Fandom: Difference between revisions
Changed blockquotes even more. |
|||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
===Business Model=== | ===Business Model=== | ||
<blockquote>''"I briefly worked for Fandom last year, and I worked closely with GameSpot and TV Guide. After ten years in the editorial industry I had never seen editorial brands treated so poorly. Fandom is fundamentally a company that ONLY knows how to operate using an army of unpaid volunteer editors and have no clue whatsoever how to manage paid writers and editors. It was an absolute nightmare of mismanagement, and while I was going to bat hard for the editors (like what do I care about Fandom after a few weeks of working there, I literally only care about journalists being resourced well enough to keep their jobs and do great work) my management started drilling down on me pretty quickly. I wound up going on disability because the working conditions there exacerbated a mental health crisis (having to do with the nightmare layoffs at Condé that I'd just gone through), and eventually I left"'' </blockquote>Quote from a former FANDOM Employee in the article [https://gemvidio-navi.neocities.org/Tech/fandom-working-environment Behind the moderation of Fandom Wikis: Controversies, incidents, and toxicity] | <blockquote>''"I briefly worked for Fandom last year, and I worked closely with GameSpot and TV Guide. After ten years in the editorial industry I had never seen editorial brands treated so poorly. Fandom is fundamentally a company that ONLY knows how to operate using an army of unpaid volunteer editors and have no clue whatsoever how to manage paid writers and editors. It was an absolute nightmare of mismanagement, and while I was going to bat hard for the editors (like what do I care about Fandom after a few weeks of working there, I literally only care about journalists being resourced well enough to keep their jobs and do great work) my management started drilling down on me pretty quickly. I wound up going on disability because the working conditions there exacerbated a mental health crisis (having to do with the nightmare layoffs at Condé that I'd just gone through), and eventually I left"'' </blockquote>Quote from a former FANDOM Employee in the article [https://gemvidio-navi.neocities.org/Tech/fandom-working-environment Behind the moderation of Fandom Wikis: Controversies, incidents, and toxicity] | ||
[[File:Fandom Wiki - Path of Exile Ad Information.png|alt=Fandom Wiki Ads Monetization Information|thumb|Using external tools, you can see which ads are being displayed and how much Fandom is paid to display them on the wiki. The people who write the articles do not receive any monetization for these ads, just as Fandom does not tell the people who work on its wikis how much they actually earn from monetizing their content. (Source: [https://forkfandom.com/ ForkFandom] by Jacques Corby-Tuech)]] | |||
In mid-2008, the British newspaper The Guardian published an article about the ''[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/jul/31/wikipedia Transformer Wiki]'' migration, which was the first formal piece of criticism that the company described as “The typical digital sharecropping website is a capitalist's fantasy,” explaining that users who contribute to Fandom wikis do not receive rights, protections, or remuneration for the work they contribute to the website, while Fandom claims 100% of the ad revenue generated by user-generated content. | In mid-2008, the British newspaper The Guardian published an article about the ''[https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/jul/31/wikipedia Transformer Wiki]'' migration, which was the first formal piece of criticism that the company described as “The typical digital sharecropping website is a capitalist's fantasy,” explaining that users who contribute to Fandom wikis do not receive rights, protections, or remuneration for the work they contribute to the website, while Fandom claims 100% of the ad revenue generated by user-generated content. | ||