codyg1985’s Think Tank

Let’s face it, a lot of us now go to social news websites for our news. In fact, we go there for more than news. We also go there for funny pictures, videos, and jokes. Some things are opinion while some are fact. Some things are funny while others are serious. With all of these different ways of measuring content there is only a thumbs up or a thumbs down to that content.  Lots of thumbs up votes may not necessarily equate that the content is fact or that it is universally funny. It is all subjective. The problem is that dissenting views from the majority are driven away from social news sites, and as a result, the bias of who is left (no pun intended) shines through.

Let’s take a look at the top stories on Digg for the morning of Tuesday, October 28, 2008:

• Google Chrome [pic]
• Dozens of Call Center Workers Walk Off Job in Protest Rather
• WTF: Amazon search for “terrorist costume” shows Obama mask
• Rick Astley to perform at EMA’s - HELL YEAH!
• McCain - Second-Guessing the Vice-Presidential Pick
• John McCain, Drudge conspire to smear Obama
• The 10 Most Outrageous Opening Lines in Literature
• Adults give Uzi to 8-year-old, who shoots and kills himself
• Chavez calls Sarah Palin “confused beauty queen”
• All Codeweaver Products Free 10/28/08 Due to Price of Gas

Four of of the ten stories above are pro-Obama/anti-McCain stories. Nothing that is either neutral or pro-McCain/anti-Obama on Digg. I have to go elsewhere to get another perspective on the issues. There is no popular social news website for conservative viewpoints. Even if there was, it would face the same problem as Digg and Reddit; it would not offer both sides of the argument.

Several solutions are available for this problem. One solution would be to employ something similar to the political news/blog aggregator Memeorandum, which lists a news story that is largely free of any bias, and then that link is followed up by discussion from liberal and conservative blogs alike.

This would work similarly to my topic-tree idea in that it would eliminate duplicate stories as well as providing different perspectives of the news story, but in this case it would separate the raw story from analysis and discussion, which could be biased either way.

On a social news website, an item could be submitted that would only be accepted from “credible” news sources (using the term loosely) that would present only the story, not any discussion or spin either way. Here is how that would work:

• That item would be voted up or down just like on other social news website.
• However, not only would the up or down votes weigh into if it makes the front page, but also page views.
• Comments would appear all under that news story, not under each blog that is linked to.
• The person that submits the news story could choose to submit a blog discussion of that story. More than one blog could be submitted.
• More people could add more blog discussion links to the story.
• An algorithm would be in place that would color the links based on how biased those blogs are (red for conservative, blue for liberal). The darker the color, the stronger the bias.

To an extent, voting on page views and up-down votes would keep news stories that cast certain candidates or individuals in a negative light from being quelled. Attached to each news story would be discussions from blogs. Each link would get an up or down vote, and it would be sorted from most popular to least popular, but the least popular links would  not disappear.

Tying news discussion blogs to news stories would keep multiple entries from appearing on the front page. More importantly, the facts would be voted up on the front page, not the spin or viewpoint. It would also be easier to identify bias on a social news website.

The obvious problem with the above method is that all news stories would have to be submitted in the first place, and if a social news website is biased, then the stories that cast the other guy in a good light or their guy in a bad light will not be submitted. Even if those news stories were submitted, perhaps only the blogs that the majority agree with or align with would be submitted as discussion for those news stories. This would mean a return to the original problem.

My next blog post will talk about another idea that I have that completely changes the voting system for social news websites that not only takes bias into account, but also the type of item being submitted.