Conversation

Notices

1. Derek Powazek 🐐 (fraying@xoxo.zone)'s status on Friday, 24-Aug-2018 09:28:52 EDT Derek Powazek 🐐

   I’ll never forgive the internet for training a generation of artists and writers to call what they make “content.”

   Boxes have contents. You’re a fucking ARTIST. You make ART. Own it.

   1. Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz)'s status on Sunday, 26-Aug-2018 08:17:18 EDT Strypey

      in reply to

      @fraying Stallman agrees with you
      https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#Content

      1. Strypey (strypey@mastodon.nzoss.nz)'s status on Sunday, 26-Aug-2018 08:20:26 EDT Strypey

         in reply to

         @fraying @alcinnz @dredmorbius "content" has its uses as a technical term though. If you are building a general-purpose thing like a CMS, it might be used for journalism, or opinion, or art, or any one of 10,000 other things, but from the POV of managing it in the software, it's all content, and the users uploading and managing it are content creators.

   2. raphael, now @gekitsu@toot.cat (gekitsu@mastodon.social)'s status on Sunday, 25-Nov-2018 15:43:38 EST raphael, now @gekitsu@toot.cat

      in reply to

      @fraying yes, this. it’s one of the issue where i go d’accord with stallman – the words we use are important, and we should choose them thoughtfully.
      content is a marketer’s concept, who doesn’t care what he panders, just how effectively and in what manner he does so.
      if people don’t like the connotations of ‘art(ist)’, we have the beautifully nonspecific ‘maker,’ for example. and we can always make up words to exactly fit our notions of what we do.