4 ms·

As mentioned in another comment further down, this is what I'm building. https://www.forth.news https://www.forth.news Its a news feed, but populated by journ

As mentioned in another comment further down, this is what I'm building. https://www.forth.news https://www.forth.news Its a news feed, but populated by journalists, governed by an editorial policy. No conspiracies, no misinformation, no spam. Just news.

xtian 4y ago
What about when the journalists push conspiracy theories? (e.g., Russiagate)
- jaredwiener 4y ago
  We have an editorial policy that I'd invite you to look at: https://www.forth.news/docs/editorial https://www.forth.news/docs/editorial But basically, we cant be a truth telling machine. We can, however, filter out the obvious noise and hold our journalist partners accountable if we find issues with their reporting. We speak with every reporter who onboards to the site, and reach out when needed.
  - xtian 4y ago
    How will you try to find issues? Many claims are made and accepted as true in the media without any verifiable facts to back them up. There's an inherently political valence to which claims receive this treatment at every level (national, geopolitical, etc).
    - jaredwiener 4y ago
      That claim itself sounds like it could use some verification to back it up. That said, this is why we vet journalists as they come on. We cannot guarantee that no one will ever get something wrong, but we can limit how often it happens. On Twitter/HN/etc, anyone can post anything and face little to no consequences -- thats how trolling can happen. Journalists have bylines attached, and those mess ups can haunt them the rest of their careers. They don't want to get things wrong. We don't want them to get things wrong either. And if something is wrong, then we put out a correction.
  - doublepg23 4y ago
    Have you reached out to Katie Herzog and Jesse Singal? They’ve been some of the few upstanding journalists in media.
    - jaredwiener 4y ago
      We have not; though I believe they take a little more of a position than we're comfortable with -- we're looking for straight reporting, without opinion. Any journalists who are interested should reach out -- https://journalists.forth.news https://journalists.forth.news
  - latency-guy2 4y ago
    > hold our journalist partners accountable What does this exactly mean? I personally don't think a journalist is "held accountable" if all that's being done is an email to them asking for a correction or clarification in an article.
    - yencabulator 4y ago
      Generally, corrections and retractions are the responsibility of the editor, not the individual journalist (of course, the editor can delegate the work, but they're still responsible for it). The mechanism and its working is pretty well established, by now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correction_(newspaper) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correction_(newspaper)
dannyisaphantom 4y ago
I was just browsing your site a few days ago; did you just push a UI update? It looks a lot better and is a lot more relaxing on the eyes (eye strain) that it was before. Looks great.
- jaredwiener 4y ago
  Thank you! Great to hear
mc32 4y ago
Is it not difficult to know whether a conspiracy theory ends up being a conspiracy or on the other hand a belief ending up being an actual conspiracy and the only tool to suss things out is the passage of time? We will likely not have certainty on the JFK assassination, unless the remaining sealed docs have relevant info.
willis936 4y ago
Not all journalism is created equal. I've found that NYT's The Daily coverage of SVB has been rife with misinformation and editorialization. They picked a controversial narrative du jour and expected the listeners to be stupid enough to believe whatever lies or spin they say.

xtian 4y ago

What about when the journalists push conspiracy theories? (e.g., Russiagate)

jaredwiener 4y ago
We have an editorial policy that I'd invite you to look at: https://www.forth.news/docs/editorial https://www.forth.news/docs/editorial But basically, we cant be a truth telling machine. We can, however, filter out the obvious noise and hold our journalist partners accountable if we find issues with their reporting. We speak with every reporter who onboards to the site, and reach out when needed.
- xtian 4y ago
  How will you try to find issues? Many claims are made and accepted as true in the media without any verifiable facts to back them up. There's an inherently political valence to which claims receive this treatment at every level (national, geopolitical, etc).
  - jaredwiener 4y ago
    That claim itself sounds like it could use some verification to back it up. That said, this is why we vet journalists as they come on. We cannot guarantee that no one will ever get something wrong, but we can limit how often it happens. On Twitter/HN/etc, anyone can post anything and face little to no consequences -- thats how trolling can happen. Journalists have bylines attached, and those mess ups can haunt them the rest of their careers. They don't want to get things wrong. We don't want them to get things wrong either. And if something is wrong, then we put out a correction.
- doublepg23 4y ago
  Have you reached out to Katie Herzog and Jesse Singal? They’ve been some of the few upstanding journalists in media.
  - jaredwiener 4y ago
    We have not; though I believe they take a little more of a position than we're comfortable with -- we're looking for straight reporting, without opinion. Any journalists who are interested should reach out -- https://journalists.forth.news https://journalists.forth.news
- latency-guy2 4y ago
  > hold our journalist partners accountable What does this exactly mean? I personally don't think a journalist is "held accountable" if all that's being done is an email to them asking for a correction or clarification in an article.
  - yencabulator 4y ago
    Generally, corrections and retractions are the responsibility of the editor, not the individual journalist (of course, the editor can delegate the work, but they're still responsible for it). The mechanism and its working is pretty well established, by now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correction_(newspaper) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correction_(newspaper)

dannyisaphantom 4y ago

I was just browsing your site a few days ago; did you just push a UI update? It looks a lot better and is a lot more relaxing on the eyes (eye strain) that it was before. Looks great.

jaredwiener 4y ago
Thank you! Great to hear

mc32 4y ago

Is it not difficult to know whether a conspiracy theory ends up being a conspiracy or on the other hand a belief ending up being an actual conspiracy and the only tool to suss things out is the passage of time? We will likely not have certainty on the JFK assassination, unless the remaining sealed docs have relevant info.

willis936 4y ago

Not all journalism is created equal. I've found that NYT's The Daily coverage of SVB has been rife with misinformation and editorialization. They picked a controversial narrative du jour and expected the listeners to be stupid enough to believe whatever lies or spin they say.