4 ms·
I don't always want my news ranked in a list by upvotes and an algorithm, thank you very much. I find sites that rely on user input to rank stories are prone to
by sd8f9iu 13y ago
I don't always want my news ranked in a list by upvotes and an algorithm, thank you very much. I find sites that rely on user input to rank stories are prone to spreading rumors and emotional, link-bait news. I trust the New York Times to present to me a variety of stories in what they think is the best way. What is it with this obsession with the idea that the view of the mob must be the best way?
- tomelders 13y agoI wasn't arguing for that, that road leads to gizmodo and TMZ. I'm talking purely about how the content is presented, and within that there is still room for hierarchy and emphasis, but what the NYT has produced is a muddy incoherent mess.
- sd8f9iu 13y agoWhat road are you talking about that leads to Gizmodo and TMZ? The one I described (ranking by upvotes) is used by HN and Reddit. And if not the ranking, what part of HN, Reddit, etc. are you praising over NYT? Do you like just the listing, without the ranking? I think the latter follows from the former. I don't like listing, because it orders articles and artificially gives the higher up ones more importance. NYT headlines instead assign things to levels and categories, based on page location and headline size. Also, in many of the sub-sections, news is organized roughly as its added (newest-oldest), and its assumed that it's important enough to read if it's in the NYT. Or do you just like the plain text presentation? Fair enough, but I like having more context on the home page. It may seem messy at first, but as a long-time reader, I love the NYT site for its rich and informational presentation (and content).