Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm not sure if I've become more cognizant of bad journalism over time or simply hold journalism to a higher standard with the rise of publicly available data sets which could be used for real insight into questions like this. Whichever one, I am infrequently satisfied with the level of evidence that supports an article's conclusion. I would love to see a truly data-driven news publication that made quantifying uncertainty a priority over creating a digestible narrative for people who'd rather the author does the thinking for them.


Well said, and I share this intuition and desire 100%. I’ve been working on building a platform for data-driven journalism at https://numer.al -- It’s a prototype that turns public APIs into live D3 charts. (Working on embedding those into articles so that they stay up to date, link back to show their provenance, etc.) I think there’s a lot that can be done to bring journalism into the 21st century. If you’re interested in the things we’re working on, feel free to drop me a line: brian@numer.al.


This is pretty neat! My only complaint is that you haven't labelled the axes. You can estimate the Y-axis pretty well based on the listed number, but the X-axis is a mystery until you click the graph. Even two date labels at either end would be welcome.


I'm not sure if their understanding of data or statistics has decreased, but the level of journalism has definitely taken a nosedive. A friend of mine in journalism school says they are taught that accuracy isn't as important as being first or having a clickbait thanks to social media


>I'm not sure if their understanding of data or statistics has decreased, but the level of journalism has definitely taken a nosedive.

Not really surprising. The number of professional journalists is shrinking yet those that remain are expected to produce the same volume of output as was possible with a much larger staff.


Unfortunately, news today isn't meant to be as accurate as it is meant to be popular. Sure, accuracy will provide stability in the long term. But for immediate popularity, appealing titles are what creates viewers, which is revenue in terms of ads.

It's the sad reality of click bait, and it's hard to place blame. Is it the ad network? The"news" outlet? The viewers?

Maybe it's all three, but what I do know is that there is a problem with news on the web.


"...But for immediate popularity, appealing titles are what creates viewers, which is revenue in terms of ads. It's the sad reality of click bait..."

But did you see the Supermoon Monday? It was ginormous!

/s

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2012/05/02/th...


Statistics and data are a means, not an end. Narratives and conclusions must be made by people.

That said, I agree a little more data wouldn't hurt.


That's the problem. I don't want my news to be narratives and conclusions.


News isn't experimental data.


No, but they can report information without having to turn stuff into a narrative.


Then we will complain about that. "Yes, but what does it MEAN?!"


Do you know GapMinder[1]? I think that's what you are looking for.

[1] https://www.gapminder.org/


Don't read news. Buy market research.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: