If This Is What Life After Curation Looks Like I Might Lose My Mind.

Summary

The author expresses frustration over an unfunny and poorly written article about Grammarly Pro being promoted in Medium's Daily Digest newsletter, questioning the curation process and its reliance on algorithms.

Abstract

The article on the undefined website discusses the author's disappointment with Medium's curation system, as evidenced by a humor piece on Grammarly Pro that lacked humor, originality, and accurate grammar despite the service it promoted. The author, who has enjoyed humorous content from the same author before, is puzzled and dismayed by the selection of such low-quality content for distribution, especially in a humor publication. The piece in question, filled with repetitive mentions of "Grammarly Pro" and basic grammatical errors, seems to contradict Medium's stated editorial standards. The author's bewilderment leads to a rant about the potential reasons behind the promotion of subpar content, ranging from mindless algorithms to nepotism, and ultimately questions the integrity of the curation process on Medium.

Opinions

The author is bitter and frustrated that an article of poor quality, which seems to lack human touch and humor, is being promoted over presumably more deserving content.
There is a suspicion that the curation process may be heavily influenced by algorithms or other non-editorial factors, rather than human judgment and quality standards.
The author feels that the promoted article does not meet the high editorial standards that Medium claims to uphold, nor does it provide value or consider the reader's experience.
The author is concerned that if curation is solely bot-driven, it could negatively impact the quality of content on Medium and the morale of writers striving for excellence.
A sense of injustice is conveyed regarding the selection process for content distribution, with the author feeling that their own and others' high-quality work is being overlooked.

Just a little rant

The top recommendation in Medium’s Daily Digest newsletter this morning, was an article about Grammarly Pro.

It had been published in one of Medium’s humour publications so I thought I’d have a chuckle before I got to work. After all, I use Grammarly, I like laughing, what could possibly go wrong?

The four-hundred and thirty-nine-word article which greeted me contained the phrase “Grammarly Pro” thirteen times, plus once more in the title. Yet it failed spectacularly to tell me anything remotely interesting or useful about the software. It also had numerous basic grammatical errors. (Even though it’s about Grammarly Pro, Grammarly considers it to be “a bit bland”.)

Perhaps worst of all, it contained zero humour. Not because the author doesn’t know how to be funny, I’ve read funny stuff by them before. There simply weren’t any discernible attempts to write anything funny in the article.

Now, I don’t want to subtly imply that I’m bitter because writing like this is being signal boosted through Medium’s newsletter while mine isn’t. I want to state it so loudly, clearly and emphatically that there’s nothing subtle about it. You’re goddamn right I’m bitter!

How is stuff like this being selected for distribution? Mindless algorithms? Blind chance? Shameless nepotism? It’s not just my own writing I’m grieving for here. There’s oodles of witty, original, high-quality content being shared on Medium every day. It’s downright criminal that an article which appears to have been written by a bot is being pushed in front of readers’ eyeballs.

It doesn’t meet a high editorial standard. It doesn’t add value. It’s not written with the reader in mind. It’s precisely none of the things Medium claims to look for in the articles it selects for distribution. So why is this being distributed? Why is it in a humour publication? Why does it exist?!

Look, I’m perfectly happy to compete against good writing. Truly I am. Good writing is inspiring, it’s educational, it’s entertaining. It motivates me to make my writing stronger. If I’m having to work my way up the ladder because better, more talented writers are enjoying the view from the upper rungs, I have no complaints.

But if the curation process is being entirely run by bots now, (which I’m forced to assume is the case, because no literate human being would have selected this), there’s no way my sanity will cope. Seriously, what gives?!

Anyway, I guess that’s enough. Rant over. I’m off to cancel my newsletter emails and try to write something useful.