Re-editing the agenda with NewsTrust

Mon, 07 Apr 2008 00:00:00 -0700

Media Nation - By Dan Kennedy - Apr. 07 (Opinion) - NewsTrust's strength is also its weakness. Unlike Digg, which simply allows you to vote on whether you like or don't like a story, NewsTrust asks users to rate stories on a wide range of criteria, including whether you think the news organization is reliable, how well sourced the story is, whether it's fair and whether the story offers enough context. In all, there are 12 different criteria, each of them demanding a rating of one to five stars. Though you may leave any particular criterion blank if you choose, that's still a lot -- and you haven't even gotten to writing a comment, adding tags and filling in several other forms. That's quite a bit of work. Still, the idea is a good one. It's a way for ordinary readers -- well, ordinary readers who happen to be news junkies -- to re-edit the news, to judge for themselves what are the best and most important stories rather than relying on the editors of the New York Times, the BBC or what have you. Some readers who don't want to submit or even rate stories may be intrigued by the idea of tapping into the wisdom of the NewsTrust community to find news they might otherwise never see. [Disclosure: this story about NewsTrust is based in part on a presentation made by our editorial director Rory O' Connor, at the invitation of Northeastern professor Dan Kennedy]

NewsTrust Rating: 3.9 average (not enough reviews) - See Review » - Review It Visit NewsTrust | About | Sign Up | Disclaimer

NewsTrust - For Review

Re-editing the agenda with NewsTrust