[asaramis]

I found this article to embody every problem with the attitude of journalists from traditional media institutions. The author effectively is lamenting his loss of role as the gatekeeper of all information. Apparently, all journalism was 'pure' and devoid of any conflicts of interest and the only way to receive the 'truth' for a reader.

You can see this near arrogance flow through much of the anecdotes. "Ugh, more and more PR people trying to get my attention all the time. It's sooo annoying." "Ugh, PR girls are even trying to sleep with me, but you can't compromise my editorial integrity." It's perfectly represents the entitlement of the gatekeeper role that must've been built into that last generation of journalists.

Sorry for the mild rant but sites like Hacker News and Reddit have shown that readers are plenty smart, and capable of sifting through the bullshit, whether produced by a corporation, a newspaper, or an individual. When news media held a monopoly on distribution and there were few sources of info, I understand the danger of a corporation holding the sole lifeline of info. That's no longer the case.

[whoopdedo]

> sites like Hacker News and Reddit have shown that readers are plenty smart, and capable of sifting through the bullshit,

Oh? I've had the opposite impression. That Reddit adequately demonstrates that readers are impulsive, poorly informed, narrow-minded, and easily manipulated. On subreddits with the most passive style of moderation, the comment threads are a self-congratulatory shouting match where any contradictory information is shouted down regardless of its merit. On the other hand, where conversations are productive and good information is rewarded, those subreddits are moderated strictly and editorial control is frequently used to remove distracting comments or guide conversations.

In my opinion, Reddit validates the usefulness of a gatekeeper for news.

[asaramis]

I feel you've just perfectly described the variety of newsrooms that produce the stories we read every day!

[shaldengeki]

More rigorously, the explicit goal of sites like Reddit, Facebook etc is to present you with content that you like. In effect, they're doing a search over recent news stories to optimize for likability.

Journalism outlets, at least those operated in the traditional manner with a wall between business and copy, explicitly eschew this goal. The whole point of "church and state" separation in news outlets is to enable journalists to write about stories that readers probably wouldn't upvote, but is important for them to see. This sort of story will be given _much_ less exposure on sites that are single-mindedly optimizing for likability in general.

I think traditionally-operated news outlets serve a socially-useful function, and that the metamorphosis of these outlets into likability optimizers means everyone loses out. You may disagree, and that's your perogative!

[georgemcbay]

"readers are plenty smart, and capable of sifting through the bullshit"

The shared links that pop up all over my Facebook from friends and family who I otherwise wouldn't think would believe such nonsense says otherwise.

[asaramis]

Would disagree here. Facebook as a platform promotes feel-good stuff and it's been self-reinforcing. It makes the space more attractive to advertisers and everyone "wins" (while we all lose).

I still however believe people are smart on average, and are becoming better and better at thinking critically. Possibly a bit naive, but I hope as information becomes more accessible, people will only develop a better sense for what's bullshit (again, no matter who it's produced by).

[foobarqux]

> Sorry for the mild rant but sites like Hacker News and Reddit have shown that readers are plenty smart, and capable of sifting through the bullshit

It's not that they are not capable or smart, it's that they don't bother fact checking every single story or seek out opposing analysis or interpretation, especially for things like US foreign policy.

[asaramis]

Main difference is stories aren't fact-checked before discussing. In the end the right information ends up disseminated probably as often as a standard news story, it's just the 'sausage is made' in the public eye vs. in a closed newsroom the public has no visibility to.

[walterbell]

> readers are plenty smart, and capable of sifting through the bullshit

This has an opportunity cost.

[ionwake]

This is way I built sagebump over a weekend as a side project for myself. It applies merging aswell as custom filtering using open source algorithms I came across on HN and elsewhere. I only wish more people gave it a go, I seem to be the only user at the moment unfortunately. Feedback is totally welcome if anyone wants to take a quick gander. Use this link for a "Technical filtering pass" http://www.sagebump.com/?view=technocrat&info

[hackuser]

What makes it better than my RSS feeds?

1) Auto-categorization: Great if it works. I understand it's beta, but it isn't working now. For example, almost every story is labeled 'Controversy' including "High school football player gives best post game interview ever.", "Chocolate lab after the dog park" and other similar stories.

2) Auto-curation: Again, great if it works and I know it's beta, but the Technocrat view currently offers "LPT: The correct & easiest way to safely break up a dog fight", "California boy gets detention for sharing school-prepared lunch with another student", etc.

Those are hard problems; if you could solve them, count me in. Possibly I misunderstand your goals, but as the other poster said, they could use more explanation.

[ionwake]

1)Content is not categorised. It is filtered on a personal level (your self) then again on an application level (sagebump) to provide a reading digest. I am not sure how I would categorised such a product.

2) Where you using either the default views (technocrat for instance) or your own personal feeds? The articles selected are only as good as your feed filters on your different sites and the settings selected in the menu.

Thank you for taking the time to look at it!

[hackuser]

1) I meant the icons, which I think of as categorization. For example, Sagebump tags story A as 'controversy'.

2) I was using the Technocrat default view.

[sogen]

The Hipster view is broken

[SnacksOnAPlane]

I think you really need a clearer explanation of your goals for the project. I mean, it looks like it could be a neat time-saver, but I don't think I can customize it (I've picked my subscribed reddits carefully already), and it doesn't have the niceties of Reddit Enhancement Suite.

[ionwake]

The point is you enter in your customised reddit feed link, the add the other accounts you have from other websites (EG slashdot) so you can have a merged, filtered, organised list on the same page.

Sagebump sits ontop of your different aggregator site accounts.

BTW Thank you for taking the time to look at it!