Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Surfing the Future of News 2.0

By John Gorenfeld, AlterNet. Posted May 19, 2006.


Are we passive consumers of news no more? A survey of innovative news sites that allow you to be the editor.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by John Gorenfeld

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

You could almost picture the movie trailer: "In a News 2.0 future, where the ultimate journalistic crime … is being editor-in-chief …"

Blogs were only the beginning of a revolution that has put you in control of the news: deciding the headlines, choosing what's front page. Or at least that's the premise and promise of a whole slew of internet services suddenly on the horizon, which forgo editors in favor of consumer choice. Some sites robotically survey public opinion -- others let users nominate and vote on stories. And in some spots on the Net, the rightness of democratic editing has become such an article of faith that it's downright scandalous for one man, even the owner of news site Digg.com, to appear to take charge of a front page.

That's why reports of a "Digg Army" -- a platoon of 15 or so robot users that gamed Digg's system to promote two stories -- have engendered a headache for Kevin Rose, "Tech TV" personality, creator of the computer news site Digg and one of several entrepreneurs to have received a fortune in venture capital funding -- $2.8 million -- for the promise of news by and for users. He told CNN last year that his Bay Area business had dispensed with "editors in a smoke-filled back room" in favor of handing control over to the 100,000+ Diggers.

In recent weeks, however, a flurry of disgruntled Diggers were accusing Rose not only of casting editorial votes with the Army, but covering it up: banning Digg Army stories from Digg and spiking links to critics. Rose, reached Thursday morning, said the controversy stemmed from a "complete misunderstanding" of how his site works, saying the people themselves had hit a "complain" button to dump the unfavorable coverage.

"Once it was buried," says Digg CEO Jay Adelson, "the website that submitted it -- Forever Geek -- created fake accounts…" "--someone did," corrects Rose. And as the alleged Geek Army submitted the story again and again, he says, the site's "secret sauce" -- a hidden security formula for blocking spam sites -- had hummed to life, he says.

Clearly secrecy is father to suspicion. "They key for us is to make it more transparent," he says.

These are the questions facing the new world of you-are-the-editor news sites, which have been proliferating since last fall. While Digg's emphasis is on computers, information technology and the RIAA, other sites are turning the approach to finding other material from the web -- as on Reddit, where users vote for interesting links.

And other sites are exploring the wider genre of news as newspapers traditionally cover it. Seattle-based Newsvine, which opened to the public in March with an undisclosed six-figure investment, has sought to create a place for friendly discussion of everything from Iraq to the Mariners.

The need the new sites are addressing, says longtime tech journalist Dan Gillmor, is to cut through the noise of the internet and find the good stuff users are submitting. "This is the experimentation period," he said. And the "big jump from where we are to where we need to be," Gillmor says, is a long way off. Companies are trying out new methods for weighing credibility and trustworthiness of web news, so that there's more than mere popularity at stake. "We're not going to know for some years what works and really doesn't," he says.

Or even what features are going to stick around, and which will prove to be relics like Windows 98's Channels, the ill-fated experiment in fetching the news for you. Read a blog or browse photos on Flickr, and the experience is breezy. But click to one of the new services -- grouped together under the loose banner of News 2.0 -- and you can be at a loss as to what the features are supposed to do for you, those little vestiges of Friendster, MySpace or Del.icio.us and even multilevel marketing, features that may lure venture capitalists and the kind of people who get excited about "folksonomies," but whose advantage to understanding the world situation may not be readily apparent to your mother. Or you.

So what's it like browsing some of these sites now? Hoping to test out what works, and narrowing my focus to websites that provide general news stories -- many others are offering local info -- I hit up a random group of News 2.0 sites, hoping to cut through the "noise" to find exactly what I want. It couldn't just be a big breaking story (like the recent immigration rallies) or a music consumer story that was guaranteed to be covered (Apple is keeping iTunes downloads at 99 cents!). It would have to test the ability of these sites to personalize the news and find what I want.


Digg!

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Totally Missed out
Posted by: bodo on May 20, 2006 12:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
on http://www.guerrillanews.com/

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

netizen
Posted by: ronda on May 21, 2006 11:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
OhmyNews has pioneered the concept of citizen reporter or journalist. They have an international editon that is written in English. But the only link you give in the article to OhmyNews is to their Korean edition and most of your readers probably don't read Korean. So it would help to give the link to the English edition .
For those interested in the url, it is: http://english.ohmynews.com.
OhmyNews has just started a citizen journalist special section

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: netizen Posted by: Eloquence
Neutrality vs. propaganda
Posted by: Eloquence on May 21, 2006 5:10 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Ayn Rand obsessed" Jimmy Wales had little to do with the creation of Wikinews other than approving it. The project was proposed and developed within the Wikimedia community through open processes.

I think you underestimate the potential usefulness of a community site which tries to follow a neutral point of view, regardless of whether you believe this is possible. You should look bit more closely at some of the stories we've had in the past, particularly those including original reporting.

This has included exclusive coverage about Internet censorship in China, protests (both liberal and conservative), poverty, privacy issues with social networking sites, a Rwanda youth forum about the genocide, an International Peace Conference in the UK, a controversial French copyright law, the corruption scandal in Brazil, and many other issues relevant to liberals.

Wikinews adopts a maintsream journalist outlook without implementing mainstream topical filters. People write about what they like; as long as they follow policy, even controversial issues are usually not a problem, occasional conflicts and disagrements notwithstanding.

I think a site that very much reads like a normal, average news site but presents stories which you wouldn't find there, mixed in with the others, is a valuable addition to the global news sphere. Some liberals seem to feel the same way as they try to raise awareness of issues which are only discussed within their circles by posting about them on Wikinews.

I believe the rigid standards of citing sources and documenting original reporting are also the highest currently used on any "citizen journalism" website. Aside from Indymedia, it's also hard to point to an example that produces a similar amount of original content.

While the number of stories per day may seem small for a site which aims for broad coverage of all topics, it is much higher and more comprehensive than for any regular blog, and the total number of stories we've published in English is over 5,000. The site is also internationalized, including a Chinese edition.

I think our biggest problem at the moment is the presentation of the content. As you note, stories scroll off too quickly, and world news are often mixed with local events on the frontpage. On the one hand, this means "equal time", on the other, I think there needs to be at least a basic distinction by "how many people where" are potentially interested in the story content. We've in the past always argued that we're going to do something like that when the number of stories per day gets too large, but it may well be that the current approach limits the growth of the project because readers find it unappealing.

Finally, you seem to be entirely unaware of the copyright issues surrounding news. All Wikinews content is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution license, meaning that anyone can use it for any purpose, as long as they cite a source. So it's perfectly legal to take Wikinews stories, slightly alter them to reflect your point of view, and publish them in your blog -- or to make a filter on Wikinews on topics which interest you. This is not true for wire content (you can link, but you may not copy or modify large amounts of text), nor is it true for most other citizen journalism sites.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wikinews on White House dinner
Posted by: Eloquence on May 21, 2006 5:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By the way, while you criticize our coverage of the White House dinner as "robotic", you fail to mention that our coverage described the Colbert speech in some detail, linked to a video, and mentioned that it had generated quite a bit of buzz on the Net -- most mainstream news sources didn't.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

loop
Posted by: er on Nov 29, 2006 6:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
phente
Posted by: er on Dec 14, 2006 7:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]