Hacker Neue

Preferences
darkwater parent
So, why is even HN getting a lot of those non-original sources, many times even behind a paywall, on the front page? The answer IMO is easy, and we should have learnt it after over 30 years of Internet and World Wide Web growth: because there is still added value in some journalism (true journalism, we might call it?). Even if they are publishing something from a common source. Who reads the original news might have a better understanding of the topic, might be a better, clearer writer, can add context that makes sense for their audience etc etc
graemep
> So, why is even HN getting a lot of those non-original sources, many times even behind a paywall, on the front page?

They are still a minority of sources, many of the newsy ones have non-paywalled articles. I may not notice some paywalls because I usually have JS off so a lot of paywalls do not work.

They are also a pick of the most interesting articles. its a very small proportion of what is available.

> Who reads the original news might have a better understanding of the topic, might be a better, clearer writer, can add context that makes sense for their audience

Might! If you want original sources read Reuters - non-paywalled BTW.

> because there is still added value in some journalism (true journalism, we might call it?).

Good journalism is a rarity. It is, and has always, been far less common than sloppy, inaccurate, and sensationalist repporting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gell-Mann_amnesia_effect

lapcat
> So, why is even HN getting a lot of those non-original sources, many times even behind a paywall, on the front page?

Because a lot of HN voters and commenters just read the headlines and not the articles.

carlosjobim
Great point. That's how news should be read and how news should be presented. A filtering by the journalist to shorten, highlight, explain, and then a link to the complete and original source, so that interested readers can verify and dig deeper.

This item has no comments currently.