Post by j2 on Feb 6, 2017 10:44:50 GMT
Straight from the oven.
Take a look at something I posted elsewhere a while back about an imdb ex-employee's post on reddit, regarding what they're really about:
Found it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/5ruzwc/imdb_message_boards_shutting_down_effective/
Manhattan_Writer•2d
This is no surprise whatsoever. I've worked at IMDb (the worst and most discouraging experience of my professional life ) and believe me, the company is a soulless, empty corporate shell that has one goal: to sell advertising. It's not about movies, TV, or being 'guardians of data' - everything is about making money. The entire site is setup to sell advertising, and movie data is simply a means to achieve that. End of story.
The reason IMDb is getting rid of the message boards is simple: they can't be monetised. If IMDb could make money out of the boards, they'd be staying, but there's no cash in it for them, so they're getting axed. The sell-outs who run IMDb will have looked at the 'metrics' (a risible corporate buzzword the Data Team loves so much) and decided that traffic is not high enough for them to make any real money.
It really is that simple. I've experienced first-hand the obsession with metrics, and making money (at the expense of customer satisfaction), and it really is pathetic to behold. No decision is made at IMDb without greed being factored into the equation, and believe me, they will also shut down certain data sections at some point if they get in the way of making money. Forget the fact that the site has compiled 20+ years worth of important data - if one of the sections can no longer be monetised effectively (Literature, for example), they'll just get rid of it, and dump the hard work of thousands of contributors without batting an eye.
In financial terms, keeping the message boards live costs IMDb basically nothing, bar the human cost of maintenance, which - when considered in the context of the site's huge annual profit margin - is less than miniscule. Still, community cannot get in the way of making money, and trying to increase the site's earning by 5-10% every.single.year.
There's no point complaining about it, making suggestions, or suggesting alternate, viable solutions - the hacks at IMDb don't give a toss. There's no money in it for them, so they're not interested. They'll fob you off with the usual hollow platitudes, but make no mistake, the IMDb that people love died years ago. Now, the site is just a shiny, corporate plaything, pimped out by Amazon for the purposes of making money, with greed - not customer focus - being its primary driving force.
One final note: it probably burns IMDb that the majority (over one third) of their users come from China, the audience for which is far less valuable to advertisers than, say, the USA and the UK. Only about 5% of IMDb's users come from the UK, which is ironic considering the site originated in England. But, I digress - IMDb stopped having relevance years ago; Letterboxd is far superior.
'nuff said.
Take a look at something I posted elsewhere a while back about an imdb ex-employee's post on reddit, regarding what they're really about:
Feb 6, 2017 3:49:26 GMT @weirdraptor said:
I don't usually frequent Reddit, but I would like to read that article, though.Found it:
https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/5ruzwc/imdb_message_boards_shutting_down_effective/
Manhattan_Writer•2d
This is no surprise whatsoever. I've worked at IMDb (the worst and most discouraging experience of my professional life ) and believe me, the company is a soulless, empty corporate shell that has one goal: to sell advertising. It's not about movies, TV, or being 'guardians of data' - everything is about making money. The entire site is setup to sell advertising, and movie data is simply a means to achieve that. End of story.
The reason IMDb is getting rid of the message boards is simple: they can't be monetised. If IMDb could make money out of the boards, they'd be staying, but there's no cash in it for them, so they're getting axed. The sell-outs who run IMDb will have looked at the 'metrics' (a risible corporate buzzword the Data Team loves so much) and decided that traffic is not high enough for them to make any real money.
It really is that simple. I've experienced first-hand the obsession with metrics, and making money (at the expense of customer satisfaction), and it really is pathetic to behold. No decision is made at IMDb without greed being factored into the equation, and believe me, they will also shut down certain data sections at some point if they get in the way of making money. Forget the fact that the site has compiled 20+ years worth of important data - if one of the sections can no longer be monetised effectively (Literature, for example), they'll just get rid of it, and dump the hard work of thousands of contributors without batting an eye.
In financial terms, keeping the message boards live costs IMDb basically nothing, bar the human cost of maintenance, which - when considered in the context of the site's huge annual profit margin - is less than miniscule. Still, community cannot get in the way of making money, and trying to increase the site's earning by 5-10% every.single.year.
There's no point complaining about it, making suggestions, or suggesting alternate, viable solutions - the hacks at IMDb don't give a toss. There's no money in it for them, so they're not interested. They'll fob you off with the usual hollow platitudes, but make no mistake, the IMDb that people love died years ago. Now, the site is just a shiny, corporate plaything, pimped out by Amazon for the purposes of making money, with greed - not customer focus - being its primary driving force.
One final note: it probably burns IMDb that the majority (over one third) of their users come from China, the audience for which is far less valuable to advertisers than, say, the USA and the UK. Only about 5% of IMDb's users come from the UK, which is ironic considering the site originated in England. But, I digress - IMDb stopped having relevance years ago; Letterboxd is far superior.
'nuff said.
