This Story is Archived
The Netscape 'OpEd' Issue: What Would You Do? »
Posted by: Neophile 1 year, 11 months agoThere has been some confusion and debate over Netscape's policy of flagging some stories as "OpEd". Karina explains what has been going on behind the scenes.
Read Full Story at blog.netscape.com »
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 46
-
Neophile
Sept. 29, 2006, 12:21 p.m.I think proper identification of opinion pieces is necessary, but I don't think categorization belongs in the title of stories.
I would like to see one of two things happen:
1. Users start making use of an OpEd tag.
2. Netscape adds a Political Opinion category.
Both of the above would be more useful than having a flag in the title because it allows us better access to opinion pieces.
-
TechnologyExpert
Sept. 29, 2006, 12:49 p.m.Both of those are good suggestions. Frankly, I would love to see some finer granularity or additional categories as well ... so many things are put into News cuz they really don't fit elsewhere. I'm surprised there isn't a Business category and Offbeat news, for example.
-
Noonz
Sept. 29, 2006, 1:19 p.m.Both of Neophile's selections are excellent. Adding a category for political opinion seems like a no-brainer given the sheer number of political bloggers out there.
-
ameliog
Sept. 29, 2006, 1:44 p.m.A troublesome issue. There should be differentiation between an opinion article and regular news, but from what I've seen of comments of left/right partisans on Netscape even agreeing on what is a "news" article is difficult.
To be sure, some will argue about the legitimacy of a story just to be argumentative and disruptive. Also, some will band together to game the system and rank stories on the front page. So is an objective solution even possible when there is no honest inclination of objectivity from many of the political story submitters?
I'd hate to see every political story have to go through an arbitration process, and I'm sure the navigators have other responsibilities besides dealing with political stuff. How do we objectively qualify an area such as politics when it's such an emotional area for many?
Maybe have GOP/Dem categories, but that leaves the less partisan and independent people out in the cold.
But it'd be nice to resolve the issue.
-
Neophile
Sept. 29, 2006, 1:58 p.m.Good point, ameliog. With that in mind this may all be a moot point.
One might also argue that on a social news site it is up to the users to clarify the validity of a story in the comments, whether it is news or not. We all have the ability to add value to these stories by sharing our insights and links to supplemental information.
I don't think I'd like to see gop/Dem or Left/right categories. No political issue is simple enough to only have 2 sides to it and you're right, people would be alienated.
-
ameliog
Sept. 29, 2006, 2:48 p.m.Neophile:
I wouldn't care to see a GOP/Dem split either for the same reason that you mentioned. Further brainstorming is needed. Also, the anonymity of members on a social site makes it impossible to determine who is a "regular" person and who is a party apparatchik disguised as an ordinary joe.
Getting general agreement on this site for political articles is like trying to herd cats. My guess is that many more people are viewing Netscape and not posting comments than there are commenters, so the vocal minority is steering the direction of this social site. The new Netscape is interesting but I'd certainly vote in favor of having the main page be more news and general info, and keep political opinion articles off the front page.
-
Neophile
Sept. 29, 2006, 3:06 p.m.They do seem to dominate quite a bit, don't that ameliog?
That could be solved if we had opeds all in one category AND give users the ability to disable any categories they have no interest in. Then you could make your own custom front page.
-
coreyspring
Sept. 29, 2006, 3:18 p.m.I think accuracy of the headline is the most important issue. If Bill O' Reilly says that Jon Stewart is hurting America, the headline shouldn't be 'Jon Stewart hurting America' matter of factly, but something more along the lines of 'O'Reilly: Jon Stewart Hurting America'
-
ameliog
Sept. 29, 2006, 3:18 p.m.Pretty good ideas. :)
The blocking feature is nice - maybe they could extend it to articles and not just comments. Those who only want to view the world from a narrow perspective could tune their site to show only what they agree with, and those who think certain articles are intellectually dishonest could block them and not have to sift through a pile of (fill in the blank).
This might be a big and costly job of customization for Netscape. Or maybe not. These are just ideas being tossed around to see what might work.
-
Neophile
Sept. 29, 2006, 4:09 p.m.I wouldn't go so far as to mandate that titles have to be identical to the article title. That would take away a great way for users to be creative. Writing headlines is fun.
I agree, Corey. Headline accuracy is key to keep in mind when submitting AND voting.
-
posthumous
Sept. 29, 2006, 5:57 p.m.Personally I like some of the op-eds, I find they often contain more information than news articles do! Leave them be.
-
Neophile
Sept. 29, 2006, 6:08 p.m.@The18Delta, any chance that 3.5-3.7 score is on a scale of zero to 3.7? :)
-
deathray
Sept. 29, 2006, 6:30 p.m.My practice is to copy the headline directly from the article as published. I think all columnists and pundits should be labelled Op-Ed. I would advocate an "Opinion" channel, but we need to make sure that political analysis and opinion don't creep back into the news channels, as we are on the honor system. It's clear that some users are gaming the system, and in most cases I am ok with it, as long as their is equal representation of opion from the posting community. Maybe the Anchors can be the arbiters of what goes where, but then, you might be opening yourselves up to additional accusations of partisanship...
-
Wil
Sept. 29, 2006, 9:01 p.m.The problem, IMHO, is presenting stories with misleading headlines. If a story is clearly an op-ed, written by a commentator or columnist, it should be identified as such. If an article is a reporting of facts, then it doesn't need to be labeled as opinion, because it's not.
-
-
JustFactsPlease
Sept. 30, 2006, 12:29 a.m.I'm happy with the way it is. But nothings perfect so change away.
-
-
mmcl
Sept. 30, 2006, 3:05 a.m.I've never really saw the point to labelling a piece Op-Ed. A normally aware person should be able to spot bias in an article without a label being attached.
Bias in and of itself isn't necessarily a bad thing. Propaganda when it is effective is usually so because it expresses a truth about a situation. The bias is seen in how that truth is presented.
Take the tax cuts put forward by President Bush. Liberals will argue that they are contributing to record deficits and favor the rich. Conservatives will argue that they are stimulating the economy and lowering unemployment. I would suggest both are true.
I'm not sure why I would need a label to tell me when I hear the argument and the manner that it is presented to recognize that I am hearing an opinion.
In a similar fashion, if the article simply tells me that the tax cuts were $X billions, unemployment is down by Y% and the deficit is up by $Z billions, I would think it is a straight article.
-
fisksed
Sept. 30, 2006, 9:28 a.m.It seems that there is some bias on the part of the lead anchors. If it's an OP ED, tag it thusly, it's not hard to differentiate OP ED pieces from news pieces. Editorials often use misleading headlines, we can't trust the author of an OP ED to be impartial.
-
Sandokan
Sept. 30, 2006, 9:35 a.m.Once again, neutralism on an article being submited is in the eyes of the beholder. How do you influence that? Even if it is a hard story, there are ways of slanting the account. Monitoring is the only way to cut down on the amount of OpEd stories being submitted as neutral articles. The editiors could also have a rating system for the submitters. If the submission on the part of the contributor (submitter) for the past 10 stories is neutral, then his choices should be given higher priority or something similar.
-
Wizardcotx
Sept. 30, 2006, 10:11 a.m.Label Editorials as editorials. Label oponion/columns as Oponions not facts. Label News Stories as News Stories. Label political speeches as that. Just because Hillary Clinton, or Richard Fisk say something does not make it factual.
At least that way when we get the left wing trash oponion or political columns that spend the whole piece attacking President Bush, we can tell in advance what they are and Ignore them.
-
buckrog
Sept. 30, 2006, 10:25 a.m.I am fine with the OpEd heading..Or perhaps people should be limited to some number of posts per week...it seems certain interests like luvmyprez have hijacked your site for their political ends and I have really grown tired of it..
-
deathray
Sept. 30, 2006, 10:27 a.m.Look, I vote for and comment on stories which express opinions with which I have disagreements, or at least a differing perspective. this is about an exchange of ideas, not a coffee klatch for entirely like minded individuals. if you start to segregate by political/... ideology, no one learns anything, or gets the opportunity to walk a mile in somebody else's shoes.
I'd like to keep Netscape reasonably freewheeling.
-
Route66
Sept. 30, 2006, 10:28 a.m.luvmyprez: I agree with you and Masked as well.
I've added to a few postings the "OPED" before the title of the article just so people knew it was such before taking the time (not) to read it.
A problem comes in, though, when the argument is raised (again) that, for example, all NYT articles are pretty much OPINION pieces slanted toward the Dems and all Fox News articles are OPINION pieces slanted toward the Repubs.
If that becomes an issue, then I'm with the group stating leave it the way it is or label only the COLUMNIST/... as OPED.
*Then again, what about blatant commentary in a supposedly straight news story? The news media as a whole has really fallen back a couple hundred centuries, or so. WHO, WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, HOW, and leave out the WHY, since that is subjective to opinion.
-
buckrog
Sept. 30, 2006, 10:29 a.m.Wizard...dcotx..is that the same as OTR?...believe me when I say the right wing sewage is just as prevalent...sorry of the truth about the moron in the whitehouse is offensive to you...but then, you voted for him...I would too-for impeachment!
The first 25 comments are shown. Show all 46 comments »
Submitted By:
Neophile
I'm a Propeller Scout so if you have any questions or concerns, send me a message and I'll be happy to help.
Also submitted:
