spit out a highly personalized response for the user. In the supplied example, a user would take a quick quiz and the AI would write a short RomCom using the data provided.

    “We don’t have to train the AI to be as good as the BuzzFeed writers because we have the BuzzFeed writers, so they can inject language, ideas, cultural currency and write them into prompts and the format,” Peretti said. “And then the AI pulls it together and creates a new piece of content.”

    Peretti indicated that he had no interest in utilizing artificial intelligence to replace human journalists for authoring news articles, as the technology outlet CNET recently did with disastrous consequences (dozens of the outlet’s stories written by AI were riddled with errors that required correcting.)

    “There’s the CNET path, and then there is the path that BuzzFeed is focused on,” Peretti said. “One is about costs and volume of content, and one is about ability.”

    “Even if there are a lot of bad actors who try to use AI to make content farms, it won’t win in the long run,” Peretti predicted. “I think the content farm model of AI will feel very depressing and dystopian.”

    Source link

  • ChatGPT’s Mind-Boggling, Possibly Dystopian Impact on the Media World

    ChatGPT’s Mind-Boggling, Possibly Dystopian Impact on the Media World

    A couple weeks ago, in his idiosyncratic fan-correspondence newsletter, “The Red Hand Files,” musician and author Nick Cave critiqued a ”song in the style of Nick Cave”—submitted by “Mark” from Christchurch, New Zealand—that was created using ChatGPT, the latest and most mind-boggling entrant in a growing field of robotic-writing software. At a glance, the lyrics evoked the same dark religious overtones that run through much of Cave’s oeuvre. Upon closer inspection, this ersatz Cave track was a low-rent simulacrum. “I understand that ChatGPT is in its infancy but perhaps that is the emerging horror of AI—that it will forever be in its infancy,” Cave wrote, “as it will always have further to go, and the direction is always forward, always faster. It can never be rolled back, or slowed down, as it moves us toward a utopian future, maybe, or our total destruction. Who can possibly say which? Judging by this song ‘in the style of Nick Cave’ though, it doesn’t look good, Mark. The apocalypse is well on its way. This song sucks.”

    Cave’s ChatGPT takedown—“with all the love and respect in the world, this song is bullshit, a grotesque mockery of what it is to be human”—set the internet ablaze, garnering uproarious coverage from Rolling Stone and Stereogum, to Gizmodo and The Verge, to the BBC and the Daily Mail. That his commentary hit such a nerve probably has less to do with the influence of an underground rock icon than it does with the sudden omnipresence of “generative artificial intelligence software,” particularly within the media and journalism community.

    Since ChatGPT’s November 30 release, folks in the business of writing have increasingly been futzing around with the frighteningly proficient chatbot, which is in the business of, well, mimicking their writing. “We didn’t believe this until we tried it,” Mike Allen gushed in his Axios newsletter, with the subject heading, “Mind-blowing AI.” Indeed, reactions tend to fall somewhere on a spectrum between awe-inspired and horrified. “I’m a copywriter,” a London-based freelancer named Henry Williams opined this week for The Guardian (in an article that landed atop the Drudge Report via a more sensationalized version aggregated by The Sun), “and I’m pretty sure artificial intelligence is going to take my job…. [I]t took ChatGPT 30 seconds to create, for free, an article that would take me hours to write.” A Tuesday editorial in the scientific journal Nature similarly declared, “ChatGPT can write presentable student essays, summarize research papers, answer questions well enough to pass medical exams and generate helpful computer code. It has produced research abstracts good enough that scientists found it hard to spot that a computer had written them…That’s why it is high time researchers and publishers laid down ground rules about using [AI tools] ethically.”

    BuzzFeed, for one, is on it: “Our work in AI-powered creativity is…off to a good start, and in 2023, you’ll see AI inspired content move from an R&D stage to part of our core business, enhancing the quiz experience, informing our brainstorming, and personalizing our content for our audience,” CEO Jonah Peretti wrote in a memo to staff on Thursday. “To be clear, we see the breakthroughs in AI opening up a new era of creativity that will allow humans to harness creativity in new ways with endless opportunities and applications for good. In publishing, AI can benefit both content creators and audiences, inspiring new ideas and inviting audience members to co-create personalized content.” The work coming out of BuzzFeed’s newsroom, on the other hand, is a different matter. “This isn’t about AI creating journalism,” a spokesman told me.

    Meanwhile, if you made it to the letters-to-the-editor section of Wednesday’s New York Times, you may have stumbled upon one reader’s rebuttal to a January 15 Times op-ed titled, “How ChatGPT Hijacks Democracy.” The rebuttal was crafted—you guessed it—using ChatGPT: “It is important to approach new technologies with caution and to understand their capabilities and limitations. However, it is also essential not to exaggerate their potential dangers and to consider how they can be used in a positive and responsible manner.” Which is to say, you need not let Skynet and The Terminator invade your dreams just yet. But for those of us who ply our trade in words, it’s worth considering the more malignant applications of this seemingly inexorable innovation. As Sara Fischer noted in the latest edition of her Axios newsletter, “Artificial intelligence has proven helpful in automating menial news-gathering tasks, like aggregating data, but there’s a growing concern that an over-dependence on it could weaken journalistic standards if newsrooms aren’t careful.” (On that note, I asked Times executive editor Joe Kahn for his thoughts on ChatGPT’s implications for journalism and whether he could picture a use where it might be applied to journalism at the paper of record, but a spokeswoman demurred, “We’re gonna take a pass on this one.”)

    The “growing concern” that Fischer alluded to in her Axios piece came to the fore in recent days as controversy engulfed the otherwise anodyne technology-news publication CNET, after a series of articles from Futurism and The Verge drew attention to the use of AI-generated stories at CNET and its sister outlet, Bankrate. Stories full of errors and—it gets worse—apparently teeming with robot plagiarism. “The bot’s misbehavior ranges from verbatim copying to moderate edits to significant rephrasings, all without properly crediting the original,” reported Futurism’s Jon Christian. “In at least some of its articles, it appears that virtually every sentence maps directly onto something previously published elsewhere.” In response to the backlash, CNET halted production on its AI content farm while editor in chief Connie Guglielmo issued a penitent note to readers: “We’re committed to improving the AI engine with feedback and input from our editorial teams so that we—and our readers—can trust the work it contributes to.” 

    For an even more dystopian tale, check out this yarn from the technology journalist Alex Kantrowitz, in which a random Substack called “The Rationalist” put itself on the map with a post that lifted passages directly from Kantrowitz’s Substack, “Big Technology.” This wasn’t just some good-old-fashioned plagiarism, like Melania Trump ripping off a Michelle Obama speech. Rather, the anonymous author of “The Rationalist”—an avatar named “PETRA”—disclosed that the article had been assembled using ChatGPT and similar AI tools. Furthermore, Kantrowitz wrote that Substack indicated it wasn’t immediately clear whether “The Rationalist” had violated the company’s plagiarism policy. (The offending post is no longer available.) “The speed at which they were able to copy, remix, publish, and distribute their inauthentic story was impressive,” Kantrowitz wrote. “It outpaced the platforms’ ability, and perhaps willingness, to stop it, signaling Generative AI’s darker side will be difficult to tame.” When I called Kantrowitz to talk about this, he elaborated, “Clearly this technology is gonna make it a lot easier for plagiarists to plagiarize. It’s as simple as tossing some text inside one of these chatbots and asking them to remix it, and they’ll do it. It takes minimal effort when you’re trying to steal someone’s content, so I do think that’s a concern. I was personally kind of shocked to see it happen so soon with my story.”

    Sam Altman, the CEO of ChatGPT’s parent company, OpenAI, said in an interview this month that the company is working on ways to identify AI plagiarism. He’s not the only one: I just got off the phone with Shouvik Paul, chief revenue officer of a company called Copyleaks, which licenses plagiarism-detection software to an array of clients ranging from universities to corporations to several major news outlets. The company’s latest development is a tool that takes things a step further by using AI to detect whether something was written using AI. There’s even a free browser plug-in that anyone can take for a spin, which identifies AI-derived copy with 99.2% accuracy, according to Paul. It could be an easy way to sniff out journalists who pull the wool over their editors’ eyes. (Or, in the case of the CNET imbroglio, publications that pull the wool over their readers’ eyes.) But Paul also hopes it can be used to help people identify potential misinformation and disinformation in the media ecosystem, especially heading into 2024. “In 2016, Russia had to physically hire people to go and write these things,” he said. “That costs money. Now, the cost is minimal and it’s a thousand times more scalable. It’s something we’re definitely gonna see and hear about in this upcoming election.”

    The veteran newsman and media entrepreneur Steven Brill shares Paul’s concern. “ChatGPT can get stuff out much faster and, frankly, in a much more articulate way,” he told me. “A lot of the Russian disinformation in 2016 wasn’t very good. The grammar and spelling was bad. This looks really smooth.” These days, Brill is the co-CEO and co-editor-in-chief of NewsGuard, a company whose journalists use data to score the trust and credibility of thousands of news and information websites. In recent weeks, NewsGuard analysts asked ChatGPT “to respond to a series of leading prompts relating to a sampling of 100 false narratives among NewsGuard’s proprietary database of 1,131 top misinformation narratives in the news…published before 2022.” (ChatGPT is primarily programmed on data through 2021.)

    “The results,” according to NewsGuard’s analysis, “confirm fears, including concerns expressed by OpenAI itself, about how the tool can be weaponized in the wrong hands. ChatGPT generated false narratives—including detailed news articles, essays, and TV scripts—for 80 of the 100 previously identified false narratives. For anyone unfamiliar with the issues or topics covered by this content, the results could easily come across as legitimate, and even authoritative.” The title of the analysis was positively ominous: “The Next Great Misinformation Superspreader: How ChatGPT Could Spread Toxic Misinformation At Unprecedented Scale.” On the bright side, “NewsGuard found that ChatGPT does have safeguards aimed at preventing it from spreading some examples of misinformation. Indeed, for some myths, it took NewsGuard as many as five tries to get the chatbot to relay misinformation, and its parent company has said that upcoming versions of the software will be more knowledgeable.”

    Joe Pompeo

    Source link

  • Stock market rally will be put to test in week ahead, after yields fall and tech surges

    Stock market rally will be put to test in week ahead, after yields fall and tech surges

    Source link

  • O’Connor Institute Constitution Series Showcases Library of Congress

    O’Connor Institute Constitution Series Showcases Library of Congress

    Press Release



    updated: Mar 18, 2021

    The Sandra Day O’Connor Institute For American Democracy will present a complimentary online public forum Constitution Series: Equality and Justice for All on Thursday, April 8, 2021, at 1 p.m. EDT.  The webcast, open to the public, will feature Dr. Carla Hayden, the nation’s 14th Librarian of Congress who has served under three presidential administrations. Dr. Hayden will speak on the topic of Enriching America’s Stories: Expanding Diverse Collections. Guest moderator for the forum will be Chevy Humphrey, President and CEO of the Chicago Museum of Science and Industry and a member of the Institute’s Board of Directors.

    Dr. Hayden will provide insight into the 13th Amendment which abolished slavery in 1865, ratified by Congress and signed by President Abraham Lincoln. Additionally, she will discuss “Of the People: Widening the Path,” a new program funded by the Mellon Foundation which creates new opportunities for more Americans to engage with the Library of Congress and add their perspectives to the Library’s collections. Of The People will allow the national library to share a more inclusive American story and expand the Library’s efforts to ensure that a diversity of experiences is reflected in our historical record and how we might use those materials to better understand our past.

    The Constitution Series was launched by the Institute in 2020 to convene civil dialogue and foster solutions. With core values of inclusivity, civility and collaboration, the organization founded by Justice O’Connor believes that the expressed ideals of this great nation require exploring issues of injustice. The series hopes to broaden perspectives and increase understanding through thoughtful listening, mutual respect and shared purpose.

    Justice O’Connor has stated that “in order to cultivate a set of leaders with legitimacy in the eyes of the citizenry, it is necessary that the path to leadership be visibly open to talented and qualified individuals of every race and ethnicity.”

    Following Justice O’Connor’s retirement from the U.S. Supreme Court, she founded the O’Connor Institute, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization to advance American democracy through multigenerational civil discourse, civic engagement and civics education. For more information and to register for the free webcast, visit www.OConnorInstitute.org.

    Media Contact:
    Heather Schader | 602-730-3300 x8 | hschader@oconnorinstitue.org | @SDOInstitute

    Source: Sandra Day O’Connor Institute For American Democracy

    Source link