If you (as you yourself put it) get bonuses based on the traffic you get, are you not "getting paid based on the traffic you bring in"? The fact that you get a base paycheck doesn't belie this fact.
Well, sure. I don't want to argue semantics. But the implication in this conversation is that I need to trawl for traffic in order to pay my bills, which isn't true. We simply get a bonus based on performance, as is standard at most jobs.
My original reply was expressing interest in the headline culture Kotaku encourages and how it directly affects traffic which in turn allows you to meet targets and receive bonuses. I never suggested you were paid 'per hit', merely how those sensational headlines ultimately translate into earnings.
Also if there were any assumptions made you may be, incidentally, responsible due to statements like this:
Haha. Fair enough. That's an exaggeration to prove a point. If nobody reads the website, I don't have a job.
Let's talk about this "headline culture" you brought up. I believe that a good headline is honest, attention-grabbing, and clear to as many people as possible (in other words, I might use something like "The People Who Made Metroid Prime" because more people know what Metroid Prime is than what Retro Studios is). My goal with a headline is to get you to read the article, not just because I want your traffic but because I want people to read the things I write. A good headline gets your attention
without being misleading, dishonest, or using gimmicks to get you to click.
As with all writing, headline-writing at Kotaku can be tricky, and sometimes we make mistakes. When we do, we try to fix them.
So all that said, what are your issues with this approach? Other than the "clueless" thing, are there any specific Kotaku headlines you take issue with?
