In defense of ‘clickbait’ — and why journalists should stop being so snobby

[Commentary] A new piece in the New York Times that takes on the idea that the chase for page views and eyeballs in the modern journalistic age has created a depressing sameness of content and a lack of the sort of in-depth reporting that most people got into the profession for. The piece compares the creation of this allegedly ephemeral content to eating a bag of Doritos; it scratches an itch in the moment but just isn't any good for you. To which Kevin Merida, the managing editor of The Washington Post, says this: “I like Doritos. We’re in the business of people reading our work. If we were to ignore the information that people are talking about, we would be news snobs.”

I like Doritos, too. I also like a steak. And chicken fingers. And Brussels sprouts. (For real, I do.) And yogurt. You get the idea. Liking Doritos doesn't preclude liking other, better-for-you options too. To suggest that it's all one or all the other suggests that people are entirely one-dimensional in their consumption habits; either you like Doritos and eat them every day all day or you don't. There's no in-between. As a news organization, your goal should be to make sure you are providing content not only for for all sorts of people but also for one person who might want to read about Morgan Freeman's granddaughter being stabbed to death one minute and the White House's fight against heroin the next. We need to do all of the above. To ignore writing stories that we know -- through Facebook, Google news or other tools -- people want to read is (a) dumb and (b) remarkably snobby. (Sidebar: To do ONLY those sorts of stories would be a massive mistake.) We are simultaneously servicing reader wants and needs in real time while also doing the longer-form investigative journalism that made The Post famous. That's journalism how it should be.