Likewise with the AdelaideNOW blog, which is full of praise for the new layout?
I don't like the new page because the stories are different from the Advertiser, meaning if I want to read the front page I have to go buy the paper, which I refuse to do. I'm not paying for one or maybe two stories. Also, you used to be able to read the paper and stories from up to a week previously, but I can no longer find that functionality on the website.
Sure, I can go online and read other sites, but when Adelaide only has one news source, it kind of makes it a little hard to find stuff about us from an Adelaide perspective. But that's besides the point.
Anyway, on Sunday there was a story by Amanda Blair, an ex Adelaide radio jock, about how DJs and radio hosts are aware that most callers to the station are fake.
And it got me thinking... how do we know these blog commentators aren't fake?
The posts are moderated anonymously, and there's nothing to tie people to their posts like other sites like Kotaku or even a web forum.
I added a comment to the AdelaideNow website, and hopefully Rod, the editor, can answer...
Hey Rod,
Just like to get your opinion on something...
Given that the fake radio caller thing has been blown wide open by the Sunday Mail (well, for those listeners too stupid to realise the truth beforehand anyway), I'd like to know what guarantees do we have that people responding to these blogs aren't just newspaper people posing as 'concerned readers'.
Because the posts are moderated before we see them, I feel that this is very open to abuse, much like the Radio calls.
Surely a registered user database would be better than anonymous posting coupled with anonymous moderating.
Hi FunkyJ
ReplyDeleteSurfing around and found your blog. I responded a long time ago with the following:
Hi Funky, you can rest assured there are no fake bloggers here. All are moderated by me, no one else, and I post everything I can as long as it’s not offensive or abusive. The problem with making people register is then most people just won’t bother. And then we don’t get very wide opinion. Rod
Cheers and hope you're still using the site.
Rod
Hi Funky ... can I respond to a few things directly:
ReplyDelete"Likewise with the AdelaideNOW blog, which is full of praise for the new layout?"
You'll find loads of the bloggers don't like the layout - I reckon it's only slightly in favour, so I don't know where you've got this from.
"I don't like the new page because the stories are different from the Advertiser, meaning if I want to read the front page I have to go buy the paper, which I refuse to do. I'm not paying for one or maybe two stories. Also, you used to be able to read the paper and stories from up to a week previously, but I can no longer find that functionality on the website."
I'm deliberately trying to make the site different to what's in the paper. It's about breaking news, with very much a local slant.
A website that simply rehashes that day's paper is a waste of time - and a waste of the medium - in my opinion.
However I do take your point on not being able to see stuff from a week ago. I think our achive system is not good and needs to be overhauled.
Now you've lived with the site for a while, I'm interested to get your opinion again on it. And do you get the PM Edition? I'd also like to know your thoughts on that.
Thanks Funky - look forward to hearing from you.
Rod
Hi Rod,
ReplyDeleteThanks for taking the time to look at my blog and taking the time to respond.
The AdelaideNOW blog was full of praise when I posted that, but I think that's simply people thinking you need to be agreeable to be published... ;)
Truth be told I didn't look at that thread again because we got busy at work.
Now I look at the site a few times a week, usually directed from news.google.com and I think it's too... what's a good word... "busy".
Too many links, too many things to look at, too many adverts and too many sections.
And I personally don't like drop down selection boxes.
But I realise the overall design is probably out of your hands.
I appreciate the effort to bring different stories to the website, and do understand your position, and I grudgingly admit you're right, but it would be nice if you could put the complete newspaper online like the New York Times and Guardian do.