World News

22056 readers

62 users here now

Breaking news from around the world.

News that is American but has an international facet may also be posted here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

For US News, see the US News community.

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Moderation / Rules of "news" community? (beehaw.org)

submitted 1 year ago by HeapOfDogs@beehaw.org to c/news@beehaw.org

43 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I can't seem to find anything in a sidebar or sticky thread that talks about the moderation / rules of the news community. I'm very interested in coming to this community to learn about news, but right now it seems whats being posted tends to be relatively low (lower?) quality.

Examples of common rules

Use the same titles as the article itself
No blog spam, link to the source
Political news, should go to the political community
No dupes of same topic

As an example, take a look at other news aggregators that focus on news.

My goal here isn't tell people what to do but its start a conversation on the topic.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] alanine96@beehaw.org 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What do people think of a "journalistic integrity" rule? I know that's also subjective, but I'm trying to think of how to phrase a rule that is basically "don't post intentionally incendiary crap". I guess the rule could just be "don't post intentionally incendiary crap", with some examples of what that means and community opportunities to in some way indicate that an article is incendiary crap.

[–] Prestron@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Sorry about the duplicate comments. Not sure if it was the server or the app I was using, but I didn't think they posted until it was too late and I re submitted it.

Anyway, I agree to this idea in theory, but only if there are extremely clear thresholds before the rule is invoked. For example: a limit on authors' statements of opinion. Ways that are unacceptable for the article to refer to its subjects.

Basically I think we should debate the rules we want, but once we have consensus I wouldn't want us also fighting about what does or doesn't break the rules. Let's please make the rules clear and measurable.

[–] Powderhorn@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

For example: a limit on authors’ statements of opinion.

What did The Economist ever do to you?

Seriously, a hard rule (zero) on that excludes that pub and would exclude almost everything, but would still be far easier to implement than drawing a subjective line for each post that satisfies no one.