Slashdot Mirror
Has AOL Lost Its Sex Drive?
TheViewFromTheGround writes "Why have the years since the merger with Time Warner been so hard on America Online? Michael Wolff, a consultant who advised Time Warner not to buy AOL in the early 90's, says that the the big problem is Time Warner's denial of AOL's core value: a monopoly on dirty chat. The argument says that AOL was successful because they had a critical mass of people and that it skillfully marketed talking dirty by appearing to be family friendly. Now, the old media bedfellow is pushing AOL to stop its pimping ways."
AOL offers a community feel. A safe-place for internet non-newbies to get warm fuzzies and feel happy and loved. Unfortunately, there are so many other online communities that it's no longer necessary to pay $23.95 for constant busy signals.
The primary reason people are still with AOL is that many of their subscribers don't feel like they have a choice. "I can't use something else because I don't know how to switch".
I recently moved my mother-in-law from AOL to Earthlink. She thanks me to this day, even though it's something she could have done.
-- People who hate Windows use Linux. People who love UNIX use BSD.
If AOL lost it's sex drive I think it showed up at Yahoo! My widowed 63 year old mother seems to find the raunchiest people to talk to on Yahoo somehow. I can't decide whether to let her have her fun or destroy her computer.
Didn't AOL buy Time Warner?? Shouldn't they be dictating what is going on?
AOL did buy Time Warner, but they helped "pay" for it in AOL stock options...which then proceeded to tank. This did not sit well with the Time Warner people, losing their millions, so they begin clearing the AOL house. I think Steve Case is one of, if not THE, only major original AOL person left and that's because the AOL brand is synonymous with him.
Support bacteria! It's the only culture most people seem to get.
I remember way back when I used AOL. It was an ok service provider. I didn't get busy signals like everyone else. The only gripe I ever had with AOL as in ISP was that in order to connect you had to run the bloated memory eating AOL software. Whereas for another dial up ISP I could use the super lite built in windows dial up networking. I don't want to have to use up all my RAM just to establish a connection. I always ended up minimizing the AOL software and using netscape or other programs.
AOL was always so dumb with the way they sent out their discs. I got some in collector tins (like altoids tins).
Their problem isn't that somebody just up-and-decides they need internet access. It's in being around when somebody finally decides they do need to get online. Nothing about the AOL discs inspires someone to keep them around. What they should have been doing is include some additional content that makes you want to hold onto the disc. They're paired with TimeWarner for goodness sakes, you'd think that would give them compelling content. The folks in AOLs marketing department are just stupid with the way they spend money on those discs. (not that I'm not thankful for the few free DVD holder cases)
I don't know if this is still true (the last time I used AOL was about '94), but once you started using the free hours, AOL needed a credit card number. Just in case you, uh, go over the limit. What they didn't tell you is that if you did go over the limit, you wouldn't be notified; they just quietly started billing you. Then it was the devil's own work to try and get them to stop, and especially to get your CC out of their database.
fact is, all of my friends who were aol addicts were hooking up with girls online. that's why they had aol, period. now, they're doomed to be a first rate version of msn, and that aint sayin much.
"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
They force you to use their dialer, meaning you can't do simple dial-up networking sharing, auto-dialing. Other ISPs use these but still allow you to set up an (unsupported) PPP connection using standard tools
Said dialer software is full of adverts. AOL/Time Warner removed popup handling abilities from Netscape for this reason, I believe.
At one point, you had to use their own browser
It forces you to have Real Player installed (evil) and complains every time you dial in if you remove it
They ask for your credit card during the trail for verification etc then automatically start billing you without warning. Cancelling used to be difficult and often went "wrong".
You are paying over the odds because the service has great customer help, which is useless to techies. (I'd recommend it to non-techies for this reason tho)
They send junk mail. Lot's of it. Regularly. To the same people.
Said junk mail is not just recyclable paper, it's a cd-rom and a complete waste of resources and bad for environment as it needs to be disposed of in landfills.
Typically, lamers and newbies were on AOL. A large majority of HTML posts to usenet are from AOL and other anti-social net activites are common, hence the term AOLamer
They encourage parents to give up responsibility for their children's safety into the hands of parental controls in software.
They encourage parents to give up responsibility for helping their children with their education since "homework help is just a breeze on AOL"
Their business model depends on people no realising that they are out of free hours and are going to be charged unless they perform some frustrating and time-hungry tasks to cancel the service. Essentially, they depend on the users thinking they know the whole story when really, they don't until they are forced to pay more.
They give a misconception of 'the internet' to new users. Some people think that surfing aol:// addresses means they are on the internet.
They are an ecological menace. Most of the CDs they send out are trashed. Also, consider the waste put out to make the components of the CDs and electricity expended to make something which just fills our landfills faster.
They reward ignorance. They make it acceptable for you to know nothing about computers and be happy with it even though you are using them as an integral part of your life. (Please no automobile analogies.)
The stifle choice. Supposedly part of the big news for AOL 8 is that you can now choose between 8 welcome screens and change the colours of your AOL interface ... oooooh ....
It takes a everything short of a lawsuit to make them stop billing you.
AOL does not introduce people to the Internet, it dumbs down the Internet, thereby hurting the users in the process. 90% of the AOL users I've had to deal with think their Web Browser is the "Internet". And after years of thinking this, it is almost impossible to get them to understand the truth.
AOL harbors undesirable individuals much like certain middle eastern nations harbor militant terrorists. What's worse, with all the free 1000 hour disks floating about, individuals who mean ill to the 'Net at large can easily gain free access over and over to do more damage.
The service is crap. But since most AOL users have been coddled for so long, they CAN'T learn to use anything else; they are stuck w/ sub par service...
If I think of some more reasons (I know there's a few more)... I'll post another response... :P
;-)
Just a few thoughts from the top of my head...
My Dad uses AOL because they provide local dial-in numbers in a large number of countries. He travels a LOT for business, to places like Bangladesh, Brazil, Chile, etc. All those places have local numbers where he can dial in and get his email on his laptop.
That DSL line at home isn't going to do him any good then, is it?
Also, he's not a computer geek, so it's not like he cares about getting the latest release of Kazaa or anything.
AOL may not appeal to you, but there are plenty of people out there for whom it works just fine, since their needs aren't very high. YMMV, mang.
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
I'm not a big fan of AOL, in fact, I dislike it, but the premise for Wolff's argument is so tenuous. If it were written by one of my students, I would give it a D. As evidence, he presents one account of John Podhoretz, an alleged conservative. That's just one "fact." It's not hard evidence!
As anyone who has ever used AOL realizes, not everyone uses it for the chatrooms. In fact, as evidenced by the immaturity of such chatters, most of the people talking are teenagers, and they are more concerned with "a/s/l" questions than the formation of physical relationships.
If AOL's PR firm presents it as "family friendly," it's because the company wishes to be seen as the family friendly ISP solution. They aren't involved in some bizarre "yes means no" advertising scheme where "family friendly" really means "dirty talk dating service."
So, I'll conclude this with one question: Where's the proof?
and we were challenged with coming up with room names that might be borderline questionable. One of our jobs was browsing the room names and privatizing names like the one you mentioned. These rooms were still available, but you had to know the room name to get in. I did come up with a room name that no one could ever make a policy decision about whether or not it would be "closed" to the public. My room name was, "Morning Wood on Back Nine".
It's easy to stand out when the general level of competence is so low.
The fall of CNN from reputable news source to racing Fox News to the bottom of the filth was terribly depressing. I used to watch CNN Headline News regularlly. The news moved quickly, the anchors were serious and limited themselves strictly to the news, and the reporting was relatively unbiased for mainstream media. In thirty minutes (any thirty minutes) I could get a quick summary of the world's news. It was perfect background as I went about my mornings.
Then the changes. They got rid of all of the old anchors and replaced them with irritatingly perky youngsters. The broadcasts become full of inane banter between various anchors. They filled the screen with sidebars and tickers and newsflashes. They created more and longer needless story animations (Dum dum dum, *horns*, "The WAR on TERROR " *horns*). Then it happened... near the end of last year (or was it the year before?), the bubbly airhead anchor introduced "a special report on purchasing gifts online." Well, vapid... but I guess. "As reported by our special AOL correspondant." Erm, that's an amazingly uncomfortable conflict of interest. The "AOL correspondant" then proceeded to tell me all the great stuff I could buy using AOL. No web sites, no general tips. AOL specific content. I turned off my television. Years of my watching for a half hour a day, of my general like of CNN HN, destroyed. To hell with big media.
Search 2010 Gen Con events
You know, all this "safe internet" shit really bothers me. I'm tired of "kids" movies. I'm tired of "kids" television. I'm tired of hearing everybody kow-towing (is that how that's spelled?) to kids.
All, right, yes, yes, yes: kids are important. I know that. I don't deny that. But for fuck's sake: I'm important, too. And while my idea of decent entertainment isn't hardcore porn 24/7, it's not the teletubbies either. It's not Blues Clues. And it's not all the shit that the networks pimp out during their "safe hours."
I watch the Sopranos because it's entertaining. I don't give a rat's ass if it's goddamn offensive, because life is fucking offensive. Sadaam Hussein is fucking offensive.
Fundamentalist religious idiots offend me. I'm offended by Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, all the right-wing religious zealots who appear on late-night cable and who have -- I'll say this now because it's been on my mind for years -- the weirdest fucking hair-dos I have ever seen.
What is it with these wacko Christian fudamentalists? What's with the hair? Why does all their hair -- men, women, it doesn't matter -- swoop and wave and look like Donald Trump on acid?
Speaking of which, Donald Trump offends me.
Bin Laden offends me.
All this terrorism shit offends me. And, no, one man's freedom fighter is not another man's terrorist. If you fucking kill civilians -- innocent men, women, and children -- you're a goddamn terrorist. And you offend me. I don't give a fuck if you think the civilians are paying taxes to the evil government. You don't go killing people who can't defend themselves. Period. If you wanna blow shit up, put on a goddamn uniform, grab your rusty-ass Kalishnikovs, and goddamn claim a fucking state to be your backer. But don't hide in the fucking shadows.
I'm tired of the Anti-Americanism. True, America is big and bad and loud. But we're not the *SOLE* cause of misery in the world. I'm tired of nations who just blame, blame, blame and don't accept even a modicum of responsiblity.
I'm offended by the local news. I'm offended by dippy newscasters who worry about whether or not their colleagues have given them a good "segue" to talk about the next story. Because (a) no one except dippy newscasters give a fuck about "segues" and (b) no one but dippy newscasters tease their fucking audience so much and after *every* fucking segment.
"But will this beautiful weather last? Tune in at 10!"
"But will the snow come? Tune in at 10!"
That offends me. Local news and the way they manipulate you. Not all media offends me. I like the New York Times. But the Chicago Tribune is a fucking joke. There's *nothing* to read in the Tribune. It's like some goddamn newspaper for fifth graders.
Bob Greene creeped me out. But he's gone now. I knew he was bad news years and years ago. I'm disappointed it took this long to toss his ass out of the cubicle and onto the pavement.
I miss Mike Royko. I like eating lunch at the Billy Goat Tavern. I like cheesburgers and Pepsi. So fucking sue me. I like the grease on the burgers.
And I like White Castle. Bring it on, motherfucker. I'll take that bag of fifteen sliders. Sure, I'll get sick after I eat it and shorten my lifespan, but I'd rather shorten my fucking lifespan in one moment of enjoyment than worry about it being prematurely shortened by the four tons of VX that Sadaam has hidden in some Libyan bunker that'll get wheeled out and shipped back to Iraq once the shooting starts.
My point? Life is offensive. Suck it up. I watched my share of Sesame Street and Electric Company and Mr. Rogers, but that's fine. Those shows were there for me. And I appreciated it. Just like Blues Clues and those fucking weird-ass teletubbies "Teletubby Bye Bye" are there, too. But give folks a break. Not everything has to be kid safe.
ANd now, on-topic:
The concept of an internet community is bullshit. AOL was never a goddamn community. It was dirty chat. Who here hasn't dirty chatted on AOL? No one.
And who here realized after you dirty chatting you were chatting to some legless freak that was just duping your sorry ass into thinking, well, maybe this dirty chat stuff isn't so bad after all?
Hell, I remember when AOL started and they charged by the hour. I ran up a goddamn huge ass bill on account of my pud-whacking chats to legless freaks of (most likely) both, neither, either, or sexes. God knows who I was talking to. But, the idea of a community is bullshit. It was just a place to talk dirty and hope for the best.
Cross your fingers, maybe this freak is the girl/guy/whatever of your dreams. But of course it wasn't, and you immediately knew it when, after pressing for more information, you received the IM that said, "Well, wait. Listen. There's something you should know."
Besides, if you want "safe" communities, there's the real world. Don't mistake virtual pudwhacking for real world social interaction. It never was, is, or will be. It's every man and women for themselves, god save the queen, hold your nose, because here I come, baby.
Everybody whacks their puds, lets be honest. But lets at least stand up and like that guy in Network say, "I'm mad as hell and not going to take it anymore." At least not in the virtual wastelands like AOL.
AOL has been on it's way out for years. Time Warner's merger with AOL was dumb.... and not just "regular" dumb... really really dumb.
At one point in time AOL had a fairly nice product to offer; however, over time AOLs service became bloated, annoying, sloppy, and restrictive. Fortunately, AOL had the dot-com bubble to keep them, and their horrible product, profitable. AOL had tons ad revenue coming in from numerous dot com companies, and many consumers where still new to the concept of being "online."
Yet now most of AOLs ad clients have either bit the dust or come to realize that banner ads and spam are not necessarily the best way to advertise. Moreover, now that a number of people in the world have had a chance to use the internet sans AOL (ie, LANs at work, schools, libraries, etc), folks are beginning to realize that AOL is a huge POS.
If Time Warner actually -thought- about what AOL was selling and how they were making money I doubt these two companies would have merged. But, hey, that didn't happen.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
AOL was not the first company to deploy an instant messaging service that was availible internet wide, ICQ was and that is where the whole cyber-sex thing started. It was easy to find a partner via ICQ and it's random "Men Seeking Women" (etc...) friend finder was a god-sent to helpless, love-sick nerds everywhere (all-be-it porly sorted and managed). Simply put, AOL took an existing technology, put a family friendly coat of make-up on it and a "I don't like those dirty bad nasty words" fuction and called it good for a mere ~$23. Once again we've seen a monopoly take an existing technology, made it friendly, then made it availible. The only step that they're missing from various other monopolies is making it cheap. The last thing most of us will ever dream of seeing is an AOL user switching over to a better, faster connection.
Isn't everybody using YAHOO now anyway?
I mean seriously, you can search out a chat-room by your state, do voice with the whole room, deal with booting, view web-cams, and basically just talk some serious shit to underage and overweight people.
I thought Yahoo Fuck-Chat was WAY more popular than AOL Fuck-Chat these days? Maybe AOL just never noticed this?
*(You boot them or they boot you... it becomes a pissing contest about who is the bigger skript kiddie, of course... but that's life in this primarily lamer-driven internet we live in now days.)
"Everything you know is wrong. (And stupid.)"
Moderation Totals: Wrong=2, Stupid=3, Total=5.
Uh huh. Was this before or after IRC?
So now they're trying to tell us that AIM came out before ICQ? ICQ was the first Instant Messenger I used. I remember when AIM came out and it was LONG after ICQ. Then AOL bought Mirabilis and the ICQ client slowly degenerated into an advertising channel with a messaging feature. (Now I use Miranda)
'scuse me?! I was using ICQ over dial-up almost five years ago, if I've done the math right. The friend that introduced me to it had a five digit ICQ number. My sister got an ICQ account before AIM came out and she's non-technical. Then all her friends signed up.
I'll let them off the hook for the last one because ICQ2Go didn't come around until after Mirabilis was purchased by AOL. There may still have been someone who did it before they did, I don't know.
My username does not make me Apathetic. It's irony, get it?
-----
Free P2P Backup, Windows & Linux
The author of the article, Michael Wolff, wrote a book called Burn Rate back in 1998. Its all about how his small media company got sucked into the DotCom revolution, nearly made him very rich and nearly bankrupt, and generally pointed out that the bubble was going to burst, two years before it did. Most of his attempts to sell his company for lots of cash involved AOL, so he has plenty more to say about them in the book. And he made this point about AOL as the 'ultimate brown paper bag' in that book, so the article in a large part is just a rehash of his own work of four years ago. Still, a good book and a decent article.