Skip to main content

Insiders bash Patch’s business structure; did AOL over-invest?

PatchA recent Business Insider article took a closer look at AOL’s Patch business model, and all is not well at the hyper-local news arm of the media conglomerate. According to the story, an anonymous Patch salesperson came forward to explain the crippling day-to-day operations within the company. Since the Huffington Post-AOL merger, Patch has become a major focus. AOL has invested somewhere around $120 million dollars in the community news sites this year. The goal is to have 1,000 dedicated sites up and running by 2012.

So it follows to reason that such rampant expansion could be contributing to the reports of a confused and shaky infrastructure. Now had it been just one salesperson who admitted to being a “disgruntled employee,” it would be easy to dismiss the report. But now more and more Patch staffers are coming forward, and this coupled with complaints over pay plaguing the site make it sound as if a mutiny is in our midst. Complaints about low company morale, unreasonable sales models, and unsustainable writer requirements are among the litany of complaints.

There can only really be two conclusions to make here: Either AOL has the uncanny ability to hire the world’s whiniest, least discreet employees, or Patch is coming apart at the seams. Given it’s less-than-clean reputation, it’s difficult not to assume the latter. It’s no secret that AOL is desperate to find a profitable platform, and Patch is one of its two major investments to do this (the other being the $300+ million it spent on the HuffPo merger). While AOL continues to hire writers and create new Patch networks all over the country, it’s really only resulting in driving more traffic to its site, rather than creating any real revenue.

Of course, its employees’ public airing of insider information is perhaps what hurts Patch the most, and adds fuel to critics’ fire. But if there is some truth to these revelations and Patch is unable to steer AOL toward a profitable path, it will have wasted a lot of money, time, and resources in the project. At best, it seems incredibly unclear whether Patch will pay for itself.

Molly McHugh
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Before coming to Digital Trends, Molly worked as a freelance writer, occasional photographer, and general technical lackey…
Bluesky barrels toward 1 million new sign-ups in a day
Bluesky social media app logo.

Social media app Bluesky has picked nearly a million new users just a day after exiting its invitation-only beta and opening to everyone.

In a post on its main rival -- X (formerly Twitter) -- Bluesky shared a chart showing a sudden boost in usage on the app, which can now be downloaded for free for iPhone and Android devices.

Read more
How to make a GIF from a YouTube video
woman sitting and using laptop

Sometimes, whether you're chatting with friends or posting on social media, words just aren't enough -- you need a GIF to fully convey your feelings. If there's a moment from a YouTube video that you want to snip into a GIF, the good news is that you don't need complex software to so it. There are now a bunch of ways to make a GIF from a YouTube video right in your browser.

If you want to use desktop software like Photoshop to make a GIF, then you'll need to download the YouTube video first before you can start making a GIF. However, if you don't want to go through that bother then there are several ways you can make a GIF right in your browser, without the need to download anything. That's ideal if you're working with a low-specced laptop or on a phone, as all the processing to make the GIF is done in the cloud rather than on your machine. With these options you can make quick and fun GIFs from YouTube videos in just a few minutes.
Use GIFs.com for great customization
Step 1: Find the YouTube video that you want to turn into a GIF (perhaps a NASA archive?) and copy its URL.

Read more
I paid Meta to ‘verify’ me — here’s what actually happened
An Instagram profile on an iPhone.

In the fall of 2023 I decided to do a little experiment in the height of the “blue check” hysteria. Twitter had shifted from verifying accounts based (more or less) on merit or importance and instead would let users pay for a blue checkmark. That obviously went (and still goes) badly. Meanwhile, Meta opened its own verification service earlier in the year, called Meta Verified.

Mostly aimed at “creators,” Meta Verified costs $15 a month and helps you “establish your account authenticity and help[s] your community know it’s the real us with a verified badge." It also gives you “proactive account protection” to help fight impersonation by (in part) requiring you to use two-factor authentication. You’ll also get direct account support “from a real person,” and exclusive features like stickers and stars.

Read more