Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Credder Wants to Create an Equivalent to “Rotten Tomatoes” for News

mondaynote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 247 posts

Re: Credder Wants to Create an Equivalent to “Rotten Tomatoes” for News

#91

Post by techiferous »

josefresco wrote: post #58

This, and many other concepts based on "vetting" news assumes that the audience cares. A significant portion of the audience does not care, and is instead looking for news that validates their worldview, and furthers their (and their chosen political party's) goals. So basically these services will cannibalize the part of the audience that does care about truth, turning people against each other over marginally skewe…

You're not wrong. But for those of us who want facts and insight instead of entertainment and opinions it would be nice for it to be more obvious where to find that.

Re: Credder Wants to Create an Equivalent to “Rotten Tomatoes” for News

#92

Post by danso »

crististm wrote: post #71
rooam-dev wrote: post #64

Good luck to them if course, but I am not sure this will work. Couple of reasons come to my mind: 1. How will I know that news have been reviewed by qualified people? Technically this should be news agency/source's job. 2. By the time the score will depict the news' quality, the damage may be already done. 3. RT is based on people's opinions, but news should be fact checked. What I think it should do, is to score the…

> 3. RT is based on people's opinions, but news should be fact checked. Except when RT doesn't like to hear people's opinion when it differs from the mainstream. Unfortunately it's easy to box it as "trolling" and hide it under the rug.

If you want to go on a rant, is it too much to ask that you list examples and how they apply, rather than assume everyone here is as on top of Internet drama like you might be? Your examples might even make it clear why a RT for news would be even more difficult than the one that exists for movies.

Re: Credder Wants to Create an Equivalent to “Rotten Tomatoes” for News

#93

Post by frogpelt »

komali2 wrote: post #84
crististm wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently I'm getting myself in a SJW hive. Shame on me. s/hive/swarm

This is why my hackles are raised the instant somebody starts a "people should be exposed to various viewpoints discussion." I want to give the good faith interpretation, which would be, maybe, a healthy exposure to different economic system philosophies or something. But, nowadays, I find this argument, or people "just promoting the right to free speech," are really exactly the kind of people that casually toss arou…

Interesting that you consider it bullying if an individual abrasively states different viewpoints from the crowd.

Is it bullying if the crowd uses similar tactics to silence the individual?

Perhaps it depends on whether you agree with the crowd's opinion or not.

Re: Credder Wants to Create an Equivalent to “Rotten Tomatoes” for News

#94

Post by Circuits »

danso wrote: post #92
crististm wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 3. RT is based on people's opinions, but news should be fact checked. Except when RT doesn't like to hear people's opinion when it differs from the mainstream. Unfortunately it's easy to box it as "trolling" and hide it under the rug.

If you want to go on a rant, is it too much to ask that you list examples and how they apply, rather than assume everyone here is as on top of Internet drama like you might be? Your examples might even make it clear why a RT for news would be even more difficult than the one that exists for movies.

If you think that is a rant my sister would melt your eyes from your skull within about 10 minuets.

Re: Credder Wants to Create an Equivalent to “Rotten Tomatoes” for News

#96

Post by esalman »

Like academic publications, every news article should be published along with acknowledgement of funding, conflict of interest and maybe data availability statement. It is a lot easier to judge a news article when you know who own the publication and such.

Re: Credder Wants to Create an Equivalent to “Rotten Tomatoes” for News

#97

Post by DamnInteresting »

joeblau wrote: post #40

I wrote something that was trying to do this a back in January that was called desational[1]. What I did was very basic but the process I did went as follows. 1. Break up news articles into sentences 2. Pay Amazon MTurkers to tag sentences as `news` or `not-news` 3. Train a text classifier based on the results for Mturk 4. Process new articles using the trained model to identify and strip out parts pf the article tha…

Very interesting idea. However, having dabbled with Bayesian classifiers myself, I suspect that your decision to break the article into sentences may be a fatal flaw...both the Mturkers and the classifier lose out on valuable context that way. I know because I took a a similar approach in one of my own projects, and the classifier could never gain enough 'confidence' to classify things, even after thousands of trainings.

The approach might work pretty well if you broke it down to paragraphs, where some context is preserved, but the more context you provide, the better the classifier will perform, often for surprising reasons. For example, I built one classifier that was performing poorly until I re-trained it without stripping HTML and headers; after that it performed splendidly. Upon examination I found that tokens such as domains and IP addresses in headers and links were hugely influential (and rightly so) in the classification.

Just something to consider. :) Apologies if I incorrectly assumed that your classifier is Bayesian.

Re: Credder Wants to Create an Equivalent to “Rotten Tomatoes” for News

#98

Post by Circuits »

josefresco wrote: post #58

This, and many other concepts based on "vetting" news assumes that the audience cares. A significant portion of the audience does not care, and is instead looking for news that validates their worldview, and furthers their (and their chosen political party's) goals. So basically these services will cannibalize the part of the audience that does care about truth, turning people against each other over marginally skewe…

I think your outlook on the subject is extremely pessimistic and is a strong reflection of your own jaded feelings towards misinformation.

Re: Credder Wants to Create an Equivalent to “Rotten Tomatoes” for News

#99

Post by CodeSheikh »

IMHO, journalism is slowly dying. These days you find more "opinion-based" or "make-it-viral" news pieces than proper investigative journalism. Services like this can help but at the same time they can create further segregation of true news vs poor news if most of the critics start growing to be biased.

Re: Credder Wants to Create an Equivalent to “Rotten Tomatoes” for News

#100

Post by crististm »

komali2 wrote: post #84
crististm wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently I'm getting myself in a SJW hive. Shame on me. s/hive/swarm

This is why my hackles are raised the instant somebody starts a "people should be exposed to various viewpoints discussion." I want to give the good faith interpretation, which would be, maybe, a healthy exposure to different economic system philosophies or something. But, nowadays, I find this argument, or people "just promoting the right to free speech," are really exactly the kind of people that casually toss arou…

Just to be clear, I should have said swarm. This is not about the whole HN and I've been here for a long time to see how it adjusted its directions from the top.

I should probably know better than to voice my opinion to a group of strangers, but no, I will not apologize for what I think.

I voiced my opinion and that part of HN crowd that heard me considered that I should shut up. Such is life

Post reply on HN