Discover drivel

1. 83

   Rupert Taylorposted 17 months ago

   An article has appeared on Discover that promotes a wild conspiracy theory about a plan to poison us all with airplane contrails loaded with nasty chemicals. The writer then warns us that this is against God's plan with several Biblical quotes.
   
   It shouldn't be necessary to refute such drivel, but here's the BBC, a usually reliable source.
   
   https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-62240071
   
   "They are made up mostly of water and are called contrails or vapour trails, but a growing number of people falsely believe they are evidence of something sinister going on.
   "Some think malign forces are spraying the population with dangerous chemicals - so-called chemtrails - for purposes that are neither entirely clear nor consistent.
   "A surge in conspiratorial thinking following the Covid pandemic along with the summer travel season and clear skies mean the once obscure chemtrails theory is now being promoted by major influencers."
   
   The title also blames this nefarious activity on "Globalists," a well-known anti-semitic codeword. See the article "The Origins of the 'Globalist' Slur" in The Atlantic, another authoritative source.
   https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/ar … ur/555479/
   
   The writer has other articles on Discover claiming that "globalists" are plotting to ruin our lives.
   
   My point is how is this sort of garbage allowed to pollute Discover? I reported it at the HubPages stage yet it is deemed of high enough quality to be promoted to Discover.
   
   Yes, this is a rant, but I strenuously object to being on the same platform of this sort of nonsense.

   replyreport
   1. STAFF

      Matt Wellsposted 17 months agoin reply to this

      Send a link to the article to team@hubpages.com and I will take a look.

      replyreport
   2. 84

      SerenityHaloposted 17 months agoin reply to this

      I wish there was Discover for articles that don’t quite fit a niche and another lower level for articles that are significantly worse.

      replyreport
2. 69

   PaulGoodman67posted 17 months ago

   The views expressed in the article definitely sound like drivel. Whether that disqualifies it from Discover, I don't know. My understanding was that if an article doesn't break some very basic rules then it can get into Discover.
   
   I'd be happier without nonsense conspiracy but it appears to be everywhere nowadays.
   
   If someone did actually "discover HubPages" via Discover, they might conclude that the entire site is a poor source of accurate information and advice.

   replyreport
3. 83

   Rupert Taylorposted 17 months ago

   I'm told I've got it all wrong. Google, the arbiter of what the world shall and shall not read, does not connect the bilge on Discover to the better quality stuff on the niche sites and therefore doesn't negatively impact the HP brand. How this is known is a mystery to me.
   
   The editors have recently been evaluating the contents of Owlcation, where much of my output resides. Several dozen of my articles have been deemed unfit for the niche because they don't attract enough views. Once judged to be of the highest quality, these stories must now rub shoulders with conspiracy theory claptrap and racist bunkum.
   
   My only recourse is to remove them and forego the dribble of pennies they generate.

   replyreport
   1. 69

      PaulGoodman67posted 17 months agoin reply to this

      The reason that HP created Discover was for it to be a kind of purgatory for the stuff that the Google algorithm is iffy about.
      
      The algorithm deals with search rankings, not the brand which is a different thing.
      
      Discover stuff doesn't influence the rankings for the niches because the site has its own URL/domain so the algorithm sees it as a completely separate entity.
      
      Whether Discover influences the HP brand is a harder question. I kind of understand the "Discover HubPages" concept they were going for but whether it was a good idea, I don't know... It might have been better just to leave out the HubPages mentions altogether.
      
      I do the same as you, if I can't get an article accepted into a niche, I delete or move it. That said, there used to be lots of alternative platforms to choose from but it's hard to find other options nowadays.
      
      Substack seems to be the place that writers are going if they completely hate writing for the search engines. It seems difficult to get a following and earn there, though, unless you already have a strong following.

      replyreport
4. 83

   Rupert Taylorposted 17 months ago

   There you go Paul. As I thought, it's beyond my comprehension and I have zero interest in learning about algorithms and the dark arts of the internet. It takes me back to school days when Fruity Brown would be at the blackboard banging on about Pythagoras and Euclid as I dozed in the back row.
   
   I have semi-successfully made it into my ninth decade with complete ignorance about algebra, calculus, and all those pesky theorems.

   replyreport
   1. 69

      PaulGoodman67posted 17 months agoin reply to this

      It does create a certain irony, though.
      
      If you want to comment and draw conclusions about a topic without actually learning about it, then the risk is that you end up like the chemtrails guy.
      
      SEO can get super-complicated and much of it is certainly beyond my capabilities. However, the basics of how search engines work is no more challenging than the BBC article you posted about chemtrails.

      replyreport