|
Probably Magic posted:That should probably be in the OP then instead of on page 18. (Also, the AP stylebook, what the gently caress? Whatever.) In any case, that still isn't the example what I and multiple other posters have asked for, about an example of a media that people in this thread trust even with qualifiers and caveats, but thank you, Fritz the Horse, I appreciate it. AP and Washington Post are probably the closest you can get to being endorsed here. Discendo Vox posted:Most reputable news organizations prominently publish their internal policies; whether these policies are truly followed isn't guaranteed, of course. Here's the AP. Discendo Vox posted:As it came up earlier and I'm desperate to spend less time at the Omaha Zoo's latest exhibit, here's a shorter effortpost on general sourcing and attribution policy terms. fool of sound, this should be uncontroversial so if possible please link it in the OP. Note that these are obviously not endorsements, only the most specific statements of approval of some facet. mawarannahr fucked around with this message at 10:29 on Dec 15, 2021 |
#
¿
Dec 15, 2021 07:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 02:41 |
|
|
Kalit posted:So.... RT and OANN are pretty much the only legitimate major news sources? That sounds reasonable. How’d you get that out of what you quoted? For reference, in case you want to read it again: Nucleic Acids posted:Pretty much every media outlet that pushed Russiagate should not be considered a legitimate news source. You’re making stuff up that isn’t there.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2021 18:45
|
|
|
raminasi posted:Twitter’s entire technological thesis is to present content in a way that maximizes the magnitude of its reader’s emotional reaction. That’s the furthest thing possible from “just an index.” What is the site’s technological thesis anyway? I’m not really sure of it, and I don’t see what disqualifies it from being an index that’s addressable by username, hashtag, keyword, date, and location. Some of these are pretty close to the kind of things I’d expect in an index so I don’t see how it’s the furthest thing possible. Kalit posted:
You can sort the results and feed by date on Twitter. I think Google does tailor results to the user these days but will look for a source.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2021 20:53
|
|
You really should understand how different search algorithms work. This is absolutely inaccurate. Twitter tailors the algorithm based on the individual's followed accounts/actions/prior search results/etc. Google/search engine algorithms produce results based on those immediate words searched/page relevance/etc and does not use machine learning to tailor results based on the individual user.
|
Discendo Vox posted:Other users have provided specific information about how the two sites differ. quote:…ignored provided evidence about differences in the mediums of twitter and google. I don’t really buy the idea how they differ is meaningful though, and there are features of Twitter that arguably make it more like an index than Google (being able to browse rather than just search, and better sorting, for example). Like a lot else in this thread you’re pointing to explanations that don’t really explain anything, they’re just… there, not insightful, not definitive, and unclear how they might be applied. PS: the over-the-top berating and condescension make it a real hassle to read anything you post, let alone posts from months ago. It’d be better for the thread if you went back and edited every single one. I struggle to remember a more condescending person I’ve interacted with or read online or IRL. mawarannahr fucked around with this message at 23:10 on Dec 16, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2021 23:01
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Also with algorithms the Google search algorithm is not as biased as what Twitter or Facebook use to feed you news which both absolutely create an echo chamber. But if you're in the Google ecosystem those searches feed into their advertisements and news feeds and that also creates an echo chamber. I think it’s far easier to moderate your consumption on Twitter and even Facebook if you’re a media literate person capable of curating your sources and clicking the “sort by most recent” button every now and again. The recommender system you might call “the algorithm” doesn’t really come into play.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2021 23:53
|
|
|
Gumball Gumption posted:Yeah, I'd agree with that though it does seem like part of this thread is the differences between how someone media literate and not media literate are going to consume media and all of the major social media outlets (Google is one, just in a weird way) are a firehose of stupid if you're not media literate. But yeah, if you're media literate Twitter makes it easy to curate what you want to see and then it's up to you on if you're putting yourself in an echo chamber or not. You can make your feed many diverse voices, a few specific voices, and any range of credibility. From a practical perspective, the best way I have to gather news is to collect RSS feeds for everything I want to keep tabs on and use my own judgment to figure out what to read and how many grains of salt to take. This way I get important news from slower-moving channels like the Institute for Supply Management and don’t get too bogged down in sifting through the daily cruft. I’ve gotten better at glancing over the “cruftier” high-volume sources and picking out what’s worthwhile, and I can follow sources I wouldn’t typically follow without completely ruining my web browsing experience. I’m worried more places will phase these feeds out but they’re still mostly functional (but missing more summaries these days). It’s refreshing to see a list of news that can be sorted on the merits of their headlines, summaries, and sources rather than ~tha algorithm~. Right now I use an online feed reader called inoreader (which appears to support Twitter but I haven’t tried that yet) and would recommend it to anyone willing to put in the small amount of effort (and possibly money) to set up something that works for you. If anyone has similar practical advice on how to apply a media-literate perspective to daily news consumption I’d like to read about it. mawarannahr fucked around with this message at 00:17 on Dec 17, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2021 00:15
|
|
|
Harry Potter on Ice posted:Gonna run a python script to do some content analysis for hawkish language for ya clowns brb I looked around for 10 minutes and didn’t find it, but I believe the authority figure of this thread has specifically shot down the idea of sentiment analysis and similar, so I’d suggest you not waste your time and spare yourself the condescending tone indicating the matter was covered in an “effortpost” 38 pages ago. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2022 00:04
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 02:41 |
|
|
cinci zoo sniper posted:This sounds like something you could be interested in bringing up during the next D&D feedback thread, currently scheduled for February. If you can’t be clearer in how you communicate before dropping down punishments, you should consider stepping down instead of dismissing their question for February.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 7, 2022 02:21
|
|