The Internet Is Ruining Spoilers Trying To Prevent Ruining Spoilers
If you're a Walking Dead fan who missed this week's episode, God, do I feel sorry for you. I haven't watched the show in three seasons, and EVEN I KNOW WHO MIGHT HAVE DIED. By the way, this article puts me in a difficult spot...to prove my point I'm going to have to be part of the problem by potentially spoiling The Walking Dead's October 25th episode. So if by some miracle you watch the show and have absolutely no idea what or who I'm talking about, get the f*** off the internet right now because it will be spoiled for you if you don't!
Okay, now that the out of touch are out of sight...here's how the internet is ruining spoilers trying not to ruin spoilers.
THE PROBLEM (For Us Bloggers)
The world of entertainment is at an incredibly unique moment in time. People aren't going to the movies like they used to...and why would they? Movies are expensive, streaming is widespread and cheap, and television production value is at an all time high. Pick any one of those and you'll see why sites like GeekTyrant have grown exponentially in the past ten years. The following things are true about the average consumer of media:
- They only go to the movies if it's a "Blockbuster Event" (5 movies a year on average)
- They have thousands of options to stream on Netflix...but no idea what to watch...often streaming something they've seen or a TV series.
- They don't have enough time for all the shows they want to watch.
This has created a very weird type of reader that we regularly encounter in our day to day. They want to know everything they can about something, but they also don't want spoilers. They want to discuss a beloved franchise with friends, but dammit if they can find a place to do so because apparently they're the only person that's seen it.
We, along with many other sites, struggle with the balancing act of remaining relevant with content while ensuring that we don't spoil things to people. 100% of the time we piss someone off. There are variations and exceptions of course, but essentially these two accusations are constantly posted and discussed amongst the editors in the most 21st century "damned if you do, damned if you don't" scenario ever.
Example: "You'll Never Guess Who Was Cast As Mr. Freeze In Gotham!"
Angered reader: "Are you f****** kidding me?! How about some discretion in revealing villains in your titles?! SPOILERS"
Example: "Gotham Just Cast A Major Villain In The Series"
Angered reader: "Really. That was it? Seriously, I had to click that to waste my time? Click bait."
Not to pat ourselves on the back or anything (because we do mess up sometimes, trust me), but I thought we handled the cliff hanger episode of TWD this week very well. Props to Joey as he avoided the temptation to really drive in the discussion with "IS SPOILERS ALIVE OR NOT ON THE WALKING DEAD" (admittedly something I would do). Instead he went with...
THE WALKING DEAD SEASON 6: Episode 4 Promo And Sneak Peek "Here's Not Here"
Not at all a bad title...perhaps a little vague if someone living under a rock missed the episode and has no idea what happened. They might click it and be like WTF in the first paragraph and back the hell out. There's that special type of person though...bless them...that will somehow make all the way through a post laden with spoilers to the comments to post this...
I wish you guys that follow SDF would tag your comments with spoiler alerts. Not all of us want things to be ruined for us. Just sayin'.
WHICH BRINGS US TO
THE PROBLEM (For You)
You personally have to identify what level of information you consider spoiler-worthy.
If you are someone who wants zero information about anything you haven't seen yet, what in the ever loving s*** are you doing on the Internet, much less an entertainment site? Seriously, I have no sympathy for the person who sits on Facebook while a show is going on and then gets mad when people are talking about a show. In real life, you're sitting at a viewing party mean mugging everyone watching while you stick your fingers in your ears with your back to the television. That's on you.
There's a flip side to this, however, when we deal with movies.
Star Wars is a perfect example. I'm not going to lie, even if it is a fan theory, I don't care to hear even a hint that Luke Skywalker may be affiliated with...well, you know if you've been on the web. The line for spoilers is a bit grayer when it comes to film. Truthfully, I have no good answer about film spoilers. I feel like going completely dark into a film can lead to disappointment, but of course, clicking articles and learning about the film can be a gamble and lead to something you don't want. You know yourself better than we do, so use your discretion.
How We Are Ruining Spoilers...While Trying Not To Ruin Spoilers.
So in trying to keep from pissing off those who don't wish to be spoiled and those who don't want bait to click upon, bizarre s*** like this surfaces on the web.
SO IS [BELOVED CHARACTER] REALLY ZOMBIE MEAT
THE WALKING DEAD SPOILER SURVIVAL CONFIRMED
SORRY WALKING DEAD FANS BUT THAT DEATH WAS REAL
Those are real headlines, by the way, from sites similar to ours, and while they are great attempts to both show information and avoid spoilers, they completely miss the point. The spoiler is, for someone who hasn't seen the episode, that someone important may or may not die in the episode. It doesn't matter to the person who didn't watch what happens next...you've robbed them of the ability to witness what you did to the same extent. This happens so often at GeekTyrant and other sites it's not funny, and we need a solution.
Of course, there are far worse routes that "traditional" journalism can take. Like the Huffington Post's:
THE WALKING DEAD: IS GLENN REALLY DEAD?
The Solution?
That's the million dollar question, isn't it? What do you think the answer is? Seriously, I want a discussion — I'm genuinely curious your opinion on this trend lately. How do we as bloggers move forward to better serve you, the reader?