SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
This is a topic that comes up all too often in comments, lambasting editors or praising them.
As it stands, editorial is a black box, they accept submissions, fettle them, then they appear as stories. Recently, the Original Submission link appeared on stories so you can see what went in and what appeared out of that black box, yet still the complaints come.
Just how much transparency is necessary? (This is an open question not rhetorical)
I like to believe that SoylentNews is the people that form it as a community, and the editing should reflect that.
Should we adopt some version control for subs so everyone can see who edited what through the pipeline that goes from sub to front page?
Thoughts on a postcard please.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
META: Editorial Transparency - What do you want?
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 93 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
With Congress, every time they make a joke it's a law; and every time
they make a law it's a joke.
-- Will Rogers
(Score: 5, Insightful) by quadrox on Friday May 29 2015, @06:09AM
1) you can't please everyone - no matter what you do there will be people complaining. Accept it, deal with it.
2) I want a neutral tone in all articles - submissions that are written with a clear bias should be edited remove that bias. No bias should be introduced by editors. This includes any and all stories where there is a clear majority view on SN (e.g net neutrality).
3) Submissions should be fact checked. If the submission seems fishy but still worth posting, don't give it a negative slant, add links.
4) I don't care about editorial transparency as long as the advice rules are followed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 29 2015, @11:56AM
SoylentNews is people. People have views. People write articles. People's names are associated to those articles. People's words are copyrighted by default.
Editors - edit
Writers - write
Editors - Do not change the view of the writer to be something that was not submitted.
Writes - Be pared to have an article rejected because it is missing facts and supported information per what the WRITTEN standards are.
Editors - can fix grammar, display formating, and misspellings, but the "tone" or view of the submission.
Writers - Be sure your "voice"fit the group's WRITTEN standards.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 29 2015, @05:29PM
If you want to follow that, then:
Editors: Reject submissions that do not have a neutral tone, or at least aren't using flamebait wording to get attention. This isn't some breathless clickbait site.
(Score: 3, Informative) by janrinok on Friday May 29 2015, @06:16PM
When well-intentioned submissions do not comply with the Submission Guidelines [soylentnews.org], I would prefer that we editors be allowed to edit them until they do.
There shouldn't be any 'tone' or 'view'. The submission should be neutral, balanced, fair and supported by links to factual material. The tone, view or personal thoughts belong in the comments! When we edit we are often trying to correct one or more of these deficiencies so that we can release it as a story. Its probably why they call us 'editors'.
Before you continue spouting about what the Submission Guidelines should say, perhaps you ought to read them to see what they do say. Concentrate on the first requirement if you are too busy to read it all.
I am not interested in knowing who people are or where they live. My interest starts and stops at our servers.