SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
His goal is for Wikitribune to offer "factual and neutral" articles that help combat the problem of "fake news".
The service is intended to be both ad-free and free-to-read, so will rely on supporters making regular donations.
One expert said it had the potential to become a trusted site, but suggested its influence might be limited.
Wikitribune shares many of the features already found in Mr Wales's online encyclopaedia, including the need for writers to detail the source of each fact and a reliance on the public to edit articles to keep them accurate.
However, while anybody can make changes to a page, they will only go live if a staff member or trusted community volunteer approves them.
The other big difference is that the core team of writers will be paid, although there may also be instances in which a volunteer writes the initial draft and then a staff member edits it.
Wikipedia has built a trustworthy reputation. Can it be transferred to journalism?
takyon: A SoylentNews expert asked, "Whatever happened to Wikinews?"
[Ed. Note: updated at 19:20 with more information]
More coverage: (compiled by butthurt)
Fortune
Daily Mail
Nieman Foundation
The Atlantic
The Guardian
Silicon UK
Press Association 2017 via Clydebank Post
AFP via The Peninsula
(Score: 3, Informative) by edIII on Wednesday April 26 2017, @07:57PM (2 children)
Nope.
First I heard of the term it was being used to describe Facebook posts that had egregiously incorrect information being presented as fact. It was meant to look as if it came from a reputable news organization, but didn't.
Had nothing to do with the DNC leaks, and you're trying your hand at revisionist history.
It's not a liberal term, but just the term created to define that activity. Of which, it was indeed news that was faked. Or, Fake News.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 1) by Ethanol-fueled on Thursday April 27 2017, @12:05AM
Even if the first paragraph in my post is factually correct, the second will not be. You wait and see.
(Score: 2) by Lagg on Thursday April 27 2017, @03:15AM
Man this thread is exactly why doing stuff like that concerns me so much. That's the trouble with simplistic terms. They're easily mangled if someone is purposefully trying to create a communication barrier. I've never used facebook or plan to. Yet I had seen it used previously years ago to describe general crap and spinning of stories into whatever terrifies the audience most, or advertisements disguised as articles. Because it's within the literal definition of fake.
Notice how even in these posts when all participants are fully aware of what context is being used, we've still had two instances of etymology talk. For a dumb simple two word phrase. It's gonna be so easy for a full scale propaganda assault :(
http://lagg.me [lagg.me] 🗿