The way to seed an article

Repeating my comment from your other seed:

I seed whatever I find interesting, leave headlines alone (except where a tweak is required to make it more clear a story is regionally specific) and include the first few paragraphs to convey a sense of what it is about. My seeds don't reflect what I agree or disagree with (I've posted "climate change is bunk" kinds of stories though I disagree with that - they help provide an opposing view and some balance).

It is the reader's responsibility to read a story and make their own judgement on its validity. There isn't time, of course, to read everything but it's also our responsibility to recognize that everything is questionable. (As opposed to, "It must be true - I read it!")

I think a news article to a reputable site should be the first paragraph of the article or the entire article, the title as the name of the seed, and a link. If the author wants to share his opinion, he should do so with the comment boxes.

I notice that when an article is seeded the title of the text block is "Your Comment", not "Summary" or "Fair and Balanced Summary". I've always just left a comment.

I basically use the same strategy, reuse the original title sans extra stuff and then copy the lead-in. However, just for further clarity, if the articles is clearly a rumor, I add that to the headline and since much of my seed are sports related, I add the sport to the front of the headline for further clarity as to what I am seeding.

I also believe that just because a user seeds an article, does not mean the article reflects their actual viewpoints at all.

Keep up the good work!

Irma: This is what I was referring to in the comment that you quoted above. I figured it might make a little more sense in the context I meant it. I'm not saying it's a completely static thing and I've figured I'll add to it as situations arise. However, I hope it helps me maintain some level of effort here.

In general, I do feel that we can editorialize by selecting quotes from articles. However, that has always been an issue with journalism. For example, I'd argue that was the issue with the article you had seeded earlier today regarding Linda Hirshman. The article (again, not anything on your part) was being selective to try reframe the context of her words. Judging by the extremely harsh reaction of the comments, I'd say the author suceeded in doing that, upon reading the origional piece written by the seeds subject.

We are given quite a bit of latitude for what we put into the "Your Comment" space, and with good reason. There are many who choose to editorialize there or to simply put just a sub-headline and no more. I can't say that what I do is any better than that, it just is what I would prefer to see myself and that's what I do. I can't imagine that any one set of rules would cover all situations. I agree that I don't have the time to construct the perfect two paragraph, unbiased description or quote set.

I don't swallow everything that's put in front of me, and I think that's a positive attitude

Almost any intelligent person who watches, listens to or reads news of any type today almost has to agree with that statement.

Your method just may be the best to generate discussions, cause people to check your every reference and look for the hidden meaning in everything. Congratulations, you have just joined most of the major journalists. I hope it works for you, is sure has for a lot of others.

I appreciate this discussion because I really haven't given it a great deal of thought. I went back to the help menu and looked at the How to Seed Newsvine Effectively article and realized that my seeding philosophy is basically a direct import of what Calvin suggests.

- Write a concise lead-in using the text field "Your Comment:". This will help people understand what the saved link is about and why they should visit it. It also orients users who want to read or participate in comment threads and chat. A good method is to start by saying what the article is about and to finish off by saying what your take on it is (if any) and perhaps asking others for their views on the subject or event. Please do not use web addresses

I don't always do this as well as I would like - usually because I don't think I can add to or improve what has already been said. In that case, I use the summary provided.

I do like to see people's thoughts when they seed something but I hadn't considered that this could be done as a comment instead of in the seed itself. I have kindof thought adding a comment to a seed was a way to inflate one's comment count and hasten the seed's arrival on the front page. I appreciate having another perspective -- it's making me smarter and changing the way I have thought about this.

Irma, I would like to apologize to you.

I'm not retracting what I said but I should have phrased it less confrontationally. It probably came over a bit heavy and personal and that was not what I intended.

A bit of context might help explain why I reacted the way I did to your seed.

I make no bones about being a supporter of Israel. That would be obvious to anyone who reads my column or comments. Certain Viners are distinctly anti-Israel and seem to spend much or all of their time seeking out anything negative about Israel they can find so they can seed it. Some of it is newsworthy but a lot comes from websites that have a pro-Palestinian or anti-Israel agenda and present very one-sided views. I suppose I'm now a bit sensitized to this and therefore on the lookout for seeds that come over as deliberately trying to portray Israel in an unfairly bad light.

You did happen to seed that article about the Kibbutz pool in a way that did not reproduce the balance of the original, but that might well have been an unintended consequence of your normal approach to article seeding. I still think there is a lesson there but I have no reason to think you have an overriding agenda and I was probably unfairly critical.

Sorry.

Friends?

I voted for this article and I appreciate what you have said. I may even believe and adopt every word you have written. BUT. Seeders shouldn't be cookie cutters. Each individual has to decide for themselves what and how and when to seed. Maybe even why and where. Rules about seeding or writing or just about anything else tend to defeat individualism. I do believe in reining in those that go beyond what the readership wants. Let the readership decide by not reading.

I summarize, and prefer when others do to. I can honestly say, that 90+% of the time I click through and read the article, but there are many times I wouldn't have bothered if the seeder would have provided a good summary. I click through a lot of articles; and a good summary allows me to make educated selections regarding what may or may not truly catch my interest.

I don't expect the summary to be fair and balanced; but closer to Calvin's

…concise lead-in…that orients users who want to read or participate.

Headlines can be so misleading by themselves; but then again so can articles, which is why I try to be diligent in checking the sources and trying to read the original quoted materials, as well as seeing how the topic is handled by multiple sources.

4) I'm not Claus *grin*

Hey, a Claus joke - with a twist :D

I prefer that people post a quote in blockquote tags, and/or post their own opinion.

The issue I have with this style is that it is a copyright violation. Quoting the first couple of paragraphs of an article is a direct copyright violation, and is quite beyond fair use. Take google news summaries as an example. If your seed is including much more text from the original website than that, you're violating copyright. I'm not interested in discussion of how broken current copyright law is (extremely), or the morrality of breaking the law in copyright cases; I'm just stating a fact.

Irma, what I prefer to find when coming across a seed in Newsvine is something to tell me whether it is worth clicking on the BGB (Big Green Button). If the tittle isn't self-explanatory (many science-related one are), then a few lines can be helpful (either from the article, or your own short explanation). Opinions and comments can come later, in the comment section. What I find imperative in the mains "article area" is some information that will show me, as clearly as possible, what the BGB will take me to.

Hope this helps.

Irma

You're absolutely right, all news is biased. The idea of pointing out that something is your own comment is unnecessary, I would have thought, as everything you post is immediately a comment. Just seeding is you saying: here's something. Have a look.

Posting snippets is fine under UK copyright law (don't know about US) as it's quoting, which is exempt. Don't worry about it.

You've written above about citizen journalism, which is a concept that demands attention and work from both the reader and the poster. Don't feel responsible if someone gets the wrong impression, it's entirely their own fault for not bothering to read things properly.