Jeffrey Zeldman Quotes

I think social media is good for promotion, stuff like that, but people are so negative. People are too negative. If you read the comments, it's just too negative.

It's a social life, or time to read the comment section: I prefer social life.

I love reading comments online.

I don't read the "letters" section of Time magazine. I think it's just my habit as a reader. I don't read comments on stories, in general.

Now, for my younger viewers out there, a book is something we used to have before the internet. It’s sort of a blog for people with attention spans.

I think it hurts blogs when they have to turn off their comments.

There is a generation of skimmers. It's not that they don't want to read in-depth content, but they want to evaluate what the content is before they commit time. Especially on a mobile phone - you don't have the phone, or cellular data, or screen size to be reading full-length content.

I'm very aware how many distractions the reader has in life today, how many good reasons there are to put the book down.

While I know that Twitter is doing just fine with or without my 140-character contributions, I also know that people are fickle, and when using something becomes too annoying, they stop.

In reality, if there are 200 people commenting on something online, it's less than a grain of salt in a huge beach of humanity - who cares?

I, perhaps wrongly, assume that people actually read articles that interest them rather than just headlines.

We're looking at dozens, sometimes hundreds of things every day in articles, videos, and we never look at them again. Even if we do like them, even if we tweet them out to all of our followers on Twitter, we don't return to it.

If you follow someone on Twitter, you're interested in what they have to say. When you get bored you follow someone else.

No one reads anything. They just look at images.

I get the weirdest comments on Instagram.

The money is in television. Books are not the dominant medium of our time, so fewer people will create them. In a sad way, books have become a form of "comfort food" we expect to lull us to sleep.

There's very little solid research on readership, yet people make pronouncements about it all the time.

A lot of people say, "Ah, Rush, don't read the comments. You can't. This is loony..." You can't ignore this stuff. These people vote, and they are huge in number, and every social media app you can find from Twitter to Facebook, to LinkedIn, whatever the hell it is, they dominate.

We live in a world that is so quick to lose people's attention, and to move on to the next thing. We live in a YouTube world, so it's hard to build something slow like you did fifteen or twenty years ago. You have to have the kind of show that keeps people interested.

It is reasonable to assume that, by and large, what is not read now will not be read, ever. It is also reasonable to assume that practically nothing that is read now will be read later.

People in general do not willingly read if they have anything else to amuse them.

I don't really care how people read. I care if people read.

Because so many people use goodreads, it is an amazingly good—and amazingly underutilized—resource for understanding what people read, why, and how they feel about their reading experiences.

I post probably 5 to 10 times a day in my forum. I have a forum directly related to my blog where I will write my blog and people will disagree with me and call me an idiot so then I will say this is why I wrote that and blah, blah, blah. I spend a lot of time online.

We started out on the Internet, so I've been reading what people had to say about stuff since we were getting mean comments on iFilm, before we even had our site going. People are really, really rough on the web - that's their right, that's the whole point of it - but sometimes it can be a little bit brutal.