Many of you might be familiar with the popular and massively growing antiwork/work reform movement that found a home in the r/antiwork subreddit. Well, recently, the founder of the subreddit was invited on Fox news for an interview and it went about as well as you could expect (We shouldn't support r/Cringetopia) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yUMIFYBMnc

Sub is now private, an offshoot called /r/WorkReform has been launched and everyone hates the old mods now.

I've recently experienced something multiple times and wanted to see if others are seeing this. I'm seeing various news articles where the first few paragraphs basically say the exact some information over and over again 3 or 4 times in slightly different ways. My most recent experience was this article about some hackers selling information on billions of Facebook users.

The article starts off with the title "Personal Information of More Than 1.5 Billion Facebook Users Sold on Hacker Forum". Straightforward and to the point. Next we get this paragraph in bold:

The private and personal information of over 1.5 billion Facebook users is being sold on a popular hacking-related forum, potentially enabling cybercriminals and unscrupulous advertisers to target Internet users globally.

Next is a bullet list of the highlights of the incident:

Highlights:

• Data scrapers are selling sensitive personal data on 1.5 billion Facebook users.
• Data contains users’: name, email, phone number, location, gender, and user ID.
• Data appears to be authentic.
• Personal data obtained through web scraping.
• Data can be utilized for phishing and account takeover attacks.
• Sold data claimed to be new from 2021.

This rehashes the number (1.5 billion) and place (Facebook), but does contain new information like what was leaked, and some unsubstantiated claims about whether it's authentic and how it was obtained.

The next paragraph repeats the 1.5 billion number a fourth time, and repeats that the data is available on a hacker forum. Two paragraphs later, we get another list of bullet points which are identical to the 2nd bullet point above; namely that the info contains:

According to the forum poster, the data provided contains the following personal information of Facebook users:

• Name
• Email
• Location
• Gender
• Phone number
• User ID

At this point I stop reading because I mistakenly think that I'm re-reading the same paragraph over and over again. It's an incredibly unpleasant experience.

Is anyone else seeing this? I've been seeing this not just on smaller sites like the one linked here, but on major news sites like CNBC and CNN, too. I know that news sites are having their budgets slashed, etc., but I literally can't read articles like this. I mean my brain just won't let me complete them because it thinks it's caught in a loop or something. It's hard to describe.

As a new member I am really hesitant to post this but I recently posted an article to ~news that was related to lgbt issues and it was moved to ~lgbt. I fully support a sub section devoted to lgbt but news should be news regardless.

Just because it has an lgbt angle does not mean it should be moved. I'm not even lgbt myself but I find it sort of hurtful that a news article was pushed off ~news. So I ask this, and once again not trying to make waves. But why?

Edit: I would love to be a member of this community as I am personally seeking a less asshole filled reddit alternative. But pushing a news article to another ~ just because it relates a bit more to them shouldn't be a thing. If you are tolerant it relates to us all. And yes I know I posted it in ~news because I was trying to participate and I'm a news junky.

Sorry.

Edit 2: This was a sad sorry way to come in to this community. I apologize.

Here in Brazil we have:

Globo, the generic "centrist"/neoliberal TV news outlet. Used subtle methods of backing a right-wing candidate in the 90s who then ruined the Brazilian economy and (apparently) massively exaggerated the Car Wash operation, even if Lula did something wrong.

Record, which is owned by the largest evangelical Church here and I'd imagine is often a mouthpiece for them.

Cultura, which is the only traditional news outlet here that can actually be called left-leaning, and I don't think they are as ostensibly "moderate" as the American news outlets, which is good.

Band, which is the one all about showing all the crime all the time, presumably to justify the law and order policies as opposed to welfare to it's viewers.

From here we have various (mostly but not entirely) right-wing and religious 'news' channels.

Online there are news outlets like Nexo, El País (for Brazil) and the international news outlets which will occasionally cover the big Brazilian news stories, but I don't think most of them are very popular, at least among most people who, for how divided we are, aren't that political, especially if you aren't a Bolsonarist or Leftist.

Asked because I like the idea of reading about the past and feel unsatisfied by r/history and r/askhistorians mainly because reddit's search isn't that great and those subs have a much wider scope than most news archives.

I'm gonna do this on a Q&A format. Note that "old news" doesn't need to be news articles, it can be blogs for example.

If you read old news/articles, where do you get them from/find them?

What kind of "old news" do you read?

What historical period do you tend to read about?

If you're reading an article about a historical event you remember, how does your memory tend to compare to those articles?

How often do you do it?

What do you think about subreddits like r/twentyyearsago, since they're basically trawling through those news archives?

Tl;dr typical news sources tend to prioritize political and governmental events and the things that surround them, like economics and social issues, even if they cover everything, and by covering everything they probably stretch themselves thinly among what they don't prioritize. (At least that's how it feels.)

A few examples of what I'm thinking of are:

Foreign Affairs, who focus specifically on geopolitics

The Scientific American, which focuses specifically on... science.

Aeon, which seems to focus on "the humanities". (vaaague.)

So... what are your examples of news sources/publications like this that you follow?

The longer I use Tildes, the more I question the effectiveness of ~news.

/r/news made sense on reddit, where they didn't have a robust cross-group tagging and filtering system. I think Tildes be better served by eliminating ~news entirely and replacing it with a news tag with a date property, which would allow for nice chronological filtering for catching up on news stories, especially if the article date could be scraped somehow. Miss a week of news? Search the tag with a date range, get all news stories for last week, perhaps with a minimum comment threshold to see what sparked discussion.

I think ~gov (or politics) would be needed as a replacement, as it's a major driver of most news stories, but there's so much more to politics than just news, and those discussions don't exactly fit anywhere nicely at the moment, esp if it's a random blog post relating to recent events in the news. Almost every other group serves as a nice catch-all for most other common news categories.

The only issue I would see would be when ~gov would overlap with the other categories, which would likely happen a lot..but that happens with the current ~news too. I think that could be further mitigated by having a sort of x-post system blurring the lines of tags and groups even more, where ~gov would take precedence but posts would then also appear in the tagged groups for users not following governance otherwise.

That's actually a foundation of my more insane idea of completely eliminating traditional groups by letting people build their own groups in the form of prioritized tags, but that's another post for another time.

I recently discovered AllSides and I'm wondering if anyone here has experience with it. If not, surely many people here will be interested in it. Seems like an amazing resource, almost too good to be true.

A while back I tried cutting down all my news feeds to just Wikipedia current events, but that can lack the interpretation/commentary which is useful for understanding. I think this will help, as well as provide a quick and easy resource when you want to validate a headline.

Their description:

"AllSides strengthens our democracy with balanced news, diverse perspectives, and real conversation.

We expose people to information and ideas from all sides of the political spectrum so they can better understand the world — and each other. Our balanced news coverage, media bias ratings, civil dialogue opportunities, and technology platform are available for everyone and can be integrated by schools, nonprofits, media companies, and more."