There are a lot of websites out there that use the word “future” in their domain name, but are they really futurist type websites? It is recommended often by print publishers and editors that the word “future” is a good word to use in titles, because it grabs people’s attention. But, when people use the word future and then do not give predictions or future accounts, then are they really deceiving the viewer and web-surfer. I believe they are.
Recently, an editor of a future of things type website asked me to write a column, but in reviewing the website I found it to be underwhelming on the futuristic side of things, and more heavy into the scientific news arena. Indeed, if the magazine is serious about “The Future” then why are all the articles about new scientific innovations in the present period or happening right now? – asked myself.
It looks like they are serious about scientific discovery that has already happened, not what will be in the future. That is just boring, more science news, regurgitation, typical human tactic of re-packaging information. I think they can do better, but are holding themselves back, afraid to make people think, worried that you will get too far from your mainstream, quote “core” group of viewers, which I believe they do not even understand.
Of course, as an entrepreneur, I know exactly why they do it this way. It is because they want to make money and thus sink to a lower level of readership, while still pretending to talk about the future of stuff. When the editor wished to defend such comments, the indication was that the site was mostly about scientific news.
Yes, I notice that the site is mostly a news site and I ask what does that have to do with the future of stuff? Shouldn’t the website be called NSIN.com or something like that; for New Science Innovation News? If the site is about Science News and is a collection of everyone else’s news, then it is a copy site of a genre that is already being used and not unique. Thus, the content is therefore the same, so even if the articles are written more clearly and easier to understand, which is nice, still what is the value to a “science news junky” as there are very few articles on the site compared with their competition?
If they called them selves a news site, then you could have “futurist type columnists” anyway, who might project these scientific news items into the future or they could keep the “Future Stuff” motif and promote the futurist columnists.
This should be a lesson to all “Futuristic” type websites as a case study. If you take the future thinkers to your website and have nothing to show them, they will leave. If you use trickery to get regular readers there, you are doing a severe disservice to the future of mankind, by promoting present inventions as the be all end all. Either way, it is unethical to use this tactic on future of things type websites.