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This discussion has been archived.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.
No problem is so formidable that you can't just walk away from it.
-- C. Schulz
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 29 2015, @04:41PM
"they're completely supportive of our editors." Great politco line.. false, if you read it all.
The issues is simple. If an editor believes something was written with the wrong voice, they change it, BUT still assign the original poster as the writer. That at a minimum is a lie and possibly libelous.
Now, how do we fix that broken problem. Showing before and after does not fix it, since how many actually compare, so original poster is still "charged" with writing the something he did not. In news, the editors do not get to rewrite a report and place the original reporters name on it. Yes, they can fix minor flaws like spelling and grammar, but whole sale rewrite it to be something the original writer did not say. They can reject and TELL the reporter to fix it. If the reporter does not want to fix it, can shop it to others or drop it.
We need better ground rules.
(Score: 2) by mrcoolbp on Friday May 29 2015, @05:04PM
The 'fix' that we came up with was something we intended to do all along and may have missed in a few cases:
In a case that editing requires modifying the intent or ideas being presented by the submitter (rather than paring down, removing bias, proofreading, etc.), then the submission should be rejected. Alternately in the case that the story runs: the byline should not read "NickName writes:" and instead read "NickName informed us of a scoop" or "Originally submitted by NickName" (or similar) and the submission should be mostly re-written.
(Score:1^½, Radical)
(Score: 2) by mrcoolbp on Friday May 29 2015, @05:07PM
I'd also like to add we are planning on adding wording to the guidelines and submissions page that indicate that by submitting a story, submitters understand and agree that their submissions will be edited based on our Submission Guidelines [soylentnews.org].
(Score:1^½, Radical)