Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Consumerist)   Apple: You paid for season 5 of Breaking Bad ... but this is season 5.5, PAY UP   (consumerist.com) divider line 91
    More: Dumbass, Apple TV  
•       •       •

5324 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 12 Aug 2013 at 7:34 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



91 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-12 10:49:33 PM  
I recently discovered that audiobooks bought through apple are a one-shot deal. Delete them? They're gone.  This is not the case with Amazon (via audible), or apple music.

Just mad that they don't mention that (surprise) anywhere.
 
2013-08-12 10:57:31 PM  

ZeroCorpse: I haven't started watching this show yet... It's in my Netflix queue. Once the show's over entirely, I'll wait a while and then start watching it.


Definitely worth watching.  It takes a couple episodes to get started, but once it's moving, it becomes very addictive.

/can't wait to see what happens in the last seven episodes.
 
2013-08-12 11:02:19 PM  

Dwight_Yeast: ZeroCorpse: I haven't started watching this show yet... It's in my Netflix queue. Once the show's over entirely, I'll wait a while and then start watching it.

Definitely worth watching.  It takes a couple episodes to get started, but once it's moving, it becomes very addictive.

/can't wait to see what happens in the last seven episodes.


Well, I like Cranston, so I'm sure I'll like the show. It helps that the fans are annoying pricks, too. I might be a bit more hesitant if the fans called themselves Breaking Baddies and obsessed about casting all the actors in every other show and movie ever mentioned while wearing Etsy-bought clothes that look like the ones worn by the Breaking Bad characters.

Luckily, the show's fans seem to be the sane variety.
 
2013-08-12 11:03:56 PM  

EvilMonkeyBoy: tenpounds trolls entertainment threads now, too?

What an age we live in...


I think the crazies in the politics tab stopped responding to his even crazier ass, so he has to resort to trolling tabs that don't know he's a troll. Trolling what many consider the best show on TV is prime real estate for a troll like him, but it's too obvious.
 
2013-08-12 11:04:25 PM  

gnosis301: This has been old news ever since I bought MLP season 3 last year.


a) season 3 was short because they wanted to reach the 65 episosde mark.
b) no one ever claimed there was gonna be a second half to season 3
corollary: season 4 is going to be the full 26 episodes and is labeled as such, rather than part of season 3.

that said, I think it's a dick move if your first season got you X number of episodes and the 2nd season got you half of that and you paid the same amount for both.
 
2013-08-12 11:13:28 PM  
and this is typical of apple users wanting a handout.
 
2013-08-12 11:17:57 PM  

dstrick44: Nonrepeating Rotating Binary: Pretty sure Apple isn't the one who decides how to package and sell them.

Apple doesn't package and market the products they sell? Really?
This is exactly why Apple will never see another thin dime from me.


He's actually correct. They don't make the call on anything but price (and even then that's arrived at through negotiations with the providers). The content provider determines how it will be packaged and sold. Apple simply has a license to sell the product they're given. Go ahead and check it out on Amazon, PSN, or wherever you buy season passes from. They're split up the exact same way because that's how AMC has decided they want it sold. Biatching at Apple and crossing your arms and pouting isn't going to change shiat any more than whining to your cable or satellite provider that your favorite show changed time slots will. You want to see a change? Start breathing down AMC's neck over them telling everyone that this is just season 5.5 but having their VOD providers treat it like a whole new season.

whatshisname: If you buy current TV on the internet does it end up costing more than cable? At $23 for 8 shows it seems like it might.


Depends on what you watch and which route you take. My TV portion of my cable bill was $150 alone (and that was for the basic package), so $1800 a year. The only shows I have to buy season passes for are The Walking Dead, Hell on Wheels, Bates Motel and Hannibal, so that's $125 for the year. Everything else I watch is available on Hulu Plus at $7 a month, so $84 a year. I already had two PS3s in my TV rooms to use Amazon and Hulu on and I also subscribe to Netflix to the tune of $96 a year, so my total TV expenditures for the year are $305. That's a $1500 a year savings. That's worth it to me.
 
2013-08-12 11:20:27 PM  

Uzzah: untaken_name: So...I guess we're gonna see 8-episode "seasons" of popular shows more often now. They're not mistaken. They're trying to set a precedent.

Good. The Brits do it this way, and it makes for better tv. Producers don't have to pad out 8 episodes worth of ideas to get to a 23-episode season, and shorter seasons means you can get a bigger variety of series on the air every year (meaning a better chance to find something good). I've been waiting for that broadcast model to catch on in the US for years, and it might finally be happening. The big networks will resist it for a while, but if AMC, FX, and the others can get acclaimed for 8-12 episode seasons of great quality tv, maybe the big boys will eventually fall in line.


The reason it works in the UK is because 1) they have fewer channels and 2) they can fill all the holes in there schedule with popular US shows to make up the difference. If a standard season of a show is going to be 14 episodes shorter you are going to need around 3 times as many TV shows to fill the same prime time schedule. And there just aren't that many good TV writers with that many good show ideas out there. Not to mention developing new scripted shows is super risky. All of which means you would see way more reality shows if this were to happen since they are way cheaper to develop (reality shows are also huge in the UK, they love Big Brother like crazy over there).
 
2013-08-12 11:25:59 PM  

TheJoe03: EvilMonkeyBoy: tenpounds trolls entertainment threads now, too?

What an age we live in...

I think the crazies in the politics tab stopped responding to his even crazier ass, so he has to resort to trolling tabs that don't know he's a troll. Trolling what many consider the best show on TV is prime real estate for a troll like him, but it's too obvious.


He trolled The Walking Dead threads too (too violent, contributes to the violence of American culture, etc. derp derp).

To his credit, at least his persona in this tab fits the one he takes on in the politics tab.
 
2013-08-12 11:35:49 PM  

Dwight_Yeast: untaken_name: So...I guess we're gonna see 8-episode "seasons" of popular shows more often now. They're not mistaken. They're trying to set a precedent.

Heh.  You must not watch much UK-originated TV; Sherlock has been running three-episode seasons, and seasons of four or five aren't uncommon over there.


I don't think you can really count Sherlock in all this. It's not that they're putting out three episodes a year, it's that they're putting out three feature-length films a year. They just happen to be on TV.

(yeah, the extended break due to the Hobbit is annoying)

And it's a great format if the content is up to it. Red Riding is another one that needed to be done exactly the way it was done.
 
2013-08-12 11:43:20 PM  

bambi121899: Hey, this is probably a good place to ask this question. When you purchase a season on Amazon VOD, do you pay for the season up front, or are you charged weekly? (Does that make sense?)


If you buy a season pass partway through the season, you get charged up front for the episodes that are already available (at the reduced rate), then charged for each subsequent episode as it becomes available (usually 8AM the next day).
 
2013-08-13 12:02:55 AM  

rappy: Sock Ruh Tease: untaken_name: So...I guess we're gonna see 8-episode "seasons" of popular shows more often now. They're not mistaken. They're trying to set a precedent.

This. And since TV seasons normally coincide with the length of a season, that means we're going to get six seasons per year now: Winter, Wing, Spring, Summer, Autumn, Wintumn.

Thanks, Obama.

You've got to be kidding me. I've been further even more decided to use even go need to do look more as anyone can. Can you really be far even as decided half as much to use go wish for that? My guess is that when one really been far even as decided once to use even go want, it is then that he has really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like. It's just common sense


What. The. F?
 
2013-08-13 12:23:16 AM  

bingo the psych-o: untaken_name: So...I guess we're gonna see 8-episode "seasons" of popular shows more often now. They're not mistaken. They're trying to set a precedent.

[ecx.images-amazon.com image 362x500]

[images.starpulse.com image 580x352]

The precedent has been set for a while now.


The precedent is "content deliverer charging the old full-season price for just 8 episodes", not "a show taking a mid-season break".
 
2013-08-13 12:28:56 AM  

Dwight_Yeast: untaken_name: So...I guess we're gonna see 8-episode "seasons" of popular shows more often now. They're not mistaken. They're trying to set a precedent.

Heh.  You must not watch much UK-originated TV; Sherlock has been running three-episode seasons, and seasons of four or five aren't uncommon over there.

/still a bit pissed about only getting 8 episodes of Top Gear this summer.


Sorry, I thought we were talking about an American show. Yeah, I know that's how they do things in Britainland, but that doesn't mean it's how it has traditionally worked over here. Also, if the Brits charge $24 for 8 eps, that's just yet another crazy British habit that we shouldn't copy.
 
2013-08-13 12:35:32 AM  
JUST CALL IT A NEW SEASON.

*i bought season 5 on Google Play, and am wondering how it will be handled.
 
2013-08-13 12:52:36 AM  

MrEricSir: secularsage: ... it's just greedy to charge 2.99-3.99 for an episode of a show that's already paid for by advertisers before it airs.

Yeah... no. Most prime time TV shows would lose money if they had to be paid for based on ad sales of the first showing of each episode.


Citation needed, because I don't think you have a clue what you're talking about.

The business model for broadcast television for the last 60-70 years has been "we produce programming and sell advertising to fund its broadcast." If a show is successful enough, selling the second-run or syndication rights allows for extra revenue, but that often goes to the production company and not the channel that originally aired the show.

Basic cable adds in one additional element - they collect modest fees from cable companies for their channels since they sell advertising for so much less.

In fact, DVD sales and digital sales were an afterthought until a few years ago -- the companies that actually produced the shows were reluctant to get into the game until they started seeing how well shows that were available were selling. Those became an additional revenue stream, but not part of the business model of the shows that air. Again, those funds largely go to the production companies (who are paid for their work when they'd producing the shows), not the channels airing them unless those channels have a production company producing original content.
 
2013-08-13 12:57:37 AM  

kroonermanblack: I recently discovered that audiobooks bought through apple are a one-shot deal. Delete them? They're gone.  This is not the case with Amazon (via audible), or apple music.

Just mad that they don't mention that (surprise) anywhere.


Think that's bad, wait till next year. Apple signed a contract with Hypnotoad to erase all memories of purchased products from your brain when they've expired.
 
2013-08-13 12:59:45 AM  

rugman11: Uzzah: untaken_name: So...I guess we're gonna see 8-episode "seasons" of popular shows more often now. They're not mistaken. They're trying to set a precedent.

Good. The Brits do it this way, and it makes for better tv. Producers don't have to pad out 8 episodes worth of ideas to get to a 23-episode season, and shorter seasons means you can get a bigger variety of series on the air every year (meaning a better chance to find something good). I've been waiting for that broadcast model to catch on in the US for years, and it might finally be happening. The big networks will resist it for a while, but if AMC, FX, and the others can get acclaimed for 8-12 episode seasons of great quality tv, maybe the big boys will eventually fall in line.

I doubt that's going to become standard.  The only reason Breaking Bad is doing it is because Gilligan wanted to wrap it up in one season but AMC wanted two years.  So they did 16 episodes and split them in two.  There are a few networks experimenting in short-form television (Sundance and IFC notably), but for the most part, 13 episodes is as few as any ad-supported network is going to want to go.  And I'm actually okay with that.  The British model can be good at times, but I don't mind having more episodes.  It's not like shows can't put up good runs.  The US version of The Office had more great episodes than the entire UK run.  I guess I'm just willing to take the bad with the good.

So, TV Mini-Series are back?

cdn.aarp.net
 
2013-08-13 01:01:31 AM  

rugman11: Uzzah: untaken_name: So...I guess we're gonna see 8-episode "seasons" of popular shows more often now. They're not mistaken. They're trying to set a precedent.

Good. The Brits do it this way, and it makes for better tv. Producers don't have to pad out 8 episodes worth of ideas to get to a 23-episode season, and shorter seasons means you can get a bigger variety of series on the air every year (meaning a better chance to find something good). I've been waiting for that broadcast model to catch on in the US for years, and it might finally be happening. The big networks will resist it for a while, but if AMC, FX, and the others can get acclaimed for 8-12 episode seasons of great quality tv, maybe the big boys will eventually fall in line.

I doubt that's going to become standard.  The only reason Breaking Bad is doing it is because Gilligan wanted to wrap it up in one season but AMC wanted two years.  So they did 16 episodes and split them in two.  There are a few networks experimenting in short-form television (Sundance and IFC notably), but for the most part, 13 episodes is as few as any ad-supported network is going to want to go.  And I'm actually okay with that.  The British model can be good at times, but I don't mind having more episodes.  It's not like shows can't put up good runs.  The US version of The Office had more great episodes than the entire UK run.  I guess I'm just willing to take the bad with the good.


Nope, shorter seasons are becoming more common for cable dramas, especially ones that are more expensive to produce. For example, Falling Skies has had 3 ten episode seasons and Orphan Black had a 10 episode season. FX seems to be holding steady at 13 episode seasons, but I think you'll start seeing more 10 episode seasons like HBO does for Game of Thrones.
 
2013-08-13 01:06:06 AM  

Mad_Radhu: rugman11: Uzzah: untaken_name: So...I guess we're gonna see 8-episode "seasons" of popular shows more often now. They're not mistaken. They're trying to set a precedent.

Good. The Brits do it this way, and it makes for better tv. Producers don't have to pad out 8 episodes worth of ideas to get to a 23-episode season, and shorter seasons means you can get a bigger variety of series on the air every year (meaning a better chance to find something good). I've been waiting for that broadcast model to catch on in the US for years, and it might finally be happening. The big networks will resist it for a while, but if AMC, FX, and the others can get acclaimed for 8-12 episode seasons of great quality tv, maybe the big boys will eventually fall in line.

I doubt that's going to become standard.  The only reason Breaking Bad is doing it is because Gilligan wanted to wrap it up in one season but AMC wanted two years.  So they did 16 episodes and split them in two.  There are a few networks experimenting in short-form television (Sundance and IFC notably), but for the most part, 13 episodes is as few as any ad-supported network is going to want to go.  And I'm actually okay with that.  The British model can be good at times, but I don't mind having more episodes.  It's not like shows can't put up good runs.  The US version of The Office had more great episodes than the entire UK run.  I guess I'm just willing to take the bad with the good.

Nope, shorter seasons are becoming more common for cable dramas, especially ones that are more expensive to produce. For example, Falling Skies has had 3 ten episode seasons and Orphan Black had a 10 episode season. FX seems to be holding steady at 13 episode seasons, but I think you'll start seeing more 10 episode seasons like HBO does for Game of Thrones.




10 at 60 minutes each is great. Mini series length. Not shorter.
 
2013-08-13 01:16:29 AM  
Dwight_Yeast:
Heh.  You must not watch much UK-originated TV; Sherlock has been running three-episode seasons, and seasons of four or five aren't uncommon over there.

dude, each episode is like an hour and a half long
 
2013-08-13 01:23:25 AM  

secularsage: MrEricSir: secularsage: ... it's just greedy to charge 2.99-3.99 for an episode of a show that's already paid for by advertisers before it airs.

Yeah... no. Most prime time TV shows would lose money if they had to be paid for based on ad sales of the first showing of each episode.

Citation needed, because I don't think you have a clue what you're talking about.

The business model for broadcast television for the last 60-70 years has been "we produce programming and sell advertising to fund its broadcast." If a show is successful enough, selling the second-run or syndication rights allows for extra revenue, but that often goes to the production company and not the channel that originally aired the show.

Basic cable adds in one additional element - they collect modest fees from cable companies for their channels since they sell advertising for so much less.

In fact, DVD sales and digital sales were an afterthought until a few years ago -- the companies that actually produced the shows were reluctant to get into the game until they started seeing how well shows that were available were selling. Those became an additional revenue stream, but not part of the business model of the shows that air. Again, those funds largely go to the production companies (who are paid for their work when they'd producing the shows), not the channels airing them unless those channels have a production company producing original content.


Ad sales are a fickle business, and producing a good show costs money. Some shows make up the difference on DVD sales but the real cash cow is syndication.

Anyway there's far more details about how television shows are financed over on good ol' Wikipedia.
 
2013-08-13 01:37:36 AM  

Plant Rights Activist: Dwight_Yeast:
Heh.  You must not watch much UK-originated TV; Sherlock has been running three-episode seasons, and seasons of four or five aren't uncommon over there.

dude, each episode is like an hour and a half long


Yup.  They made a decision: they could do 9 mediocre one-hour episodes or three movie-length good ones.  Believe it or not, it was the BBC that pushed the production team in that direction; it's also let them sell it to PBS as part of Mystery!

But my point was that you never hear people complain that we only got four episodes of Morse a series, or that Poirot has been produced almost at random since 1988.
 
2013-08-13 01:44:58 AM  
Ooohhh, let's pretend this is Apple's fault, and it doesn't happen at Amazon, etc., and that it hasn't been going on for at least a few years now, and that the half-seasons aren't cheaper than other shows that sell full season passes.

Farktards.
 
2013-08-13 02:13:55 AM  

100 Watt Walrus: Ooohhh, let's pretend this is Apple's fault, and it doesn't happen at Amazon, etc., and that it hasn't been going on for at least a few years now, and that the half-seasons aren't cheaper than other shows that sell full season passes.

Farktards.




Just say no.
 
2013-08-13 02:29:00 AM  

100 Watt Walrus: Ooohhh, let's pretend this is Apple's fault, and it doesn't happen at Amazon, etc., and that it hasn't been going on for at least a few years now, and that the half-seasons aren't cheaper than other shows that sell full season passes.

Farktards.


If you're paying more than $24 for the ability to watch one (actual) season of a show on your computer, then I think we all know who the farktard is.
 
2013-08-13 02:39:37 AM  

untaken_name: 100 Watt Walrus: Ooohhh, let's pretend this is Apple's fault, and it doesn't happen at Amazon, etc., and that it hasn't been going on for at least a few years now, and that the half-seasons aren't cheaper than other shows that sell full season passes.

Farktards.

If you're paying more than $24 for the ability to watch one (actual) season of a show on your computer, then I think we all know who the farktard is.


Not necessarily arguing that point. It depends on the show. I pay Amazon $1.89 (or something like that) per episode to see "Doctor Who" a few hours after it airs because I've been a "Who" fanatic since childhood. But then, I don't have cable, and since "Doctor Who" is the  only show I do this for, I'd say that's $20-something well spent (per series), since I'm not spending twice that every month for hundreds of thousands of episodes of other things I'd never watch anyway.
 
2013-08-13 03:10:13 AM  

bingo the psych-o: untaken_name: So...I guess we're gonna see 8-episode "seasons" of popular shows more often now. They're not mistaken. They're trying to set a precedent.

[ecx.images-amazon.com image 362x500]

[images.starpulse.com image 580x352]

The precedent has been set for a while now.


(for the first pic)All this has happened before...

(and the second)... oh Cock!
 
2013-08-13 03:26:12 AM  

kroonermanblack: This is not the case with Amazon (via audible), or apple music.


It's the case with Apple music if they lose their distribution deal before you want to download it again (which used to happen all the time but is less frequent these days), and before that all iTunes purchases were one-shot. I suspect Amazon and Audible are similar, but they don't comment on future availability so it's hard to say. In general though, while you may be able to re-download some content on some services, none of them guarantee the indefinite availability of any content, so you should keep your own backups of all content.

/ The policy still sucks, and Apple should do better
// Just saying it's complicated all around due to copyright wankery
 
2013-08-13 04:13:34 AM  

blakeosage: People still pay to download new movies and new TV shows from the interwebs?

Huh?  How about that?


You are not cool because you are a criminal.

/ stop living in the nineties and PAY for what you enjoy like a productive member of society.
 
2013-08-13 07:22:51 AM  
Yeah, be cool like I look fat and take it up the bum from the corporations! Then you too can feel smug in your righteousness, no matter how ill-placed it may be.
 
2013-08-13 07:33:19 AM  
Call me crazy, but when you buy a season of shows, shouldn't it tell you how many shows you are paying for? The distributors of the shows should know how many episodes are going to air. If the show is cancelled, etc. then the distributor can then refund a portion of the 'season pass' they issued.
 
2013-08-13 08:10:17 AM  

Dinobot: gnosis301: This has been old news ever since I bought MLP season 3 last year.

a) season 3 was short because they wanted to reach the 65 episosde mark.
b) no one ever claimed there was gonna be a second half to season 3
corollary: season 4 is going to be the full 26 episodes and is labeled as such, rather than part of season 3.

that said, I think it's a dick move if your first season got you X number of episodes and the 2nd season got you half of that and you paid the same amount for both.


I know that. The first 7 episodes were one purchase.  The second half was another purchase.
 
2013-08-13 08:14:16 AM  

baorao: My Amazon VOD didn't resume season pass on these last 8 episodes. But I knew I was going to pay for the either way


Yes, same here, but it's the same per episode price, so it's not a big deal.
 
2013-08-13 09:18:13 AM  

Mad_Radhu: rugman11: Uzzah: untaken_name: So...I guess we're gonna see 8-episode "seasons" of popular shows more often now. They're not mistaken. They're trying to set a precedent.

Good. The Brits do it this way, and it makes for better tv. Producers don't have to pad out 8 episodes worth of ideas to get to a 23-episode season, and shorter seasons means you can get a bigger variety of series on the air every year (meaning a better chance to find something good). I've been waiting for that broadcast model to catch on in the US for years, and it might finally be happening. The big networks will resist it for a while, but if AMC, FX, and the others can get acclaimed for 8-12 episode seasons of great quality tv, maybe the big boys will eventually fall in line.

I doubt that's going to become standard.  The only reason Breaking Bad is doing it is because Gilligan wanted to wrap it up in one season but AMC wanted two years.  So they did 16 episodes and split them in two.  There are a few networks experimenting in short-form television (Sundance and IFC notably), but for the most part, 13 episodes is as few as any ad-supported network is going to want to go.  And I'm actually okay with that.  The British model can be good at times, but I don't mind having more episodes.  It's not like shows can't put up good runs.  The US version of The Office had more great episodes than the entire UK run.  I guess I'm just willing to take the bad with the good.

Nope, shorter seasons are becoming more common for cable dramas, especially ones that are more expensive to produce. For example, Falling Skies has had 3 ten episode seasons and Orphan Black had a 10 episode season. FX seems to be holding steady at 13 episode seasons, but I think you'll start seeing more 10 episode seasons like HBO does for Game of Thrones.


But you're talking about three extremely fx-heavy shows.  10 episodes seems to be the "test-phase" order for some cable networks (especially TNT and TBS), but for successful shows, they usually still want more.  Look at Major Crimes and Perception (both TNT shows).  They both had 10-episode first seasons but got renewed for 13 before being expanded to 19 and 14 episodes, respectively.  Subscription networks like HBO might be more flexible, but for the most part, more is always going to be better for networks, unless they're looking for a scheduling hole or a programming niche to fill.
 
kab
2013-08-13 11:22:11 AM  
If only there were an alternative means to watching shows like this.
 
2013-08-13 12:29:22 PM  
It says on the box which episodes are included.  It says in the reviews which episodes are included.  It says in the product description which episodes are included.  It says anywhere you want to look on the internet which episodes are included.  What is NOT included in the iTunes download of Season 5 is the brain power you'd need to understand that you get exactly what you paid for and nothing more.  You have to supply that yourself.
 
2013-08-13 01:32:40 PM  

theflatline: and this is typical of apple users wanting a handout.


How else are they going to afford their bowler caps and skinny jeans?
 
2013-08-13 03:34:04 PM  
Splitting a season only works if they are self-contained stories. I like the BBC model of 4, 90 minute episodes for Sherlock and Luther as a season vs what we got here.

Now I'm going to be on the outs with this, but other than Star Trek and Walt and Hank at the end I thought this episode blew. I don't think the episode was bad, but so much time had passed I'm out of loop with the characters that I can see through Walt's fakeness immediately and thought: "He's done this 83 times before." I wonder if it'll speed up-which I'm sure it will. If too much time passes, I stop caring about the story.
 
2013-08-13 09:51:03 PM  
i cant be the only one who pays for cable tv and then gets his rips from PB ....still ...24$ ?! lol
 
2013-08-13 10:52:14 PM  

Nonrepeating Rotating Binary: Pretty sure Apple isn't the one who decides how to package and sell them.


Oh really. This product not withstanding it seems I have read a few thousand words about that recently. They may even be in about a half billion bucks worth of trouble over a related issue. But yeah, probably not in this case.
 
Displayed 41 of 91 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report