Know Your Meme is a website dedicated to documenting Internet phenomena: viral videos, image macros, catchphrases, web celebs and more. A woman cruelly mocked for her appearance has slammed cyber bullies after her face was used in a nasty internet meme. Lizzie Velasquez, 27, from Texas, received. There’s hope yet, maybe! There is an excellent, thorough deep dive in the New York Times on just precisely how Russia managed to pull off such extensive hacking. No one can make you feel inferior without your consent. One of my favorite first ladies, Eleanor Roosevelt, once quoted that powerful message.
The faculty of a human or other animal by which it thinks, perceives, feels, remembers, or desires: studying the relation between the brain and the. Why you should never sleep on the job: Dozing office worker becomes victim of online prank as his colleagues turn his nap into a series of memes. As much as I want to get swept away into a VR MMO based on Sword Art Online with the rest of you, the recently announced Sword Art Online: The Beginning (involving.
So now there are 100 of you left. We’re at the point in the page where you have to scroll to see more. Of the 100 of you who. Http:// As long as trolls are still trolling, the Rick will never stop rolling.
Zoo, a film by The Stranger columnist Charles Mudede and director Robinson Devor, and executive producers Garr Godfrey and Ben Exworthy, is a documentary on the life. We never expect them to enter our real life. But, the psychopath is closer than you think.
She\'s already stopped reading. Photo by Roslan Rahman/AFP/Getty Images. I’m going to keep this brief, because you’re not going to stick around for long.
Watch Puremature Horny Milf Makes Online Hookup With Stud online on YouPorn.com. YouPorn is the biggest HD porn video site with the hottest hot mom movies! Music video by Rick Astley performing Never Gonna Give You Up. Marijuana: A Second Class Addiction (MASCA) sets out to investigate the popular misconception that marijuana is a non-addictive, non habit forming substance.
I’ve already lost a bunch of you. For every 1. 61 people who landed on this page, about 6. You “bounced” in Web traffic jargon, meaning you spent no time “engaging” with this page at all. So now there are 1. We’re at the point in the page where you have to scroll to see more. Of the 1. 00 of you who didn’t bounce, five are never going to scroll.
Bye! OK, fine, good riddance. A friendly, intimate crowd, just the people who want to be here. Thanks for reading, folks! I was beginning to worry about your attention span, even your intellig ? You’re tweeting a link to this article already? You haven’t even read it yet! What if I go on to advocate something truly awful, like a constitutional amendment requiring that we all type two spaces after a period?
Wait, hold on, now you guys are leaving too? You’re going off to comment? There’s nothing to say yet. I haven’t even gotten to the nut graph. I better get on with it. So here’s the story: Only a small number of you are reading all the way through articles on the Web. I’ve long suspected this, because so many smart- alecks jump in to the comments to make points that get mentioned later in the piece.
But now I’ve got proof. I asked Josh Schwartz, a data scientist at the traffic analysis firm Chartbeat, to look at how people scroll through Slate articles.
Schwartz also did a similar analysis for other sites that use Chartbeat and have allowed the firm to include their traffic in its aggregate analyses. Schwartz’s data shows that readers can’t stay focused. The more I type, the more of you tune out. It’s everywhere online. When people land on a story, they very rarely make it all the way down the page. A lot of people don’t even make it halfway.
Even more dispiriting is the relationship between scrolling and sharing. Schwartz’s data suggest that lots of people are tweeting out links to articles they haven’t fully read. If you see someone recommending a story online, you shouldn’t assume that he has read the thing he’s sharing. OK, we’re a few hundred words into the story now.
According to the data, for every 1. Only one- half! Take a look at the following graph created by Schwartz, a histogram showing where people stopped scrolling in Slate articles.
Chartbeat can track this information because it analyzes reader behavior in real time—every time a Web browser is on a Slate page, Chartbeat’s software records what that browser is doing on a second- by- second basis, including which portion of the page the browser is currently viewing. A typical Web article is about 2. In the graph below, each bar represents the share of readers who got to a particular depth in the story. There’s a spike at 0 percent—i.
The X axis goes beyond 1. Finally, the spike near the end is an anomaly caused by pages containing photos and videos—on those pages, people scroll through the whole page.)Courtesy of Chartbeat. Chartbeat’s data shows that most readers scroll to about the 5. Slate stories. That’s not very far at all. I looked at a number of recent pieces to see how much you’d get out of a story if you only made it to the 1,0. Take Mario Vittone’s piece, published this week, on the warning signs that someone might be drowning.
If the top of your browser reached only the 1,0. At that point, you’d only have gotten to warning signs No. I didn’t get to because I haven’t finished reading that story yet. Or look at John Dickerson’s fantastic article about the IRS scandal or something.
If you only scrolled halfway through that amazing piece, you would have read just the first four paragraphs. Now, trust me when I say that beyond those four paragraphs, John made some really good points about whatever it is his article is about, some strong points that—without spoiling it for you—you really have to read to believe. But of course you didn’t read it because you got that IM and then you had to look at a video and then the phone rang . About 5 percent of people who land on Slate pages and are engaged with the page in some way—that is, the page is in a foreground tab on their browser and they’re doing something on it, like perhaps moving the mouse pointer—never scroll at all. Now, do you know what you get on a typical Slate page if you never scroll? Depending on the size of the picture at the top of the page and the height of your browser window, you’ll get, at most, the first sentence or two.
There’s a good chance you’ll see none of the article at all. And yet people are leaving without even starting.
What’s wrong with them? Why’d they even click on the page? Schwarz’s histogram for articles across lots of sites is in some ways more encouraging than the Slate data, but in other ways even sadder: Courtesy of Chartbeat. On these sites, the median scroll depth is slightly greater—most people get to 6.
Slate pages. On the other hand, on these pages a higher share of people—1. In general, though, the story across the Web is similar to the story at Slate: Few people are making it to the end, and a surprisingly large number aren’t giving articles any chance at all. We’re getting deep on the page here, so basically only my mom is still reading this. I asked Schwartz if he could tell me whether people who are sharing links to articles on social networks are likely to have read the pieces they’re sharing.
He told me that Chartbeat can’t directly track when individual readers tweet out links, so it can’t definitively say that people are sharing stories before they’ve read the whole thing. But Chartbeat can look at the overall tweets to an article, and then compare that number to how many people scrolled through the article. Here’s Schwartz’s analysis of the relationship between scrolling and sharing on Slate pages: Courtesy of Chartbeat. Courtesy of Chartbeat. And here’s a similar look at the relationship between scrolling and sharing across sites monitored by Chartbeat: Courtesy of Chartbeat.