[zerobees]

I find this study a bit weird because it doesn't really establish a baseline. If you look at "top 100" blogs in year n, I imagine that many of them will be dead in year n + 5 simply because people move on. So are we looking at the evidence of blogging going extinct, or just at the natural churn?

Also note that this specifically focuses on blogs designed to make money and dealing with general-interest stuff like fashion or travel. A lot of this has moved onto Instagram and TikTok as a byproduct of people using phones as their primary "content consumption" devices.

But I think the internet in general is moving away from bespoke, homebrew content. This is very visible even on HN, where the daily line-up contains corporate and university press releases + newspaper articles about as often as it contains personal blogs.

[alephnerd]

> Also note that this specifically focuses on blogs designed to make money and dealing with general-interest stuff like fashion or travel. A lot of this has moved onto Instagram and TikTok as a byproduct of people using phones as their primary "content consumption" devices

This needs to be repeated ad nauseum on HN.

For most people (especially those not working in jobs which require heavy amounts of writing, analysis, and reading), text is NOT the default method with which they interact and communicate information.

TikTok, IG reels, YouTube shorts, longer form YouTube content, podcasts, television, etc all feel "easier" and more "natural" for the vast majority of people.

[mananaysiempre]

Why does it need to be repeated? It is clear enough that the blogging era was a bit of an atypical period, that much is true; but why, on a website called Hacker News, should I need to care about what most people choose to do with their lives? Yes, in reality it’s partly VC News, but the mandate is intellectual curiosity, which most people have had beaten out of them by the time they were fourteen. Some amount of disdain for what most people end up doing by default, for what’s normal, etc., is absolutely instrumental to not having that happen to you.

(For what little it’s worth, and in the spirit of aforementioned curiosity: nausea gives you ad nauseam; with some caveats, a Latin noun in the singular governed by the preposition ad gets the ending -m while retaining the final vowel of its stem.)

[TFNA]

Even most of my nerd friends are consuming less and less longform text. It has been years now since budding hackers can pick up their coding skills through YT videos and now TikTok, and suggesting they read through longform documentation or an OReilly book just makes one look out of touch. HN's audience is as susceptible to the trend the GP mentions as anyone else.

[pona-a]

I'm currently learning electronics, as well as having just recently sat my Physics/Math finals. I can tell you with 100% certainty you CAN'T learn shit from /just/ video.

Actual learning requires you to think about what you just read, maybe re-read it multiple times, stop to try and solve a example problem, etc - all of which require you to stop/rewind which video inherently disfavors.

Besides, I think just like handwritten notes might have a slightly different neurological effect than typed ones, reading might just be a very different mental muscle more connected to comprehension; humans had oral language for much longer than any script, so maybe it came with some different connections to higher brain structures as well.

[faangguyindia]

Illusion of learning is more important than actually learning stuff to many.

[embedding-shape]

I prefer to separate it as "casual learning/curiosity" and "intentional learning" rather than something so crass. I'd admit to being an enjoyer of both, I have no dreams or illusions about me becoming civil engineer or city planner just because I like watching those sort of videos, even though they're informative as well as mostly just entertainment with unreliable narrators.

As long as you're conscious about what mode you're in (which to be fair, many probably aren't), I think it's fine.

[hluska]

The only thing you’re saying with “certainty” is that you personally cannot learn only from video. Anything else is pure hubris.

[cwmoore]

I’ll say this with certainty, video is terrible reference material.

Talk me through something the first time, sure, but if I need to look something up (yes, I know asking an LLM is available) I want a comprehensive subject guide, mostly in text, searchable by actual keywords.

[HappMacDonald]

> but why, on a website called Hacker News, should I need to care about what most people choose to do with their lives?

Well, when the question is "why did the blogs go away" the answer might be difficult to investigate by only considering a narrow slice of the potential audience for said blogs.

[coldtea]

>TikTok, IG reels, YouTube shorts, longer form YouTube content, podcasts, television, etc all feel "easier" and more "natural" for the vast majority of people.

That's not exactly neutral though, but part of a larger theme of regression from literacy to a visual and oral culture (and a dopamine seeking junky one).

[bobthepanda]

Audio is just easier to multitask with than reading.

[HDBaseT]

Audio may feel easier to multitask with, but how much do you actually retain?

[hombre_fatal]

One of the nicest things about multitasking audio is that it's easier to concentrate for a long time since I'm busying my body.

If I'm sitting down to read, my body thinks I'm trying to take a nap.

[aboardRat4]

I'm usually listening to the stuff I'm expecting to be not really worth retaining, but useful to skim though once.

Like "crime and punishment".

[Guthwine]

Alright I'll bite: What are you getting out of skimming through what is widely considered one of the greatest novels of all time? General plot points? That can be accomplished with a readthrough of the SparkNotes.

[aboardRat4]

Well, I might have been too harsh. Listening is better than "skimming". It is actually slower, so you're retaining more.

>greatest novels of all time

I was forced to read it at high school, finished about a quarter, didn't enjoy it a slightest bit, and managed to sabotage the rest of the reading successfully.

Many people told me that the book just wasn't fit for my age and maturity level, so I promised myself to re-read it as an adult. Now I am executing this plan.

I am still not impressed. Of course, the language is much better than what youtubers are speaking in, so listening is more pleasurable, but overall the book is underwhelming.

Dostoyevskiy himself admitted that the book is a merger of two drafts, none of which he managed to complete on its own, and indeed it feels like that.

The first component (which had been called "Drunkards" before the merger) is about the life of alcoholics. I cannot really reflect, since I never drank any alcohol at all. Perhaps it could teach me how to deal with them, but so far the most conclusion I have drawn is just "avoid".

The second component is a so-so detective story. It could have been better, if the protagonist hadn't been clearly mentally unwell. You know, any plot involving insane people is not really worth reading, because admitting that your character is a madman is basically saying "his motivations are not what real people have". Any question of the form "why did he do X", are immediately answered with "because he is a madman". Okay, fine, now what about actually describing real human behaviour?

>That can be accomplished with a read-through of the SparkNotes

No, not really. I can feel it quite well when something like this can be accomplished. Sometimes I start listening to a book, only to find out that listening doesn't work, I _need_ to see the words in order to understand what is going on. This happened more than once, so I am confident that it's not an exception.

[bediger4000]

This appears to be true for a plurality, or maybe just barely a majority of people.

I don't find audio so easily multi-tasks, unless we're using different definitions. My example: I find it very difficult to do something described in an audio or video format - rewire a light switch, say. I find it way easier to have text with a diagram. I can stop and check the text at any time. I find it easier to go back to previous sentences, than to rewind an audio or video.

[bobthepanda]

When i say multitask I mean that more literally. If you’re driving you can’t read, if you’re a passenger on public transit audio won’t make you motion sick, if you are cooking or cleaning you can have it on in the background, etc.

Reading requires the full use of your eyes, no way around that.

[bediger4000]

Fair enough - we have different definitions. If I have audio on while driving or cooking or cleaning, I can only half listen, I miss a lot. I have to be very careful with what I listen to while driving, lest it take my attention away from the road, so I only half agree with you.

[inigyou]

Video feels easier to consume but is it really easier to produce one that people find easy to consume?

[Zak]

The phones part is a red herring here. Phones work fine for reading text.

Video outcompeting text as a mainstream medium for both information and entertainment is as old as television. Youtube would be a more reliable way to make money than a blog in 2026 even if it was primarily consumed on TVs or PCs.

[coldtea]

>The phones part is a red herring here. Phones work fine for reading text.

Not as "fine working" as a book or a magazine or even a PC - not with 10 other districtions available in the form of different apps (and sending notifications), and not with that small of a screen.

Is that really controversial?

[mbonnet]

Yes. People don't want to go out and buy or borrow physical writing, or lug around a laptop, if they don't have to.

[heavenlyblue]

Your post is a red herring, some platforms simply replaced bespoke blogging websites. How would I, without any special services, consume multiple blogs today? It's so much easier with instagram/social media.

[xp84]

> consume multiple blogs today? It's so much easier with instagram/social media

I beg to differ. Follow 12 “people” on Insta and you’re just telling the algorithm you’re into parent stuff, or fashion, or makeup, or cars, or attractive women, or attractive men. It’s not like even 50% of what they serve you will BE those 12 people you followed. Most of what you get will be related to the same niches, but it’ll be from randos and AI instead.

It’s nothing like how simple RSS, Google Reader, or even Flipboard in its original iteration, made it to follow a bunch of specific “creators.”

[shant_extry]

I think the "randos and AI" is a significant part of the problem. Despite finding what you want (just speaking personally) I like the idea of supporting a creator and knowing that that creator is genuinely interested in the content they're producing. Not to put down someone who is trying to make some money out of it, but a creator who focuses too much on following trends might lose the "micro-niches" that some part of their audience might be interested in following them through.

[heavenlyblue]

Yeah but nobody uses RSS, which universe are you living in?

I love the idea of RSS yes.

[amarant]

I use RSS, it's great! Why aren't you using RSS?

[AlienRobot]

RSS.

[realityfactchex]

Correct.

It does not require a "service" to consume multiple blogs efficiently, just simply "software" (an app will do).

The below RSS readers pretty much do their job and get out of the user's way. What's amazing is the sheer number of RSS readers that people choose to use; there are so many, people find ones that they personally like.

On desktop: Vienna https://www.vienna-rss.com/

On iOS: R2SReader https://apps.apple.com/us/app/r2sreader/id1608635613

Of course, if one wanted to use a service (or run one oneself), for features like syncing, then that is possible too.

But the basic setup remarkably simple, easy, and useful by itself IMO.

[heavenlyblue]

None of that matters since instagram has more users etc. Jesus, the question is "why blogs disappear" - they disappear because users don't care about the value proposition of your RSS app. Most of them are quite shit anyway - little commonality in terms of styling etc.

[AlienRobot]

That's a completely different demand.

The question was "How would I, without any special services, consume multiple blogs today?"

You can do that with RSS.

Now you are saying it doesn't matter because everyone is on Instagram. So you aren't consuming "multiple blogs" in the first place, you're just consuming multiple Instagram accounts.

Keep in mind that nothing stops Instagram from providing RSS feeds for each user account.

You could literally just tell people to stop using Instagram and use Tumblr instead and the problem would solve itself. Tumblr hosts photos, photos albums, and videos, including blogs of several photographers. Tumblr has RSS feeds for each blog. You don't need to have a Tumblr account to follow blogs on Tumblr, you can just put them all into your RSS app and be done. You don't even need a separate RSS app. Vivaldi, a web browser, has an RSS client built-in.

Reddit has RSS feeds. Youtube has RSS feeds. Wordpress has RSS feeds (this is 50% of blogs, essentially). Mastodon has RSS feeds. Bluesky has RSS feeds.

There is nothing that we can do if people deliberately choose to go into a walled garden, but the open gardens still existand you have the full ability to use those instead.

Maybe if more people understood the value proposition of RSS's, they would have more reason to stop using Instagram and move.

[heavenlyblue]

I know about RSS, do your users know about RSS? Does a gradpa from midwest looking for a steak recipe care about RSS?

[inigyou]

We did have that. What was Mythbusters if not a YouTube show?

[pessimizer]

> If you look at "top 100" blogs in year n, I imagine that many of them will be dead in year n + 5 simply because people move on.

This is a far more dubious hypothetical. I imagine that the top 100 of anything (that a lot of people do) that brings in income or fame will still be there in 5 years. They're the most successful, most profitable of the bunch. How many of the top 100 companies in terms of revenue do you imagine will disappear in 5 years? I'd guess around 0.0%.

"People move on" is a meaningless statement. Why were there so many colon cancer deaths over the past 5 years? Well, people move on. Why do people move on?

> Also note that this specifically focuses on blogs designed to make money

i.e. blogging, which once brought in money, doesn't seem to as much anymore. Why?

[pinkmuffinere]

> I imagine that the top 100 of anything (that a lot of people do) that brings in income or fame will still be there in 5 years.

This sort of blanket assumption is exactly what the parent is arguing against. The mortality rate of top-n things is relatively easy to measure, and should be baselined first. Then we can compare recent performance vs historical performance, and actually say if something has changed. There's no need to start with the assumption "not much changes over 5 years" -- it can be measured instead.

[ijk]

If we use the S&P 500 as a proxy for the top 500 companies, I would guess that a lot more than 0% will be gone by the end of 5 years.

It's hard to find non-paywalled sources for business analysis, but from what I can find it'd be about 20%.

[socalgal2]

4.4% turn over per year, 22% in 5 years apparenty

https://www.exchangecapital.com/blog/why-the-sp-500-isnt-wha...

and accelerating apparently

https://blog.irvingwb.com/blog/2020/01/the-pace-of-creative-...

[coldtea]

>I find this study a bit weird because it doesn't really establish a baseline. If you look at "top 100" blogs in year n, I imagine that many of them will be dead in year n + 5 simply because people move on. So are we looking at the evidence of blogging going extinct, or just at the natural churn?

It's still interesting to see that "top 100" hugely succesful blogs can go so much down, even if it's "natural churn".

Then there's the fact that blogs in the "Top 100" are big business (money wise), often established for a decade or more, and have enough subscribers/viewers to spare. So unlikely to just be "dead" in n+5, just declining (which this tracks).

>Also note that this specifically focuses on blogs designed to make money and dealing with general-interest stuff like fashion or travel. A lot of this has moved onto Instagram and TikTok as a byproduct of people using phones as their primary "content consumption" devices.

So? That's an explanation for the drop. The post tracks the drop itself.