2 ms·

Show HN: A news feed built to minimize misinfo

1 points by jaredwiener 3y ago

Hi HN -- I'm one of the cofounders of Forth, a news feed for news. (https://www.forth.news https://www.forth.news) Today seemed like a good day to share widely. My cofounder and I are former journalists, who know how important it is to be able to trust the news that you read. Today, a huge number of people -- especially the under-40 set -- are getting their news from social media, even though it's being overrun with misinformation, disinfo, propaganda, and just made up stuff. We decided that if we were going to doom scroll, we'd want the stuff we're reading to be true. All of the posts on the site come from real journalists. They are who they say they are. I know journalists are not always held in the highest regard on this site, but I will point out -- their livelihoods come from a reputation for accuracy. Sure, humans get things wrong, but a responsible journalist check out a story before posting, and will correct the record if they make a mistake. That's what we expect, and it's listed right in our Editorial Policy. (https://www.forth.news/docs/editorial https://www.forth.news/docs/editorial) Please let me know what you think, and if you find this helpful. Jared

KomoD 3y ago
So how is this "built to minimize misinfo"? Is it just because it has "real journalists", and why should a journalist spend their time posting there? How is it better than just visiting Google News? Also are you allowed to rehost another company's content, like you are with Reuters? And "All of the posts on the site come from real journalists", what determines a real journalist, and do you consider every person who posts for Reuters to be a "real" journalist, and how is a bot that reposts other company's content meant to follow your "editorial policy"? And the last one, "their livelihoods come from a reputation for accuracy" this isn't really true is it, their livelihoods come from clicks?
- jaredwiener 3y ago
  Lots to unpack here -- but I will try. First, the overarching point -- about the livelihoods coming from accuracy. I think you are confusing a publisher's business model with a reporter's ability to continue to be hired. If a reporter is caught making things up, that generally is the end of their career. (See Jayson Blair, Stephen Glass, etc) We license Reuters reporting, so we are not just "rehosting another company's content." And yes, we have had conversations with Reuters and are confident they are also following our editorial policy, and if that were to change, then we would address it. We speak with the individual reporters we onboard, verifying they are who they say they are, and that they understand the editorial policy as well. And we reserve the right to take action if that trust is violated.

1 points by jaredwiener 3y ago

KomoD 3y ago

So how is this "built to minimize misinfo"? Is it just because it has "real journalists", and why should a journalist spend their time posting there? How is it better than just visiting Google News? Also are you allowed to rehost another company's content, like you are with Reuters? And "All of the posts on the site come from real journalists", what determines a real journalist, and do you consider every person who posts for Reuters to be a "real" journalist, and how is a bot that reposts other company's content meant to follow your "editorial policy"? And the last one, "their livelihoods come from a reputation for accuracy" this isn't really true is it, their livelihoods come from clicks?

jaredwiener 3y ago
Lots to unpack here -- but I will try. First, the overarching point -- about the livelihoods coming from accuracy. I think you are confusing a publisher's business model with a reporter's ability to continue to be hired. If a reporter is caught making things up, that generally is the end of their career. (See Jayson Blair, Stephen Glass, etc) We license Reuters reporting, so we are not just "rehosting another company's content." And yes, we have had conversations with Reuters and are confident they are also following our editorial policy, and if that were to change, then we would address it. We speak with the individual reporters we onboard, verifying they are who they say they are, and that they understand the editorial policy as well. And we reserve the right to take action if that trust is violated.