and fini was hit by a carse could band needed help. call one eight hundred, i called the barnes firm.n that was the best call i could ve made. i m rich barnes. it s hard for people to know how much their accident case is let our injury attorneys know he how much their accident cget the best result possible. cnn s platforming of donald trump last night and the ensuing lies, attacks and implicit embrace of violence for his own political ends raises questions we all have to grapple with today. have we learned nothing since 2016? it s a question our next guest, ben smith, thoughtfully unpacks in his new book traffic which examines the rise of former internet media powerhouses like buzzfeed, the huffington post and gawker, how they were catapulted to prominence by facebook and how their and facebook s need for ever-increasing viewership and engagement numbers contributed to the election of the
that, to this day, remains loyal to trump, and probably consumes mostly right-wing media. but back in the day, back just a decade earlier, it wasn t really like this. as ben smith describes in his new book, big media sites like gawker, and the huffington post, and buzzfeed, they use their platforms to generate clicks and traffic. they were not necessarily in pursuit of advancing one candidate or ideology. they were there to monetize the attention of an audience. as editor and chief of buzzfeed news from 2011 to 2020, smith helped establish the sites bona fide news department. but even from that perch, he admits he didn t see how right-wing figures would later co-op the blocking and social media structures that some had once believed would further progressive caucus. smith writes, i certainly hadn t realize the extent to which right-wing populism always seemed to be sitting just down the white ikea table from this progressive internet scene, looking over its shoulder, learning its lesso
gawker, and the huffington post, and buzzfeed, they use their platforms to generate clicks and traffic. they were not necessarily in pursuit of advancing one candidate or ideology. they were there to monetize the attention of an audience. as editor and chief of buzzfeed news from 2011 to 2020, smith helped establish the site s bona fide news department. but even from that perch, he admits he didn t see how right-wing figures would later co-op the blocking and social media structures that some had once believed would further progressive causes. smith writes, i certainly hadn t realize the extent to which right-wing populism always seemed to be sitting just down the white ikea table from this progressive internet scene, looking over its shoulder, learning its lessons. gasoline can create useful energy but it can also simply burn. and by 2023, it seemed clear that the power of this new social energy had been to destroy any institution from the media to the political
trump s press corp. you communicate directly with our citizens without having to go through the fake news filter, very simple. together you reach more people than any television broadcast network by far, not even close. the white house estimated that those social media stars had an estimated reach of 100 million people. that is nearly a third of the american population. a strong 30% of the population that to this day remains loyal to trump and probably consumes mostly right-wing media. but back in the day, back just a decade earlier it wasn t really like this. as ben described in his new book big media sites like gawker, and huffington post and buzzfeed use their websites to generate clicks and traffic. they weren t necessarily in the pursuit of advancing one candidate or ideology. they were there to monetize the attention of an audience. as editor-in-chief of buzzfeed
as we look at a completely new media landscape, that in some ways is reverting back to the old, what were deemed sort of din dinosaurs, coming back into prominence as some of these others go away. there was this early moment on the internet, and i was marginally part of it, like gawker and buzzfeed, like you were flying and suddenly you had instruments and you could see everything and you could see exactly who was looking at what. and when it came to this kind of political stuff, you could see, wow, the most divisive stuff, sometimes the most, the stuff that pushes the edge hardest is what attracts people. and facebook built this kind of a mechanism, where they were looking for engagement, looking to see, what do people stick to and what will people comment on? and often people will comment on the most outrageous thing, the most shocking thing. and there was a period that i think alienated a lot of people from these platforms, where that was where you opened facebook. and what you sa