How did this article make the New York Times? It’s awful.
I listened to the entire Snap conference call and Spiegel directly attributed the drop in active users to the app redesign, a fact that wasn’t mentioned until 2/3 of the way through the article.
Moreover, they gave no guidance for DAU projections, and merely said that historically fewer users are active in the third quarter than the second. This does not equate to a longer trend, it simply implies that fewer people are active in the late summer months than the late spring/early summer which seems to make sense.
It seems like the NYT more and more either wants to report negatively on the social media industry or has more success from these sensationalist headlines. What happened to thoughtful fact-based reporting?
>Spiegel directly attributed the drop in active users to the app redesign
I wouldn't be surprised. Navigation is all over the place in Snapshot. Try sending a snap, and now I'm suddenly view stories from people I don't know, with no clear way of getting out. I can see some users jut giving up on using the app.
The new Snap design is awful. It's confusing and difficult to use and overly pushes promoted content onto me. I am a young male, I don't care what snap chat stories some women's fashion magazine (or any other 'mainstream media' for that matter) are publishing. Why does Snap try and push it in my face?
Snap could have been something amazing, a true rival to Facebook perhaps, but now instagram just does it all better.
> How did this article make the New York Times? It’s awful.
The NYT is widely regarded to have turned a corner in the early 2000's, with the decision to put a color picture on the front and, in 2003, the cringe-inducing drum beat of the Iraq War.
I listened to the entire Snap conference call and Spiegel directly attributed the drop in active users to the app redesign, a fact that wasn’t mentioned until 2/3 of the way through the article.
Moreover, they gave no guidance for DAU projections, and merely said that historically fewer users are active in the third quarter than the second. This does not equate to a longer trend, it simply implies that fewer people are active in the late summer months than the late spring/early summer which seems to make sense.
It seems like the NYT more and more either wants to report negatively on the social media industry or has more success from these sensationalist headlines. What happened to thoughtful fact-based reporting?