[Pahalial]

This seems useful, yet awfully much like another step on the slow path to legitimizing 'poor taste'.

That's a bit harsh, so let me qualify it. I actually rather agree with the division inherent in this and think it will resound with people, but I honestly believe that this is yet another step towards turning our society into idiocracy. It's the slow legitimization of appreciation for content that we acknowledge as garbage but consume anyway. I firmly believe that there is inherent social value in this garbage content remaining quasi-taboo - a social pressure not to like such things. Sure, most people will watch some anyway, or play the latest mindless shooter, or what-have-you, but so long as it's understood that most people will mock you for publicly liking this, the norm does not drift towards mindlessness - you still need to consume some legitimately good content, even if only to have something to talk about.

I don't mean to attack the site; I think it's a great way to slice into the recommendations game, and I do think a lot of people will get value out of it, and it seems like it may well succeed. I simply am afraid it's a net negative for our society in the long run (then again, of course, not launching is hardly going to reverse such a trend.)

Edit: Make that symptomatic of a net negative. I've thought some more and this is only giving an online portal to express the shift I talk about above, which has already been happening aplenty.

[recursive]

I think the alternative is people pretending to like things they do not. You can't force people to appreciate your brand of high culture by mocking them for not doing so. At best, the people you're trying to win over will publicly pay lip service. At worst, it will become more difficult for people like you to find things that you think are worthwhile, because the space will become polluted by people who don't get it. Let people like what they like.

I, for one, am not ashamed to say that I like stupid things.

[thefool]

I disagree, I think there are plenty of social groups where this type of media isn't looked down upon at all. Same with shooters... ect.

If your goal is to chase immediate gratification (as many a person seems to do), you'll be better served by metrics that reflect this aspect of things, instead of deciding to spend time doing something you think will be immediately gratifying, and getting something else in return.

Good for society? Decidedly no.

Unavoidable because it better serves demand, I think probably.

At the same time... I think if these sorts of metrics become ubiquitous, people will become more acutely aware of the distinctions between quality and gratification value... so I don't think these things are only a symptom.

[wanorris]

I have a job that I put extra time into, a longish commute, and two enthusiastic boys. When my wife and I get time to watch a movie at all, we want to watch an entertainment, not high culture. I'm pretty sure that historically, the primary consumers of high culture have been the independently wealthy and people who don't have young children that they raise themselves.

I have an Ivy League liberal arts degree, I know what high culture is, and I'm actually quite fond of it, on the whole. But I won't apologize for what I feel like watching these days, and if you try to stigmatize it, I'll laugh in your face and carry on doing what I feel like.