<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>NewsTrust - Sci/Tech - Most Trusted Stories: Opinion (Independent)</title>
    <copyright>Copyright (c) 2008 NewsTrust</copyright>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:32:50 -0800</lastBuildDate>
    
    <link>http://newstrust.net/subjects/scitech/top_rated/opinion/independent</link>
    <description>NewsTrust helps people find good journalism online. We rate the news based on quality, not just popularity. Our social news network features top-rated stories from hundreds of mainstream and independent sources. Find out more at http://newstrust.net/</description>
    <item>
      <title>Against Transparency</title>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 00:00:00 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://newstrust.net/stories/286858</guid>
      <link>http://newstrust.net/stories/286858</link>
      <description>&lt;span&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/sources/new_republic&quot;&gt;New Republic&lt;/a&gt; - By Lawrence Lessig - Oct. 09 (Opinion) - How could anyone be against transparency? Its virtues and its utilities seem so crushingly obvious. But I have increasingly come to worry that there is an error at the core of this unquestioned goodness. We are not thinking critically enough about where and when transparency works, and where and when it may lead to confusion, or to worse. And I fear that the inevitable success of this movement--if pursued alone, without any sensitivity to the full complexity of the idea of perfect openness--will inspire not reform, but disgust. The &quot;naked transparency movement,&quot; as I will call it here, is not going to inspire change. It will simply push any faith in our political system over the cliff.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;NewsTrust Rating: &lt;/b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/stories/286858&quot;&gt;4.4 average&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;/stories/286858&quot;&gt;3&amp;nbsp;Reviews&amp;nbsp;&amp;raquo;&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/stories/286858&quot;&gt;Review It&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/&quot;&gt;Visit NewsTrust&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/about&quot;&gt;About&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/partners/feeds/rss&quot;&gt;Sign Up&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/about/disclaimer&quot;&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <category>U.S. Congress</category>
      <category>Technology</category>
      <category>New Media</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Kipling Haunts Obama's Afghan War</title>
      <pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2009 00:00:00 -0700</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://newstrust.net/stories/362860</guid>
      <link>http://newstrust.net/stories/362860</link>
      <description>&lt;span&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/sources/truthout&quot;&gt;TruthOut&lt;/a&gt; - By Ray McGovern - Nov. 01 (Editorial) - The White Man's Burden, a phrase immortalized by English poet Rudyard Kipling as an excuse for European-American imperialism, was front and center Thursday morning (October 29) at a RAND-sponsored discussion of Afghanistan in the Russell Senate Office Building.???? The agenda was top-heavy with RAND speakers, and the thinking was decidedly &quot;inside the box&quot; - so much so, that I found myself repeating a verse from Kipling, who recognized the dangers of imperialism, to remind me of the real world: It is not wise for the Christian white 
     To hustle the Asian brown;
     For the Christian riles
     And the Asian smiles
     And weareth the Christian down.

     At the end of the fight
     Lies a tombstone white
     With the name of the late deceased;

     And the epitaph drear,
     A fool lies here, 
     Who tried to hustle the East.
With a few notable exceptions, the RAND event offered conventional wisdom to a fare-thee-well.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;NewsTrust Rating: &lt;/b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/stories/362860&quot;&gt;4.2 average&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;/stories/362860&quot;&gt;6&amp;nbsp;Reviews&amp;nbsp;&amp;raquo;&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/stories/362860&quot;&gt;Review It&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/&quot;&gt;Visit NewsTrust&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/about&quot;&gt;About&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/partners/feeds/rss&quot;&gt;Sign Up&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/about/disclaimer&quot;&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <category>Oil and Gas</category>
      <category>War</category>
      <category>Afghanistan</category>
      <category>Energy</category>
      <category>Taliban</category>
      <category>Pakistan</category>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Curating, not moderating, the flow of content and participation</title>
      <pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:00:00 -0800</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://newstrust.net/stories/374509</guid>
      <link>http://newstrust.net/stories/374509</link>
      <description>&lt;span&gt;Headshift - By Robin Hamman - Nov. 04 (Opinion) - User generated content is, for many media companies and other organisations, more of a problem than a solution. Vague calls to action lead to waves of irrelevant content submitted by audiences who have taken time, effort, and in some instances spent money to do so - only for that content to, in most instances, be ignored. Online communities require moderation to keep discussions on the right side of the law. Breaking stories of importance, or topics that capture the imagination, lead to floods of content that quickly overwhelm processes and technical platforms.

In all these situations, which will be familiar to anyone who has ever worked at the social media collision point between audiences and organisations, very little of value is extracted from what can be a costly exercise, primarily because most &quot;social platforms&quot; have been built to pull in audiences and allow moderators to police user activity.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;NewsTrust Rating: &lt;/b&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;/stories/374509&quot;&gt;3.8 average&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;/stories/374509&quot;&gt;9&amp;nbsp;Reviews&amp;nbsp;&amp;raquo;&lt;/a&gt; - &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/stories/374509&quot;&gt;Review It&lt;/a&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/&quot;&gt;Visit NewsTrust&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/about&quot;&gt;About&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/partners/feeds/rss&quot;&gt;Sign Up&lt;/a&gt; | &lt;a href=&quot;http://newstrust.net/about/disclaimer&quot;&gt;Disclaimer&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <category>Internet</category>
      <category>Social Networks</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
