Consider the following a little Christmas gift. Some of you may have already noticed, but for a few months already OSNews has seen a shift in content. Not necessarily in the subjects we cover, but more in the way we present our news. We’ve experimented for long enough now – we have settled on a definitive change in our content type. Read on for the details.
The first thing that many noticed is the introduction of page 2. Page 2 was a place where we posted items that we, the editors, deem less important than items belonging on page 1. The criteria that governed what items go on which page didn’t really exist, it was mostly a gut feeling thing. As you may notice, I’m referring to this in the past tense, and there’s a reason for that. I’ll arrive at that shortly.
Another addition that many have noticed are what we internally refer to as “long items”. These are the items that carry a “read more” link, under which an editor writes in a little more detail about the subject at hand, and maybe provide an opinion or two. The idea is that we want to offer more – on the crew mailing list, I explained that the internet is actually a pretty simple entity. The better input you give to the internet, the better output you get. The general idea is that if we write a little more in-depth news items (input), we are awarded with better quality comments as well (output). While this is hard to measure, we’ve seen that this is actually happening.
You see, before I introduced the longer items as a regular format for presenting news, we editors mostly expressed our opinions in the “My take” format, and these were hated vigorously for a very good reason: throwing a random, unargumented opinion into the internet is kind of asking for trouble. The front page doesn’t have the space for arguments, so this is where the body section of each article comes into play.
Now, some of you might wonder why we would express our opinions on OSNews in the first place. Other than the “because we want to” argument, there’s more reason behind this apparent madness. Let me explain by giving you a rare insight into the discussion we have behind-the-scenes on our crew mailing list. This is a paragraph I wrote from our long discussion on the future of OSNews:
Forget about being neutral. This isn’t an attack, but uhm, since
when are you neutral? Since when am I neutral? Since when is Adam? Years and years ago, Adam already said: forget this whole OSNews-is-unbiased charade. It took me a few years to realise, but he was right then, and he’s right now. This might seem a little arrogant, but I personally know a thing or two about a number of subjects, and I want to convince others of the way I feel.
There are a few guarantees we will be able to give you. First of all, we will always make sure that you are not forced into reading the stuff behind the “read more” link by placing the main link on the front page no matter what. Of course, there will always be stories with multiple links where you can’t really identify a main link, but you get the point. Secondly, we want stay away as much as possible from pompous headlines. Of course, if we can make a clever headline, we will, but you get the point.
This is where page 2 comes back into play. As you may understand, we don’t know enough about every subject to cover them all in-depth, and as such, we have made a very bold decision. Basically, we love and hug our longer items so much, that we have decided to make them our primary focus. Starting from now, we have a very simple criterion for what goes on page 2, and what goes on page 1:
If we can’t turn something into a long item, it goes on page 2.
This means that some items which may deserve the front page get relegated back to page 2 for the simple reason that none of the staff is knowledgeable enough on the subject it covers. This is a shame, but it cannot be avoided. This does bring me to my next point, though.
OSNews is not Thom’s blog
With just me doing the longer items, OSNews was moving dangerously close to just me spouting opinions, which is of course not desirable. That’s why from the moment I started doing the longer items, I started a very strong push towards getting more dedicated editors on board, with opinions that differ from my own, so that they can bring balance to the site as a whole. The best example of this is our most recent addition to the team, Kroc. Kroc and I have had multiple strong arguments in the past, so I was very happy he wanted to join the team and work with us.
So, our end goal is to have an OSNews with lots of editors, who cover various subjects in a more in-depth manner than happened in the past. The problem is that dedicated editors don’t grow on trees. This brings me back to the input/output argument: “We want serious writers to work for us? We better show we are serious about writing.”
From now on, that’s exactly what we are going to do. This is a transition phase; we will start with moving the front page to longer items exclusively, which in the beginning will mean a reduction in fresh content on the front page, because we have too few editors to post 7-8 long items each day (the number of items we used to do each day). However, page 2, which will move back to the sidebar, will continue to be updated as often as possible with fresh news. In other words, you’re not getting less news – in fact, you’re likely to get more news, because page 2 + page 1 > just page 1.
As time goes on, we hope this will make more writers and potential editors consider OSNews as a good venue for publication. Let me assure you that this will not “fix” OSNews overnight; this is a long term process that may take months. Everyone on the team is now committed to this new direction, and we will work as hard as our other obligations allow to make sure we reach our ideal.
We hope that you understand our new direction, and that you will help us in reaching our goals. And yes, you can help too. Want to submit a news item, and you know a thing or two about the subject? Write longer and more detailed submissions! This will help us greatly, and we would really appreciate it if our regular tipsters could help us out on this one.
Let me close this story with wishing you all a very merry Christmas and very happy holidays, and that you may spend lots of time with the people you love and cherish.
Feel free to post suggestions in the comments, but be advised that we are looking for your advice, not for pleas to return to the glorified-RSS-feed era. I can assure you that those days are definitively over, so complaining about it is useless.
Intuitively I feel things are moving in the right direction, regarding separating the news into “just news” and “opinion-enhanced news”. That ought to get rid of some of the mess. So keep it up. Oh, and all the best wishes for the new year and merry christmas/new year to all of the team!
Edited 2008-12-25 16:38 UTC
I don’t mean to complain, and i’m not doing – I love this site and more long features is a definite plus to me but as a suggestiopn, could we please have a combined RSS feed for our readers?
This all looks to be in the right direction, well done team OSNews!
Happy christmas everyone!
I can’t do that for you personally, but yes, this should definitely happen (assuming you mean page 1+page 2). It’ll be up to Adam to set it up though.
It might already exist, though. I don’t use RSS, so I really wouldn’t know
.
combined rss would be great
I like where you guys are going with this but I like my feed unadulterated
hehe
cheers and Merry Christmas!.
The RSS feed never changed. It was always all items, page 1 and 2, and it will stay that way for the time being. In the event we decide to break them up, we will offer a combined feed for certain.
Hmmm. I’m not sure if this would be a considered a “Glorified RSS reqest”. But regarding “long articles”… it’s always seemed to me that the editors all have their own personal accounts which probably command more attention than the regular user accounts, anyway. Why not keep the official stuff relatively “just the facts” and then post the opinions as regular posts. Lots of people here “know a thing or two about a number of subjects” and find the regular comment section to be a perfectly adequate vehicle. I dunno. It just seems like in the past, when neighborhood site operators start talking about “Editorial Vision” and stuff, it only bodes ill for the future.
OSNews is great. But it’s not CBS News, and you’re not Walter Cronkite. And that state of affairs is perfectly fine with me.
That’s the privilege we have as editors
. That’s just how the world works. So to be blunt: no.
The thing is though, if you submit an article to us, or even a well-written regular long news item, we’ll publish it. We are very open to publishing different opinions – we always have been. In other words, you can have the same kind of podium that we have. Feel free to use it.
Content needs personality.
A news item is going to be presented and written about on a million blogs up and down the Internet.
OSnews can’t be everything to everyone, but it can be something to someone. It is better that we provide something unique to the Internet — even if some people don’t like it — than to be nothing more than a Yahoo Pipes feed regurgitating everybody else’s RSS.
Yes, our “opinions” will piss some people off, but we as news editors are not soulless, genderless, completely unbiased machines. OSnews will be no more biased, unbiased or opinionated with “longer” items than it was without them.
We want to bring original thoughts, and original discussion to the table, and we can only do that by taking our roles as editors more seriously.
Kind regards,
Kroc Camen.
Well, “read more” is definitely a move in the right direction from the unnecessarily annoying “my take”… as long as the story links are in the short blurb visible without having to read through the opinion part. (Restricting the blurbs to “just the facts, ma’am” would be a plus, too.) Which is not to say that I generally disklike reading you guys’ opinions. That’s more a matter of disliking feeling manipulated. I suspect that without some strong aversion to feeling manipulated, we’d all be using Windows, never having even thought to consider other operating systems (regardless of what we’ve actually settled upon), and most of us wouldn’t be here.
Edited 2008-12-25 20:16 UTC
Which is exactly what we promise to do. It’s in the article, actually
.
That being under ‘read more’, I only kind of skimmed it. 😉 And I missed that bit.
But I kinda figured that was in the plan. 🙂
Don’t take my suggestion as being a terribly strong one. The existing plan looks reasonable.
Edited 2008-12-25 20:36 UTC
I just couldn’t bring myself to wade through that meandering edict in it’s entirety. Perhaps you could could summarize the changed?
I’m not a summarising automaton. The article is pretty clear. You might misunderstand the changes without the proper context anyway.
Wanted: Summarizing automaton. Brief experience necessary. Contact [email protected] 😉
No, it’s not a clear article.
Well, nobody else seems to be having any problems. I’m sorry, but the article is crystal clear, and i’m not going to pull everything out of context just because you are having trouble reading.
Thom, sorry, this is a meandering post with no clear structure which does poor job of actually conveying the nature of whatever changes have taken place – let me demonstrate:
First para – introduction. Nothing specific said about changes made. But read on for specifics.
Para 2 – Page 2 is here (never mind the fact that there’s no link to it anywhere I can see). Talk about the fuzzy criteria for page 2 – gut feeling – but this has changed – more about that later.
Para 3 – “long items” – of which this paragraph appears to be an example. Something about input/output posted on the “crew mailing list”. No idea what the crew mailing list is. No idea how longer items are a new/novel feature.
Para 4-6 – History of “my take” – much hated. Extended exegesis on “neutrality” which manages not to convey much about your actual position other than an insider post from the crew mailing list.
Para 7 – Wow – a real feature. Links in the summary. Hosanna. Welcome to 1999 Slashdot. But of course you feel the need to qualify this and divert into a non-sequiter about pompous/clever headlines.
Para 8 – Finally back to page 2. 200 words to say short items go to page 2. So I have to read to the middle of the darned post, and then consume 200 words of fluff to learn about probably the biggest major change. But then again, I still can’t find a link to page 2.
Para 9 – More talk about Page 2 criteria.
Paras 10-13 – OS news is not Thom’s blog, need for more editors/writers This apparently requires 4 paragraphs of exposition.
Para 14 – What you can do to help – write longer submissions.
Para 15 – Merry xmas.
Para 16 – Please provide constructive commentary.
So let me summarize the changes for those who didn’t take the time to wade through your 16 paragraphs of dense prose:
1. Main page will concentrate on longer summary articles.
2. OSNews is trying to grow the writer/editorial staff to support #1.
3. Shorter items will be moved to the mysterious page 2 (which I can’t seem to find).
4. Links will always appear in summaries.
5. You can help with #1 by submitting longer/meatier summaries.
http://www.osnews.com/page2
One thing that OSNews does well is maintain an aesthetically pleasing , logical, and easy to remember link structure.
Edited 2008-12-27 20:07 UTC
Excellent, I’ll bookmark that, because well, the site maintainers can’t seem to put a link to a major portion of the site in the title bar. How user friendly.
Currently, there is NO NEED for a link to page 2, because page is integrated INTO the front page, as part of our ongoing experimentation. As the article explains, page 2 will move back to the sidebar, which will contain a link to the dedicated page 2, just as it did when we first introduced the concept a few weeks ago.
So you did understand it.
Just because you didn’t like it doesn’t mean it’s bad. It just means YOU didn’t like it. Everyone else here seems to be perfectly fine with it, so I’m assuming you are a statistical glitch.
In any case, the the article wasn’t fluff, it was context. The moment YOU run a website like OSNews is the moment you will also understand why it’s necessary to be so descriptive when it comes to policy changes.
Edited 2008-12-27 20:07 UTC
Well… so far, few seem to be strongly against the plan. Not that it would make that much difference if they were. Consider it constructive feedback when I say that if I knew of a site of similar orientation, and which had as high quality a user community I would likely move to it. It is the user community and not so much OSNews itself which makes it worth visiting, IMO. In fact, I suspect that if another similar site did get started, and gained enough momentum to get noticed, you might be facing a mass exodus. The attitude of “this is a done deal, and you guys really have no choice” is a recurring one here are OSNews. One which has never sat very well with me. But for the moment, I don’t think I would want to sacrifice the conversations I have with my friends (and foes) here.
Which does bring to mind a suggestion that I have actually made here before, but only in jest. But I ran into a site which actually supported it, and decided that maybe it might be worth seriously discussing. I’m not sure I’m actually recommending this. But I ran into a site the other day which had a “Friends” system, similar to here at OSNews, to allow one to explicitly organize their “Friend/Fan” relationships. But they also had a complementary “Foes” system to allow users to explicitly organize their “Foe/Enemy” relationships. At the very least, discussion of this might be entertaining. 🙂
Edited 2008-12-27 20:33 UTC
You mean like the one we’ve been in the middle of ever since, like, 2003?
I’m not sure what your question is. What is the significance of 2003? I’m pretty sure I was a reader back through that time (under an old account with a username which escapes me at this time.) Did something special happen in 2003?
BTW, would my old account, unused for years, still exist somewhere? I’m now curious as to just how long I *have* been reading OSNews.
On the actual changes I don’t really care much either way. I like longer commentary, but I tend to find the longer articles here are of a lower quality than say Ars Technica – but I will grant that they are getting better.
What I was trying to get through your head is that your long winded post didn’t do a very good job of communicating those changes in a clear manner. You buried most of the major changes in the middle and end.
This appears to be a common theme with you Thom, you like to force people to read all the way through something (by for example burying the links in the “read more” section, a practice now finally abandoned, but originally heavily defended by yourself).
You will become a better writer if you learn how to summarize at the top, and leave detailed expository for the end. You might not like that style, but it’s the way things a best done on the web. I am a busy person. I want to be able to decide if I want to read on into the detail quickly – and if I don’t read on, I want to at least come away with some useful information.
Take for example Kroc’s post on Ruby. I had no idea what the hell it was talking about until I read 4 paragraphs into the “read more” section. That’s just broken. To be honest I wouldn’t have read the article if it had been properly summarized. But I read it just to figure out what the hell it was about.
If this is by design, it’s extremely wrong-headed. Don’t coerce your readers into reading things they wouldn’t have otherwise – use your noggin to succinctly summarize the story well enough that the discerning reader can decide for themselves.
This only happened during the first few DAYS of the first longer items, MONTHS and MONTHS ago. We stopped doing that right away when we received our first complaint, and NEVER did it again. You are exaggerating.
Dear lord, and I thought I was arrogant.
I will not write in a staccato information style where I will cater to people who are not willing to spend time reading articles. It are people like you that make all those pointless comments asking questions that were perfectly answered within the article – but you missed it, because you were too busy to read the actual article – yet you seem to have enough time to write comments with questions in them that everybody else had already answered by reading the article.
How quaint.
You have made it clear now that the article itself wasn’t bad or incoherent (as evidenced by everyone else here who had no problems understanding it), it’s just that you didn’t want to spend time to read it. Which is fine, but please don’t confuse your own unwillingness with bad writing on my part.
I realize this is an old posting but I was on vacation at the time.
I think the long article should be as neutral as possible, while realizing that complete neutrality is impossible. But, I also think opinions on the material are fine, I just think there should be a clear dividing line.
My ideal osnews would be such:
New wizzerbang gadget gets new Whosiwhat
Project leaders annocned today that the wizzerbang gadget would now have whosiwhat functionality. This comes in response to frequent criticism from its community that it was falling behind arch competitor Tartimal who has had the whosiwhat functionality for upwards of a year.
Commentary by Bill Shooter Of Bul:
Wizzerbang is spending too much time trying to play catch up and become Tartimal, while not doing enough to enhance it sown unique functionality. Whosiwhat-ism is nice for those that need it, but everyone that does need it is already using Tartimal. Those that use Wizzerbang have a different use case that is best left uncluttered with the modifications to the codebase that whosiwhat will necessitate.
Comments:
Bill is obviously a puppet of big Gargiphol. Anyone int the Yasterfund industry needs whosiwhat, whether they know it or not.
~eyesAreOpen
Since Eugenia took the backseat, your opinion was what kept us reading (and laughing at) osnews Thom. No seriously, it’s great to read stuff from someone intelligent and ballsy enough to voice critical opinions.
Keep up the good work Thom.
I agree, don’t always like or agree what he has to say, but I am always compelled to read it. And the topics that spurr off as a result are equally compelling, keep up the good work!
OSNews is my homepage on my Linux laptop and my mac. Merry Christmas everyone and Happy New Year to all.
I personally think this is a great idea.
It fits in nicely with a blog post by Tim O’Reilly I was reading a couple of days ago (not linked by osnews) http://radar.oreilly.com/2008/12/waking-up-from-nightmare-on-tech-s… which comments on how much of the Web 2.0 hype is over sites linking to content which never actually produce any of their own; leading, perhaps to less quality content as the advertising moves from those producing content to those linking to it.
Producing your own content centered on topics started by others seems like a neat solution.
Will
Edited 2008-12-25 19:56 UTC
I wholeheartedly agree. While OSNews serves as an excellent news aggregator that caters to us OS enthusiasts, I fully approve of the move towards offering unique and original content. I’d love to see OSNews become a definitive source for opinion and criticism on the world of operating systems
OSNews editors: Please feel encouraged to voice your own takes on issues, but remember to listen to your readers, too, for is it not written:
“Whoever loves correction loves knowledge, but he who hates reproof is stupid.” ?
Keep up the good – nay, the Great – work.
To all,
And if you know something better than us — we would want nothing more than our smart, well-informed, and passionate community to correct us.
The current editorial staff cannot be experts on every subject, and if news items you care about are falling to the wayside of Pg.2, then consider contributing original content, your own opinion and expertise attached to news items–or put yourself forward as an editor to cover the subjects you know well.
This is take two as my “is this really what you want to be doing right now?” filter kicked in, so I switched to Safari
I don’t know when or how I started reading OSnews but I have been reading for a long time. I am not the talker type of guy on the Internet, probably because I am not a native English speaker so basically I am a reader. I have actually just now registered for OSnews and posting my first comment.
I have been reading and enjoying OSnews over RSS and haven’t been onto the actual site for a while. I like OSnews the way it is, but I think it will be at least as good as it is right now in the new direction you are taking. Internet is all about getting to information but I have just recently noticed that Web 2.0 is all about what you think about this information, whether it is your friends, your photos or news items.
So kudos for the new direction and thanks for all the fish -but please keep the news items, blurbs, whatever you call them so that I don’t have to go out and find a new news source.
Cheers,
Alpay
Your English is excellent and in my humble opinion is better than most of us who are native speakers. Please do not be afraid to post your opinions in the future. Many of us regular readers would love to read what you have to say.
I have to say I have a good feeling about this direction and hope you attract new writers with more content.
I would also like to see the Resources section of OSnews updated and perhaps links to other OS related sites of interest.
.. this may well be the most exciting internal-policy article I’ve read on this site. Great ideas. It’s nice to see how OSNews is shaping up. Congratulations!
I used to see the page 2 side box but no longer, what gives?
Sorry for uneducated question, but what is the purpose of some items being collapsed by default? Can anyone explain the logic behind this? Thanks a lot …
The collapsed ones are the “page 2” items. Originally, a sidebar was introduced for this purpose. Then someone suggested listing them together with the page 1 items, showing only the headlines. This experiment is what you see now. In the article, however, Thom says they are going back to the sidebar.
Call me daft but I can’t find the Page 2 link, and I actually never saw it before. Not running an ad blocker or anything.
EDIT: Also, glad to hear about the change in editorial direction. It seems to be a continuation of the overall rise in quality OSNews has seen over the last year or so.
Keep it up!
Edited 2008-12-26 08:57 UTC
I like the direction things are taking, yet I think the rethink could go even further. Have you considered something similar to Slashdot’s Firehose, where users can contribute ratings as to whether a story should get accepted on the front (/second) page? This would not only lessen the strain on the editors but also ensure that news the users find interesting but that the editors might not have picked still makes the cut.
One step further would be to allow the users to create their own “long pieces”. In some sense this is already built-in since users can contribute original stories; why not extend it to also being allowed to contribute “long pieces” with a news and an opinion section? This combined with the user-rating system would ensure that trash does not get posted, while increasing the number of in-depth articles, all while sparing the actual editors lots of time (and saving money, since most of the “editors” in effect are volunteers).
As an added bonus the “blog-esque” aspect that comes with having a few contributing editors gets alleviated by a much wider range of opinions.
I think this would be in the “true” spirit of Web 2.0.
Think it over.
Cheers
Edited 2008-12-26 09:20 UTC
Short answer: ain’t gonna happen.
Long answer: You see, OSNews is a site with a traditional editorial gatekeeping model. Slashdot used to be like that too, but then they caved under the pressure of Digg’s success, and they figured they could create some halfbaked model in between traditional editorial gatekeeping and “modern” web-two-dot-oh user-controlled content.
We will not go there. We are already quite open, as you can see which headlines are in the waiting list, and everyone can submit news and articles to us. I personally do not believe in user-controlled content the way Digg does. It may have its place, but that place is not here on OSNews.
Would it be fair to say you are taking OSNews in the direction of Ars Technica? They just have long articles, and I’ve always liked the quality that comes from that. As you gain editors I suspect this site will become even better than it already is.
Previously, it seemed like OSNews was doing a good job at being unbiased. Has this changed? Your initial statement appears to imply that it will.
I sincerely hope this is not the case.
GC
The sky’s red here on Planet Claire. What’s it like where you are?
Edited 2008-12-27 05:40 UTC
HUH? I think this is an honest and simple question which deserves a straight answer.
The article is pretty clear. We’ve never been unbiased, it’s just that now we will be more direct about how we editors feel, but only in the longer items. It will not affect which stories we run, just how we run the part below the read more link.
Then again, we’ve been doing what I announced above for months and months now, and it doesn’t seem like you really noticed. So, no, nothing’s going to change for you.
Seems to me that that original article is an acceptance about bias and working around it.
The way to get an “unbiased” site is to have authors of different bias. There’s no reason to ask Thom to change his bias, as part of being biased is being well informed on the topic you’re biased about.
So, bring in others with different expertise and bias, and then, while individuals may be biased, the site as a whole may well not be, or minimally will at least have a broader scope.