spidr.today

Looks good.

>I have been collecting daily snapshots so that one day SPIDR would feature a timeline, would that be a feature worth of further development?

I think it would only be cool in about like 50 years or so. Reading news from half a century ago is interesting, reading what happened 2 summers ago... not so much

Basic feedback: I love this thing. WELL DONE.

Advanced: It's simple, easy to navigate on mobile (my primary use device for it), and does an excellent job of keeping up with events. It also seems to have the kind of automated lack of bias I like. And reveals how often "news" organizations just gone publish the wire. It's odd, but its quirks even give me an intuitive feel for news behind the news. Really, bravo.

>>49993
Yeah, I guess you're right, it wouldn't add any significant value in such short time span.

>>49996
>even give me an intuitive feel for news behind the news
Well described. It's like I can quickly get the outline of the topic only by looking all the headlines and not actually reading word-by-word.

What about the colors, any graphic designers here? Would black on white be better than plain gray?

>>49918
Love this platform, wouldn't mind Italian news tho :^)

>>49918
It's been my go-to news site. Some separate, specific categories would nice too.

Add a way to create our own topics, although I'm not sure how that would work.

>>50109
Custom theme setting, like color pickers, with some presets.

>>49918
Please remove infowars from the site, we don't need right wing extremist propaganda on there, and this is coming from a registered republican.

is there a way to filter, to remove stories I'm not interested in seeing?

Is this not a feature that currently exists?

the current filter highlights, and putting, say "-orlando" doesn't purge orlando headlines.

I agree with these things:
>>50148
>>50172
>>50164

>What about the colours, any graphic designers here?
I don't think you need graphic designers to pick colour schemes, right? Just pick the colours your favourite websites use

>>49918
It's good to be able to compare the headlines in different sources for any given story.

I like that I can see all the top outrageous Breitbart clickbait headlines without having to actually go there.

>>50109
Would there be any way to add themes up top or something? Personally I like white text on dark backgrounds, but a few theme settings could let people pick the original colors, white on black or black on white.

>>49918
Looks really cool but can you explain how it works? what I mean is, if there's a box that says "Reuters: Politics" but all the article headlines in the box are from random other sources? I think I'm missing something

INSOLENT SUMMERFAG KNAVES!!

BOW BEFORE YOUR KING IN PRAISE!!

ALL HAIL THE SPIDRman, THE KING OF /news/!!

>>50169
Infowars isn't propaganda so much as controlled opposition. Alex Jones is an agent provocateur.
Regardless, Infowars should stay.

I just wanna say thanks to spidrman, your site is my go to for the news. I had always wanted to see a site that aggregates all the news! Well done.
So far, so good. I dont see anything that needs changing. Let alone the color scheme. Like that clock from beauty and the beast said, if it aint baroque dont fix it :3

Atm the site (awesome btw) is showing barely anything but the Orlando Shooting. Is there a way to hide certain stories?

Okay

How much traffic are you getting OP?

>>50148
I added a bunch of italian sources. Check the info section for details if you have additional sources in mind.

>>50172
>>50306
The filter function now supports inverse filtering. Add minus sign before the word, e.g. -orlando to filter out the Orlando titles. Filtering currently supports only one word but I will improve it if needed.

>>50268
Added an inversed color theme.

>>50278
The boxes represent news topics. The most recent article within the box is displayed with a larger headline, content and source title.

>>50297
I can agree with this. Marginal and extreme sources are the salt and I don't think there are yet too many of them.

>>50315
Not too much traffic yet. I'm actually a bit disappointed that the word hasn't spreaded yet outside this audience.

>>49954
>>50181
>>50304
Thanks for the supportive comments.

Some basic translator of non-English stories would create a larger picture. But I don't know how easy a title translator would be to implement

>>49918
Please add breitbart

http://i.imgur.com/wA2jEmW.png
I would like some padding between these rectangular blocks please.

also websocket connection for live updating
consider socket.io

>>49918

If you want to reach a larger audience faster, I suggest making an app as well. Also I dig the inverse color scheme, so don't forget to add that in the app, makes night reading easier on the consumers eyes.

>>50527
this is bait

>>50406
That is so nice to just go "-Trump" and everything that isn't the eternal doom of America shows.

>>49918
did you consider to open source it? im thinking that this type of project would scale well with parallelization of work (client api, cross session modular filter logic) .. its a good fit for os, that is if you dont plan on monetizing it ofc

>>50549
this is this is bait bait

An auto-refresh option would be nice.

Also pinning breaking-news stuff for a certain amount of time.

>>50524
I use Chrome's translator feature to do that. I'm not sure if it's a plugin or what because in some Chrome versions automatic translation isn't offered. Translation must be done anyway client side because as far as I know there are only paid translator API's.

>>50535
I added +5px padding around the box contents. Thanks for the websocket tip, never thought that was possible. My web tech knowledge hasn't been updated since the mid 2000's.

>>50538
Yeah, apps are nice but I believe the same experience can be delivered with mobile-friendly web page.

>>50559
I think I would personally benefit more from monetization than open-source fame. But I wouldn't want to fill the page with ads either, so I don't do anything about it for now.

>>50641
I had the thought of auto-refresh but instead I added the yellow text to note the user when an update is available. I'm still not sure if auto-refresh is a good thing.

Pinning breaking news is a great idea. Only I have to automatize it somehow... how to discriminate between Trump-like news and Orlando-type news, both of them have large visibility. I think the algorithm would need to look back for a couple of days and note only topics that haven't been featured earlier.

>>50659
Please add breitbart

>>50295
All hail!

I like it. Alot. It quickly became one of my top sources for headlines.

If I had to complain I'd say that once in a while the stories below the main headline are not related to the main.

Other than that, it's bitchin'.

>>50662
No. Get out.

>>50659
>I'm still not sure if auto-refresh is a good thing.

Auto-refresh is one of the things that annoys me about Drudge.

>>49918
Fix your https nigga, Let's Encrypt exists now, you have no excuse.

>>50659
Well then you can have Auyo-refresh as a toggle.

I've been using this site for a few days now and as I put it on my second monitor a toggle for that functionality would be nice.

>>50700
>Auto-refresh is one of the things that annoys me about Drudge.
Every time the drudgereport.com page refreshes, Matt Drudge earns another shekel.

>>50809
Not if you ad block and tracker block his page.

This thing doesn't show up at all when I search 'Spidr news', 'spidr news aggregator' etc. You need to promote this more and set up a patreon for 'server costs'.

>>50844
Yes he does he gets paid by the pageview

Is there any chance we could simply remove a source when we're viewing? I kind of share another poster's want to get rid of infowars, I don't really consider it reliable, but I can just ignore it. But a toggle would be better, or can we do that with the filter option already?

>>51223
Really? I didn't know that!

>>50789
I remember you from the last thread. The secure http is now set but it doesn't really help your privacy because all the images are retrieved from the source providers in regular way. I would either need to buffer the images or simply not display them in the https mode.

>>50803
Auto-refresh toggle is now next to the last updated text. Make sure you bookmark the toggled version, I didn't want to store the information to a cookie.

>>51222
Yeah, I know I should. I've been guerilla marketing SPIDR in couple of places but in most cases the site has received either zero attention or hostile reception. I guess people are afraid about the non-professional look and the strange .today domain, or they don't immediately get what's it all about and get angry.

>>51230
I'm a bit puzzled about requests to filter out sources. If you think a certain source isn't reliable, then why don't you just ignore it and move on? I believe no source is reliable in its own, that's why I created SPIDR. Also, I checked the database at one point and Infowars represented 12 / 524 of the US headlines, it's not too large portion I think.

so how is this any different than an rss feed

>>49918
It looks nice and easy to navigate through. I'll definitely be using this.

Interesting snapshot function..

>>51311
Awesome, thanks for the auto-refresh, just changed my bookmark.

This is really good, started using whenever the thread was created and haven't stopped

HAIL

SPIDRman

>>51311
>I guess people are afraid about the non-professional look and the strange .today domain, or they don't immediately get what's it all about and get angry.
Those sons of bitches and bastards. You want us to show them a thing or two you just give the word, KingSPIDR, sire.

>>49918
the german edition should get a filter so I can sort out all fee-paid news, like ard tagesschau, zdf heute, and deutschlandfunk because they are only government ass-licking propaganda.

>>52213
How do you guys feel?

>>50169
I'd rather see everything than a curated list I can get anywhere like Google or similar. Infowars was also one of the few sites to have videos on the riots and mass violence from leftists. I'd love to see raw news from individuals even at some point so we can make up our minds.

Neglected to leave feedback. Love the site it's simple and succinct. Minimal which is great. Seems to work well on mobile too on Chrome and Firefox.

It's pretty much the best news site ever made, but I am deathly afraid of spiders so I can't even look at it without getting the chills.

Please change the name to something less arachnid.

>>52669
There are no actual spiders on the page, Anon.

>>50659
>Benefit from monetization
Honestly, putting ads on it will kill it, because anything that makes money from advertising gets dragged into bias by the advertisers.

You could probably start a fundraising campaign and just add a donate button and that might be the best way to keep the site all yours but still pay for operating expenses and a bit of profit

>>52760
I may donate.

>>51311
>received either zero attention or hostile reception
99% chance that this is because they opened it up and saw it isn't biased enough for them. People don't like to see things that go against their feelings.


Feature Suggestion: Could there be another toggle option that collapses the groups of the same story? It feels kind of cluttered with all those links, and It would be nice to be able to only see the multiple sources for stories I find interesting.

>tfw SPIDR thread is dead

>>50659
/gd/ here

Remove background color from .col and set .it margin to 0 10px 10px and you're golden as far as giving each news area some "breathing room" so to speak. Maybe make the border a little darker for contrast.

I'd also make the text larger. Even changing .cl font size from 70% to 75% makes a huge difference.

I like its minimal design, a style switch would be nice. Sometimes one of the headlines in a group seems to be rather unrelated to the topic though. I remember an infowars headline that seemed very unrelated to the rest of the stack.

bump for king spidrman

Adding far-right news sources doesn't provide it with any sort of "balance." Extreme POVs should be excluded altogether. Yes, that includes anything that might fall under Tumblrisms as well. I'd stick with purportedly neutral sources only.

Absolutely do NOT add a user comment / topic feature. That will quickly be abused by extreme POV pushers. Look at the fucking travesty that is Yahoo News comments, if you think otherwise.

Little late for the party, but RSS would be very much appreciated. It shoudn't be that hard to implement, format the data in valid XML and it shoud work.

>>60286
That is true, plus the websites usually have a comment section anyways. Just send people there.

Thx OP/Spidrman!
looks good!
also,bump

Sorry for disappearing, I've been busy with other projects. For SPIDR I have been mostly preparing a server-side version for the aggregator so I wouldn't have to run it in my living room.

>>55973
I made the modifications you suggested but it didn't really change the view. In my opinion, 75% font would've been too large.

>>56014
Yeah, the grouping is not perfect but fair enough. I have ideas to improve the algorithm but haven't really had the time to try those.

>>60286
It's hard for me to draw the line between extreme and neutral sources, as I'm not fully familiar with the media scene in the US. Is FOX considered neutral? I understand Breitbart and Infowars aren't. In my opinion, if I had only neutral sources it would become boring because they probably contain the same information. Extreme sources bring different viewpoints and I believe people are mature enough to receive them with criticism. If anything, I should instead add more left-wing sources. At some point I considered adding a voting button on each headline so that the most disliked headlines would be filtered off. But the traffic is not yet large enough for that to happen.

I share your opinion on the comment feature. It would be more useful to give a link to discussions of the same topic, for example a thread on /news/ or /pol/ or some page on reddit.

>>60294
Yeah, I've been thinking of that. Just that I'm a bit afraid of someone else monetizing on this.

>>60294
>>60392

Hm, I can see that. Ads and paywalls are deal breakers. You could rely on donations or keep the service up just of good will, but these options are hardly profitable, depends. Worked in the past for a news resource, and they had their own similar aggregation service, so I suppose all others have too, on some scale at least. Idea is not new and probably all those, who had the real need, already have the solution. I'm not sure who else would monetize it. On the other hand, you could limit the request rate for bots, I would see perfectly reasonable rate of multiple hours, up to 24, depending on your relevance-rating algorithm. Anyways, service is great as it is already, please continue the good work.

>>60392
>I'm not fully familiar with the media scene in the US
>Is FOX considered neutral?

Oh, geez.

You're not doing anyone a service with this app if you can't even distinguish between neutral and blatantly biased viewpoints.

>Extreme sources bring different viewpoints

Just like shitposters increase a thread's post count?

>At some point I considered adding a voting button

So you want this to be a tyranny of the majority where unpopular opinions are silenced?

Just stop. This was a terrible idea to begin with, and you're definitely not the right person to execute it.

>>60417
Oh, shut the fuck up. The site has both neutral, far-right and far-left news. It's the most neutral aggregator you will get.

If you feel assblasted because you simply can't ignore some sensationalist news articles because you possibly have ADHD or some form of mental illness, you're free to fucking leave whenever you want.

SPIDR bro, keep up the good work. A news aggregator like this that is a big jumble of everything from all points of view is exactly what I've been looking for. Unlike some retards, I find it extremely interesting to see all the different ways information can be reported.

>>60467
>>60417
To add to it though: The one thing I agree with you on is that the voting thing is not a very good idea at all.

If there's one thing you learn when working with large groups of people, is that the general person tends to be retarded and will have no qualms about shitting something up if it achieves personal victory, -especially- if they're politically-inclined.

It's best to just keep it as a reader website: No user input, and lots of features for maximum reader comfort.
Also, setting up a donation button as well as a patreon is a good idea. Some people would be more than glad to pay up some donations if you keep it clean, updated and ad-free.

>>60417
Finally one negative comment. All I can say I don't believe people hurt themselves by seeing headlines from biased sources when they know they are biased. The point of the site is to encapsulate different viewpoints of the same topic. The voting option is not a good idea, I can now agree with that.

Is there a way to see news that's more than a day old or is this more of a "current news right now" sort of thing.

>>60696
I think it's more current events only, like this board

>>49918
Support for Canadian news would be nice, I use it a lot

Also maybe making a black background with white text, like the 4chan "Tomorrow" extension

It's basically really awesome

>>60718
light on dark theme is at the top right, mate.

>>49918
maybe add a side tab with eastern news outlets (china, russia, middle east) to give perspective

/news/ is the comment section for spidr.today

this thread doesn't die on my watch

>>61757
>/news/ is the comment section for spidr.today
Pretty much.
Anyway, since this has a lot of loyal /news/men, how would you guys feel about turning /news/ into a real textboard? Maybe making the catalog the way to view threads, like on /f/? And also reimplementing the 48hour autosage?

>>61765
Fine with me just boost the amount of stories one can post 10 is restrictive

>>61765
I like the part about going back to 48hour autosage.


I'd be okay with this being a true textboard, but honestly I like being able to post an OP pic with the article. It's useful sometimes and I don't think people abuse it as it is now. I think if it does become a text board then we should also get rid of the SJIS/ASCII/unicode spam filters.

I've noticed in certain 'blocks' the brief description of the primary headline will sometimes contain the phrase "The post", often in contexts that don't make sense...
Does this have to do with the news-source (it seems to be mostly from One America News Network)?

>>60392
I'd suggest not removing extreme sources, as I agree with your notion that people are capable of their own criticism and filtering.
For some extreme left sources, alternet.org, motherjones.com are examples that would balance it out a bit.
Reason magazine for individualist perspective, National Review is very conservative but is considered respectable.

>>61988
I'm worried more about disreputable clickbait sources than I am about the partisanship of those sources.

>lol hey guiz let's add extreme viewpoints for "balance"

dropped

if I wanted to read that shit I'd just use tumblr or Fox News

>>62011
this

>>49993
>>50109

Catching up on the news when you've missed a few days or even a week is useful. no ones really doing it well. If you can work than into the system I'd be more likely to visit.

(1 of 2)

Some thoughts:

There is heaps of potential to your site but:

1) try and make it look less web 1.0. this matters. it looks ( aside from functionality ) like I've stumbled across someones personnal webiste. A banner, a slogan and decent name - "News hound" "news scoop" "news addict" "news trend" and get it a proper dot com domain.

2) Don't blocks sites like brietbart or infowars - occasionally they have good stuff BUT do allow people to prioritise news sites - the abitlity to list your favourite news sources first but NOT blcok the others. In my experience most people want biased news but want to pretend that they don't.

3) Consider listing by what's trending on your site ( you can fake/bias this until your site gets big enough )

4) Sports and celebs sell - consider a companion site for sports and celebs - don't junk up the real news though please no matter how click profitable it is

5) Ads are okay - banner ad at the top that can easily be scrolled past just don't be dick about it ( ie popups, vids distracting ads )

6) Consider collecting these stories under a better heading. I'm looking at the british section and I'm seeing for example:

"Jeremy Corbyn cult leading Labour to a bitter end"

A much *MUCH* better heading would be "labour leadership election" - you might be able to do this by examining tags on the news websites and/or making educated guesses based on keywords. you might have to do this manually / semi manaully.

cont

>>62050
(2of 2 )

7) allow certain news item "groupings"( whatever you call them ) to be clickable into full screen/website subsection. What do I mean? say I'm obsesed by the US presidential election. I may want to see stories *only* about that. I click on it and go to a page which is a lot less "cramped" and I can read lots of different headlines about it. You may even want subsections. So News > us presidential election > trump or Hillary etc etc into more specialised areas

8) Try perhaps a best of columns as well if you want to be an all round news aggregatgor.


That's all I can think of for now. Laptop battery is running low have to go.

>>62051
One more thing. you can test layouts with software that will deliver a different landing page to different people BUT one thing almost ALL news sites do is put up a photograph to go with the news story. They wouldn't all be doing that if it didn't work.

>>62052
>>62051
>>62050

OP, don't do any of this shit, please.

>>49918
>so that one day SPIDR would feature a timeline archive of the most popular headlines... would that be a feature worth of further development?
yes, of course

>>62095
Second. Except ads. You gotta make profit somehow, nothing is free forever, so ads or donations (more preferred), depending on your current traffic / audience. I dont think setting up paypal (which is easiest?) requires much, but dont know about details. OP, try and see if it works, im sure there are more than one man here who will donate.

>>49996
>And reveals how often "news" organizations just gone publish the wire.
?

>>62050
>>62051
>please destroy everything good about spidr

>>62095
>>62221
>>62232

As I've said before, SPIDR is awesome as-is. It's a more in-depth Drudge without an overt bias.

>>62232
>>62095

>please don't get any visitors from outside of 4chan/news/

you can make a web 2.0 looking clone site for normies and keep the original spidr for 4channers? If you want more visitors your going to have to widen you appeal and that means changing your site. Running two sites ( minimalist and web 2.0 ) at the same time, it's easily possible.

>>62266

I don't know how anyone can use drudgereport. Visually it's just a mess, barely orgnaised. spidr is already way way better than drudge imo.

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/drudgereport.com

Holy shit. drudge is alexa rank 614 globally and 118 in the usa. How?

>>62303
Nobody should have their news filtered for them and that's exactly what sites like drudgereport are, a filtered news aggregator. The reason why so many people go to drudgereport today is because it was the first widely-read click bait news site on the internet. Back in the 90s, the first big story they broke was Monica Lewinsky months before other media would touch it. Nowadays they don't break stories as much as they rehash what the AP or Breitbart says. Whatever is going to earn the most outrage points gets the top headline because those stories bring in the most clicks, and thus adsense money. Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge singlehandedly ruined internet journalism by creating this now widely copied business model.

Drudge is a lot higher ranked than 116 in the US, I assure you. Alexa is malware and should never be trusted.

Anyway, SPiDRman should be striving to *not* be like drudgereport, or any other fake news aggregator based on what someone's employees want you to see, not the sum total of what's out there.

>>62312
>Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge singlehandedly ruined internet journalism

That's a bit over the top. Ad blocker has probably done more to ruin internet journalism than anything else. Outrage clickbait possing as "news" was perfected a long time ago at gawker.

Brietbart launched in 2007

Gawker launched in 2003

>>62431
>over the top
No it really isn't.
>The Drudge Report started as a gossip column focusing on Hollywood and Washington, D.C.[10] Matt Drudge began the email-based newsletter from an apartment in Hollywood, California using his connections with industry and media insiders to break stories, sometimes before they hit the mainstream media. In its early days Drudge maintained the website from his home in Miami Beach, Florida, with help from assistants in story selection and headline writing. His first assistant was Andrew Breitbart.[11] Breitbart, who described himself as "Matt Drudge's bitch",[12] worked the afternoon shift at the Drudge Report,[13] at the same time as running his own website breitbart.com and another website BigHollywood.com, providing a conservative perspective for people in the Los Angeles entertainment industry.[14] John Ziegler has said that Drudge blocked Breitbart from posting content critical of Barack Obama during the 2008 campaign for the US Presidency.[15]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drudge_Report#Origins

They met at the same synagogue in LA where they both met Arianna Huffington. Breitbart helped design her site too.

>>62432
Sometimes I feel like converting to Judaism is the best career move one can make.

>>62432
so what gawker huff po have been doing the same for the left

Huff po started in 2005 gawker 2003 Daily Kos 2002 - The daily kos takes the news and then tells their readers why it's either the republicans fault or at least not the democrats fault. They rarely do news without interpreting heavily for their audence. Salon has been chucking out left wing clickbait since 1995

I get that you hate druge and Brietbart but SO MANY SITES are guilty of one sided clickbait and have been doing ti for far longer. How you can then Fairly conclude that "Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge singlehandedly ruined internet journalism" is beyond me. They did not start the fire there are many guilty parties and I think deep down you know that.

>>62432
>They met at the same synagogue
kek
I wish I was a Jew.

>>62312
>Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge singlehandedly ruined internet journalism by creating this now widely copied business model.
The dying newspapers ruined internet journalism, and journalism in general.

>>62671
The news papers died because of internet journalism but internet journalism was ruined by the dying newspapers. There for Internet journalism ruined internet journalism.

That leads us back to Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge, thanks.

>>62687
The internet ruined internet journalism. So, jews again.

Cool news site.
I was looking for something to browse besides Ars Technica, and I think I've finally found it.

>>62438
Did you not get the part about how Andrew Breitbart also helped create The Huffington Post? Gawker started as a gossip site, not a news site, that's a different animal. DailyKos is a blog site for fucks sake. It would figure that none of the "news" sites you listed are sites with any actual journalism on them.

This is pretty neat OP

Thank you for sharing

>>62834

All these left wing sites figured out that news repackaged as one-sided/emotional clickbait was more profitable than actual news. They were all doing this long before Breitbart was ever a website.

There are so many factors in the decline of internet journalism.

Ad-blockers

Onesided clickbait sites posing as news

Other peoples news getting repackaged under clickbait headlines.

The chase for clicks above all else.

The sheer diversity of news sources diluting the ability to monetize serious articles.

People getting their news from facebook feeds or twitter.

Advertising revenue in decline as more options for internet advertising become available.

Paywalls not working because some site will do it cheaper or even repackage your story.

Blatant theft of stories

Sites willing to be unprofitable so long as they have some influence.

Websites posing as news sites but really being about pay to play


Breitbart isn't responsible for all of them or even the ones you try and blame him for but you've got a pathological hatred of Breitbart as as hitler said "It is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge." as I've got older I've realised that people with an emotionally held view don't respond to facts. They *feel* they are right and therefore they are right to themselves. They will ignore counter evidence and constantly shift focus in order to maintain the feeling that they are right. There's really no point in arguing with them as their feelings>the facts.

>>63604

I should point out that this feelz>realz mentality extends to the point where they are often guilty of projection. So the person with the multitude of facts that is accused of feelz>realz.

Other tactics include what about this one single fact ( ignoring the many others that counter it). Claims of winning when they haven't. Personal attacks. Attacking perfectly credible sources. Constantly changing their arguing strategy, focus and what is deemed important. Telling people they are "not getting it". Hyperbole. These are all emotionally led strategies to maintain the "feeling" they are correct in presence of evidence that would suggest they are wrong.

>>63604
>They were all doing this long before Breitbart was ever a website.

Objectively false.

>Breitbart isn't responsible for all of them or even the ones you try and blame him for but you've got a pathological hatred of Breitbart

What's so hard for you to understand about the fact that the man invented clickbait journalism? (along with Matt Drudge) Drudge and Breitbart created modern Drudgereport in 1996. You keep saying there were all these clickbait sites around before them but you can't name one, It's because there weren't any before them.

>As as hitler said "It is always more difficult to fight against faith than against knowledge."
top lel
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2013/05/09/new-evidence-from-his-doctors-shows-hitler-was-gay/


>as I've got older I've realised that people with an emotionally held view don't respond to facts. They *feel* they are right and therefore they are right to themselves. They will ignore counter evidence and constantly shift focus in order to maintain the feeling that they are right. There's really no point in arguing with them as their feelings>the facts.

That's why clickbait and circlejerks are so popular in social media today. On that small point I agree with you.

>>63612

CounterPunch 1994 Salon 1995 slate 1996 Drudge Report 1997 AlterNet 1998 Truthout 2000 Democratic Underground 2001 Daily Kos 2002 Gawker 2003 Crooks and Liars 2004 ThinkProgress 2005 Huff po 2005 poltico 2007 Breitbart 2007. but Breitbart came first.Hmmm

Drudgereport is nowhere near as "Clickbait-ey" as the above mentioned and Drudgereport is also mainly a news aggregator. Breitbart and drudge didn't come first and didn't invent clickbait and don't practice nearly to the same degree that some of the above mentioned sites do.

No one forced anyone to copy any model.

You also haven't addressed ALL the other factors in online news journalism and why it's struggling instead blaming the one bogey man.

If breitbart is to blame please explain why all the other factors listed here >>63604 are NOT to blame. Pro-tip, you can't because at this point you know you're wrong and you're just trying to desperately ignore a multitude of different factors and pin it all on your Breitbart bogeyman.

You've lost the argument. You've failed to justify you're "Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge singlehandedly ruined internet journalism" You've failed to prove their "clickbait"came first, it didn't. you've failed to prove that it was the worse or mostly finely tuned, it wasn't. But most importantly you've failed to address ALL the other factors having a negative effecting online journalism. Have the decency to admit you're wrong.

>>63640
Counterpunch never amounted to much and Salon wasn't political until after Clinton's administration. You're glossing over the fact that Breitbart worked for Drudge until he left to start bigGovernment/bigHollywood, which Drudge was more than happy to steer half his traffic to. While doing all this he was helping Ariana Huffington create The Huffington Post and building up startup money for Breitbart.com (it's financed by Foster Friess iirc)

>Drudgereport is nowhere near as "Clickbait-ey" as the above mentioned and Drudgereport is also mainly a news aggregator.

Drudge is the godhead of all clickbait. They are NOT a news aggregator, they are a filter. THEY choose whatever stories appear on the page instead of showing you everything of what's out there. They filter out anything that doesn't fit the outrage narrative or contradicts the talking points of the day. Driving a wedge and stirring the pot are the business model and not reporting news. This business model is what Matt and Andrew pioneered.

The rest of your post is irrelevant because all the "other factors" you are complaining about wouldn't have happened all at once without Matt & Andrew inventing a way for it to become profitable to do so in thee first place.

>>63658

http://ijnet.org/en/blog/nine-challenges-facing-future-journalism

https://www.chathamhouse.org/publication/opportunities-and-challenges-journalism-digital-age-asian-and-european-perspectives#

http://blog.journalistics.com/2009/big-challenges-for-journalists/

http://www.cjr.org/business_of_news/will_ad_blockers_kill_the_digital_media_industry.php

http://www.alphr.com/business/1002920/we-need-to-save-online-journalism-from-ad-blocking-and-heres-how

https://www.journalism.co.uk/news/can-publishers-good-ad-their-way-out-of-the-ad-blocking-phenomenon-/s2/a640641/


>The rest of your post is irrelevant because all the "other factors" you are complaining about wouldn't have happened all at once without Matt & Andrew inventing a way for it to become profitable to do so in thee first place.

This is like arguing with a religious person. No matter how many facts you put in place god or a lack of faith is always the answer. You have put forward a tortured out of touch argument. You have failed to address many of the issues that REALLY effect online publications, instead saying - without *credible* or *substantive* evidence that breitbart caused it all. Your argument doesn't even fit the timeline of facts. You must at this point have realised you've lost the argument. Just take a deep breath and admit that you were wrong and there are many factors causing problems for online journalism.

>>64049
Expected reply

From the book "Breitbart Devilry" Chapter1;verse1

And low it was told by the experts that media diversity, poor coin from digital advertisements, struggling paywalls as others told of what was behind them, the theft of stories, the prevalence of stories designed for "seek and ye shall find optimisation", the twitterites and facebookites with their "trending news feeds", the desperate chase and competition for the clicks, the over saturation of many in thee market and the terror that which blocks adverts, makes journalist poor and their children go hungry known as adblockers. And low, All in Media-land did talk at length about these problems.

Apart from anon because anon had faith. Anon knew the real problem was a devil by the name of Brietbart. And though anon did preach to the people the gospel of the Breitbart Devil, the people still saw the many factors not realising that secretly the devil named Breitbart had caused all of them. And the people said ," but you must see sense" but anon said "no, For I know in my heart that the devil breitbart has caused these problems. Your evidence is just another trick Breitbart plays to test my faith and sway me from the true path". As the people left shaking their heads in disbelief anon decided to carry on spreading the word about the breitbart devil. How did anon spread the word? by shitposting all over 4chan obviously.

And so endeth todays lesson.

>>64049
>This is like arguing with a religious person.
No shit, your refusal to accept widely and commonly known facts has something to do with it. It borders on the same level of denial one would find in most religous

>No matter how many facts you put in place god or a lack of faith is always the answer.
You haven't put forth any relevant facts. You previous links show some half-baked theory based on ad-bblockers when sites like Drudggereport get paid by the pageview and by clickthroughs.

>You have put forward a tortured out of touch argument.
That's funny, I was just saying the same of you.

>You have failed to address many of the issues that REALLY effect online publications, instead saying - without *credible* or *substantive* evidence that breitbart caused it all.
None of the issues you've listed apply to sites like Drudgereport or Breitbart which get in excess of 10 billiion pageviews per month. This isn't some blog, nor some startup.
>Your argument doesn't even fit the timeline of facts.
According to whom? Your timeline of facts is flawed from the outset because you casually dismiss BigGovernment(et. al.) when those sites are the linchpin of Breitbart's business model.
>You must at this point have realised you've lost the argument. No but arbitrarily declaring victory like you just did certainly doesn't help your side.
>Just take a deep breath and admit that you were wrong
But I wasn't, you were.
>and there are many factors causing problems for online journalism.
Yes, many factors cause problems for online journalism and none of them are relevant to how Matt and Andrew invented clickbait journalism on the internet. Further, your blind, shallow defense of the indefensible speaks volumes not only to your personal character but your reading comprehension level and your emotional age.

I love it! I'm a news junky and it looks good.

This is what I recommend you do next.

First, make a mobile version. The mobile version is going to need just a feed of the top headlines. Pair it back.

Now, the next step is easy. Take that mobile feed and automate it so it posts it on Twitter. Each headline and story link is a Tweet. Post on FB too for good measure.

Now, make some sort of algorithm that chooses the top picture from all the stories in a section. You can now add that picture to the top of each section.

Next, use that picture to make automated posts to Instagram. Maybe have the headline automatically put into the picture so you have the whole story in one jpg. Add the picture to FB and Twitter for good measure. Consider Pinterest.

Everything so far is 100% automated. Now you add ads. They can't be automated. Someone will have to approve each one. I recommend charging for press releases. They need to be clearly marked as press releases for the audience, but formatted as if they were legit news stories.

>>49918
Pretty kewl really.
Any chances to get more countries/languages up in it? Any chances for them to be somewhat "translated" into English, as other Anons suggest?
Cheers.

>>49918
Love it

>>64057
>>64057

Congratulations we've gone from

>>62312

>Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge singlehandedly ruined internet journalism

to

>Yes, many factors cause problems for online journalism

We're getting there.


You've failed to explain why drudge started it when salon slate and counter punch started before. Calling me stupid for stating these facts.

You've failed to show any link between drudge which is after all just a news filter as you've admitted already and rarely writes it's own articles and the crappy articles that Huff po et all turn out.

You've failed to mention fact that Gawker. salon, Daily kos and huff po took onesided emotionally led internet journalism to a level of clickbait bias that goes way beyond anything brietbart or druge have ever done and they were doing it BEFORE Brietbart was publishing. Remember all drudge does is gather headlines -you've admitted as much.

You've failed to explain why if onesided emotionally charged clickbait is the problem why Gawker, Salon, Daily Kos, Huff Po who are MUCH worse than Brietbart are somehow NOT guilty. Huff po et al all had a choice about what they do. They already make milllions, They don't have to have to make one sided clickbait but they choose to anyway.
and ... By the way "clickbait" *style* headlines have been around since newspapers

https://gigaom.com/2014/04/01/the-internet-didnt-invent-viral-content-or-clickbait-journalism-theres-just-more-of-it-now-and-it-happens-faster/

....and so has narrative bias.

http://www.mrc.org/media-bias-101/early-polls-journalists-1962-1985

You're blind to the fact that it's not drudge or brietbart that people are trying to copy but gawker and huff po.

Oh and if you dispute gawker isn't the most fine tuned clickbait on the internet then try watch this Starting at 20 minutes for just one minute. ( I can't find the original source )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2ih2OuqKXQ

Where did RT and Sputnik go? I like my counter to the US dialectic.

>>64837
They are both there look again they are not always the top article in the feed though.

>>64831
>Congratulations we've gone from
>>>62312 (You)
>>Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge singlehandedly ruined internet journalism
>to
>>Yes, many factors cause problems for online journalism
Both things are true. It's not an either/or argument like you seem to think.
>You've failed to explain why drudge started it when salon slate and counter punch started before. Calling me stupid for stating these facts.
Look I understand this is hard for you to comprehend, but Counterpunch, Salon, and Daily kos aren't anything like the drudgereport and never were. Whatever source you are getttitng this from that keeps making the false comparison between all these sites is lying to you. Don't believe me? Have you ever even been to Salon.com? It's a fucking online magazine, Anon, not a fake news aggregator. The only one that even comes close to a valid comparison is counterpunch and that really isn't that close. They organize their site like a blog and list the stories by authors instead of a one page list with boilerplate font headline and siren.gif
>You've failed to show any link between drudge which is after all just a news filter as you've admitted already and rarely writes it's own articles and the crappy articles that Huff po et all turn out.
I don't know how many ways I have to reiterate how Andrew Breitbart himself was that link, but here's one more try:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Breitbart
>Andrew James Breitbart (/ˈbraJtbɑːrt/; February 1, 1969 – March 1, 2012) was an American conservative publisher,[1] commentator for The Washington Times, journalist, author,[2] and television and radio personality[3][4][5] on various news programs, who served as an editor for the Drudge Report website.[6] He was a researcher for Arianna Huffington, and he was present at the launch of her web publication The Huffington Post.[7]
...

>>64831
>>64845
>You've failed to mention fact that Gawker. salon, Daily kos and huff po took onesided emotionally led internet journalism to a level of clickbait bias that goes way beyond anything brietbart or druge have ever done and they were doing it BEFORE Brietbart was publishing. Remember all drudge does is gather headlines -you've admitted as much.
Again you're assuming it's about the content when it's really about the outrage the content generatees. Drudge writes his own headlines, gathers a bunch of stories he knows will piss off his readership the maximum possible amount, and then turns that outrage into pageviews and clickthroughs. Every time his page refreshes in your browser he earns another pageview hit. Every time you click on a story on drudgereport.com at least 2 people somewhere earn money.
>You've failed to explain why if onesided emotionally charged clickbait is the problem why Gawker, Salon, Daily Kos, Huff Po who are MUCH worse than Brietbart are somehow NOT guilty. Huff po et al all had a choice about what they do. They already make milllions, They don't have to have to make one sided clickbait but they choose to anyway.

>>64831
>>64845
>>64849
>and ... By the way "clickbait" *style* headlines have been around since newspapers
>https://gigaom.com/2014/04/01/the-internet-didnt-invent-viral-content-or-clickbait-journalism-theres-just-more-of-it-now-and-it-happens-faster/
>....and so has narrative bias.
...and Matt Drudge introduced it to the Eternal September normies on the post- AOL WWW back in the 90s.
>http://www.mrc.org/media-bias-101/early-polls-journalists-1962-1985
You really are a retard if you're unironically quoting a media research center link like it's a legitimate thing. You might as well quote mediamatters. I take that back, if L. Brent Bozell is your dad or something then you wouldn't be a retard.
>You're blind to the fact that it's not drudge or brietbart that people are trying to copy but gawker and huff po.
I didn't say they weren't trying to copy gawker or huffpo, I was speaking historically 15 years ago when very few people outside of California knew who Andrew Breitbart was.
>Oh and if you dispute gawker isn't the most fine tuned clickbait on the internet then try watch this Starting at 20 minutes for just one minute. ( I can't find the original source )
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u2ih2OuqKXQ [Embed]
I understand you hate Gawker. I'm not trying to say Gawker is good. My only point is that without Drudge or Breitbart pioneering the science/art of internet clickbait business model that Gawker is built on today then it would be a much better world, or at least it would have been pushed back a few years.

>>64851

>Both things are true. It's not an either/or argument like you seem to think.

Except everyone in journalism etc is blaming the factors I raised and no one in journalism is blaming the drudge/breitbart factor. Buy hey you think know better than the people who work in journalist yeah?

Face it the truth is that clickbait style headlines were around before drudge and breitabrt

https://gigaom.com/2014/04/01/the-internet-didnt-invent-viral-content-or-clickbait-journalism-theres-just-more-of-it-now-and-it-happens-faster/

as has media bias:

You disparage my link about media bias - I just grabbed the first link I found. Did it ever occur to you that "the media research center" was started in 1987 and the polls were from as far back as 1962. But here's a link from left wing academics about media Bias that draws the same conclusion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Media_Elite


Outrage news based clickbait started online with

CounterPunch 1994 Salon 1995 slate 1996

All these came before drudge's site in 1997. you attempt to explain this away with "they're not news aggregators" - well if anything this makes them worse because it's not just he headline that's biased it's the content as well. After all bad content, especially content that takes other peoples news stories and repackages them as one sided outrage led clickbait is the problem - and it was started with CounterPunch 1994 Salon 1995 and to a less extent slate in 1996. Before drudge.

>>64851
>>65103

How is it that outrage clickbait journalism that was around in one form before the internet. Was started with new-sites online BEFORE Drudge. Was honed and perfect by Democratic Underground, Daily Kos 2002, Gawker 2003 Crooks and Liars 2004, ThinkProgress 2005, poltico 2007, Huff-po in anyway related to drudge. It was going on BEFORE drudge, Other news sites started it and has been take to new levels by other news sites. Yet somehow it's drudge's fault.

Your argument doesn't fit the timeline of events. You're whole argument is based on accepting that
A) Drudge was the first - No he wasn't
B) Drudge was the worst - No he wasn't
C) Drudge perfected the model - No he didn't
C) Drudge is the model that was copied - No it wasn't

-----------------------------------------

Also a word on Huff-po and brietbart's contribution. huff-po was founded by Arianna Huffington, Kenneth Lerer, Andrew Breitbart and Jonah Peretti,

Kenneth Lerer and Jonah Peretti both now work in leading roles at Buzzfeed

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonah_Peretti

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Lerer

If you don't think buzzfeed is the worst clickbait on the internet then you've auto-lost he argument.

>Anons argue against including any sensationalist / clickbait sites, regardless of their leanings

>"My clickbait alt-right sites are better than your clickbait leftist sites!! This is all the left's fault!"

Great thread, OP.

Fuck your app and every double-digit IQ anon who uses it.

>>65127
Kindly, fuck off.

>>65103
>Face it the truth is that clickbait style headlines were around before drudge and breitabrt
No, they weren't. No amount of revisionism on your part is going to make Counterpunch or Salon or Slate equivalent to the fake aggregate format of what Drudgereport was then and still is today, and you should really stop conflating wildly differing website formats like that.
>well if anything this makes them worse because it's not just he headline that's biased
This is exactly why Drudgereport is different than the other sites you keep blathering about.

>>65105
>How is it that outrage clickbait journalism that was around in one form before the internet. Was started with new-sites online BEFORE Drudge. Was honed and perfect by Democratic Underground, Daily Kos 2002, Gawker 2003 Crooks and Liars 2004, ThinkProgress 2005, poltico 2007, Huff-po in anyway related to drudge. It was going on BEFORE drudge, Other news sites started it and has been take to new levels by other news sites. Yet somehow it's drudge's fault.
Because you keep listing sites made after 1998 like they are somehow relevant to the discussion. Drudge is from 1996 (really '95, but it went down a lot). Also you keep ignoring that Breibart (the man) is the link between Drudgereport and The Huffington Post.
>Your argument doesn't fit the timeline of events. You're whole argument is based on accepting that
>A) Drudge was the first - No he wasn't
Yes, he was, 1995 happened before the year 2000 in case you're bad at math, and Andrew Breitbart was the "bitch" (his own words) behind the scenes at Drudgereport the entire time.
>B) Drudge was the worst - No he wasn't
Yes, he was. His hundreds of billions of pagehits every year, which he boasts about on his site, confirm this.
>C) Drudge perfected the model - No he didn't
Not Drudge alone but Drudge in tandem with Breitbart founding Biggovernment and Bighollywood, which AGAIN you keep leaving out of your MRC damage control.
>C) Drudge is the model that was copied - No it wasn't
All of the sites made after 1998 copied Drudge and you are going to come to grips with that fact someday. It's simply a matter of history at this point. The rest of your post is more conflation with sites that aren't even related to politics, or sites like Counterpunch where the information is organized and presented in a completely different fashion without headlines, and isn't worth responding to. Are you a breitbart.com intern?

>>49918
>http://spidr.today/
Oh god it's in PHP.

Just kill yourself.

>>65137
>PHP
Can you explain to a non-/g/entooman what's wrong with PHP?

Remember this >>64831


>Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge singlehandedly ruined internet journalism

to

>Yes, many factors cause problems for online journalism

We're getting there

Well congratulations you've done it again.

>>65132
>Drudgereport is different than the other sites you keep blathering about

>>65133
>All of the sites made after 1998 copied Drudge

You're contradicting yourself. Drudge is the site they copied and yet it's different.

See you can't read well, this is you problem.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drudge_Report
>Drudge, who began his website in 1997

Drudge report website was started in 1997 NOT 1995 Like you claim.

Secondly the sites I listed after drudge were the sites that honed clickbait to fine art ( honed means to perfect or refine - in case you didn't know).

It's simply a fact CounterPunch 1994 Salon 1995 slate 1996 all had one sided clickbait websites before Drudge.

Even if that wasn't a fact no one one forced anyone to copy Drudge. No one forced Gawker, Daily Kos, Salon ( which came before ), Democratic Underground to copy anyone. The people in charge of these online news outlets are adults and who ran news outlets catering for liberals. They weren't even chasing the same people who visit drudge.

>All of the sites made after 1998 copied Drudge

No. In fact they have a lot more in common with Salon than they do with Drudge. I'm going to say they copied Salon. Prove me wrong - pro tip you can't. I win.

>Are you a breitbart.com intern?

No I just think you are quite simply blind to reality. Ad blockers probably did the most harm to online journalism. Then market saturation - so many news sites chasing readers. The switch to mobile with it's lower ad revenues didn't help either. The difficulty in making paywalls practical and the lack of a feasible micropayments system Then the need to search optimise articles. (cont)

>>65173

Then there are the left-wing clickbait sites that steal other peoples stories and repackage them not as sensible stories like the original decent-ish journalism but as one sided articles full of bias and omissions designed to confirm peoples liberal biases. In my time on the internet I have seen these sites gain prominence and become the dominant content model. (But in your world shitty biased content isn't part of what ruined online journalism eh it's alone news aggregator and it's headlines?)

I thought if I pointed out all the different problems that online journalism face you would realise that Brietbart and drudge were not responsible for any of it and as a result you would be better off and more informed. Now I realise you are probably a looney lefty who feels the right is responsible for everything you dislike in the world. So much so that you can't even get the facts right. ( Drudgereport.com came after salon.com etc ). You contradict yourself, you deny facts about clickbait and it's origin and blame the clickbait at huff-po NOT on the two buzzfeed people but the one brietbart. Buzzfeed is so much worse for clickbait than breitbart.

I honestly think there can be only one of three reasons you carry on dementedly stating the same "two people are responsible for everything bad argument" .

1) you are a troll doing the old "pretend to be stupid thing".
2) you are incredibly stupid or mentally ill/emotionally challenged or otherwise damaged.
3) you desperately want to win an argument even though you know at this point you know you are wrong, because you've got nothing better in your life and you need some sense of victory in your life.

I don't know which it is but I hope for your sake you are a troll because if you are not a troll you are not going to be successful in life with your intellectual/emotional problems. Good luck, I suspect you're going to need it.

>>65173
>Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge singlehandedly ruined internet journalism

>to

>Yes, many factors cause problems for online journalism
Both things are still true.
>You're contradicting yourself. Drudge is the site they copied and yet it's different.
They copied the business model, stupid. Jesus Christ it's like i'm talking to a marketing intern.
>Drudge report website was started in 1997 NOT 1995 Like you claim.
The first iteration was in 1995.
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drudge_Report
>Launched 1995; 21 years ago
Hollywood, California, United States[2]
>Secondly the sites I listed after drudge were the sites that honed clickbait to fine art ( honed means to perfect or refine - in case you didn't know).
Did you even look at an archived copy of Counterpunch? It's nothing like drudgereport.. Frankly I dont know why you keep bringing it up. It's like you have some list of talking points that keeps telling you it's related when in reality most people in 1995 barely knew what Counterpunch was. Drudgereport broke through to the mainstream in '97, Counterpunch was never mainstream.

Then you go on to conflate an online magazine like Slate with a fake 1 page news aggregator like drudgereport. And you wonder why I'm having trouble taking you seriously, especially since I lived though the period in question and saw personally how Drudgereport changed the face of the internet journalism for the worse at the worst possible formative time in internet history by monetizing outrage for the masses.

>>65180
>Then there are the left-wing clickbait sites that steal other peoples stories and repackage them not as sensible stories like the original decent-ish journalism but as one sided articles full of bias and omissions designed to confirm peoples liberal biases. In my time on the internet I have seen these sites gain prominence and become the dominant content model. (But in your world shitty biased content isn't part of what ruined online journalism eh it's alone news aggregator and it's headlines?)
Do a google search for 'Breitbart bias', kid. The only point I was ever trying to make was that Andrew Breitbart and Matt Drudge ruined internet jouralism when they created Drudgereport, which is verifiable fact and history at this point. I'm sorry it contradicts whatever agenda you seem to have where you think leftists dominate the clickbait industry today or whatever, but none of that changes the facts of what got us here in the first place, and the two people most directly responsible for that are Matt Drudge and Andrew Breitbart whether you like it or not.

>>65184
>>65186


Sorry anon The drudge report started as a website in 1997 READ the website.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drudge_Report

Salons started in 1995

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salon_(website)

Salon started the business model that ruined internet journalism. It also produced biased content on top of clickbait outrage headlines. It doesn't matter how angry you get, you can't alter the facts. Salon ruined internet journalism.

FACT: All the worst news sites look a lot more like Salon than Druge

FACT: Salon came first.

FACT: Salon was producing one sided biased clickbait AND crappy content before Drudge even had a website.

FACT: Salon is the business model/website all the worst sites copied.

FACT: Journalists tend to be more liberal that conservative and that contributes to bias.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias_in_the_United_States#Liberal_bias


I'm trying to help you anon but I can't help you if you keep ignoring the facts. I don't know what breitbart or drudge did to you, your cats, your mother or your waifu pillow but it's simply a fact that Salon was the first site to try outrage clickbait titles with biased content. I'm sorry that you think Drudge had a website in 1995 but the fact is he didn't. Salon is the model they are all copying.

Salon ruined internet journalism. I don't see why this is so hard for you. Your just going to have to take a deep breath and accept the fact.

>>65574
It says it started in 1995 on the wikipedia page Anon.

Salon is a magazine. Stop comparing it to drudgereport, it has nothing to do with it. Salon has it's own writers and present articles of their own every week/month. They are not a fake news aggregator in the form of a single page with a list, and never have been. Again, I don't know where you are gettting that they are even comparable but whatever told you that was wrong.

>/news/ arguing to death about what "news" site is less of a shitty hindrance to mankind
so this is what it's like to be a /v/irgin

>>65851
No, this is what it's like to be a /news/man.
It's fun, isn't it?

I'd like to bump,but I hope the argument doesn't continue.
It's clear that neither side will give in, so let's just not continue.

>>67205
Relax, /news/friend. Andrew Breitbart is dead. That's the one thing we would both agree on.

We were arguing about the past, not the present or the future.

>>67206
Sorry, friend, I wasn't the one you were arguing with.

>>67207
So who is your favorite newsman then?

>>67208
Newspaper reporter, online guy, tv guy, or /news/man?

>>67209
/news/man

>>67216
SPIDRman, of course.

>>50315
I shared it on my facebook. News aggregation is interesting. used to use Jimmyr.com as my start page.

Would you consider doing an Australian based one? We love our news and scandal here.
>>50406

also what about spider.yesterday and spider.tomorrow ?

>>67302
Spider.today
Anything else is heresy.

>>67302
spidr.forever

>>67306
Just an idea for those who were posting here and wondering whether they could view yesterday's news

>>60718
I like the thought of Canadian news as well. Support this idea >>49918

Spidr.today is down, "Fatal error: Call to a member function fetch() on boolean in /home/spidr210/public_html/index.php on line 116"

>>68919

Well, didn't take long for this piece of shit to die off

Guess you'll have to get your conspiracy theories somewhere else

>>68944
Nah it'll be back

<spoiler>I hope</spoiler>

Also hoping for SPIDRs return. Its my main news source ;_;

Spidr looks terrible on Icecatmobile, no matter w/ or w/out JavaScript

>>69032
Also on Orfox

>>70304
Stop bumping your own thread, you piece of shit.

>>70305
>your own thread
Not mine, I just like it.

Who is bumping this thread? Stop it, plz.

>>70468
We bump it because we like spidr.today, friend. Why does it trigger you?

>>70473
He hates news.

>>70468
I've provided a few.

>>60392
Don't fall for the voting meme. It eventually permits tyranny of majority, which is the entirety of the reason your feed is useful.

Add more sources as much as possible, and let people filter their own view, rather than affect the ability of others to do so.

My $.02. Speaking of $.02, a patreon is a great idea for supporting the site while precluding advertiser bias.

>>49918
I've been using Spidr pretty regularly since the beginning when it was introduced here. Gotta tell you, I'm loving it. News aggregation without the entertainment and sports crap. I do hope you successfully (and discreetly) manage to monetize it- I use it almost as much as the top web news pages. I'd throw one tip at you: to maybe increase the filtering through optional means. Big data news can't do that, they have too much vested interest. If I could subscribe to Google news and get it without "+Kardashian" or "+Denver Broncos" ever for example, I might pay for it. Only criticism I have is that sometimes the wrong articles end up on the wrong section tho I know that only manual moderation can handle that. I hope you get the staff for that one day, you deserve it. Thanks for the service

I use spidr.today daily, thanks for the service! but I use it on mobile and would love some kind of marker or symbol on video links, if possible?

>>67300
mah google, I had no idea jimmyr was so widespread. I first got to that site by searching for a way to find downloadable mp3's.

I browse spidr almost entirely on mobile, and I want to compliment you on how readable it is. For my input though, I definetly agree with the anons saying that you should include more sources and broaden the filter options to allow people to filter what they don't like. I also think a banner ad or two would be ok, though if you could fund it through donations that would be vastly preferable.

4chan

>>62231
A bunch of news organisations receive a pre-delivered scoop, with some juicy bits, on the condition that they do not try to criticize the material provided.

Everybody wins, except the reader

I have nothing to contribute to the conversation, but feel this thread deserves a bump.

>>49918
>http://spidr.today/
well it's a worse newsmap.jp right now but it definetly has the potential to become more.
We might actually get a site that filters real
news from the attention seeking bullshit
CNN/BBC/Euronews or the others are
displaying everyday.
>However for that /pol/ needs to take a hike
and telling hipster-nazis (I'm sorry I meant alt-right) that they are too dump to post somewhere is like telling Clinton/Trump they don't understand Morality/Ethiks. Like taking candy
from a baby and watching it get pissed.

>>78870
>newsmap.jp
>flash

An RSS feed would be great, even better if I could use regular expression on the title to determine what goes through.

>>79511
What's wrong with flash?

Hi, first of all, I must say I really like the site, but I quite dislike the recent update with some words in CAPS, I find it VERY DISRUPTIVE to read actually, even if some key points are emphasized.
Thanks for all the great work!

>>79511
Flash? You got a problem with Adobe boy?

>>79823
i AGREE. Please STOP it spidrMAN

YOu HavE The Political Tab... Where is The Russia tab, Canada Tab, environment tab, and ETC.... TAB

>>79823
>>80288
Really? I thought it was a great idea. I have to think something else, then.

Sometimes your algorithm sorts a bunch of stories together because they have the same string in the title, even if that string is clearly not related to the story. For example, it'll sort all of AP's stories that say "The Latest" at the beginning, giving a list of a bunch of unrelated AP articles.

>>80441
I mean, I think it is a good concept, but IMO it makes the titles more difficult to read

>>49918
I'm just now learning of this. Cool idea.
I'm on mobile, btw. Thanks for having a dark theme and a simple layout.
How about an About section and a FAQ?

Yes, a timeline archive of the most popular headlines would be interesting. I suggest saving this page to your hard drive periodically just incase you ever need to reference suggestions made (or arguments had) in a blog post for the site's aniversary or something.

Sources: DemocracyNow.org, BBC.co.uk, BBC.com, and NPR.com.

>>74501
>"-Kardashian" filtering
This would be great.

>>74850
>funding through donations
Yes. If I had finances to blow, I'd support this. Consider a Patreon in the near future. Publicity might get tricky, though. ...Reddit?

>>76487
Well, shit. That makes sense.
If you want to see real change, people, seek to influence those with authority/power. It's really not that complicated. Finances are the simplest form. There are others.

>>80481
The "California Bus Crash Kills 13, Injures 31" one is actually doing this with the California inmates putting out wildfires.

>>80441
I understand the idea, but I quite dislike it myself. Maybe you could setup a switch somewhere on the page to disable it?
And once again, you really are doing a great job with this!

theres a thread like this but different on newsography.com

Why do the shooters always have the worst case of gay-face?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/Omar_Mateen.jpg

>>81238
Ssh he's supposed to be an angry muslim not a repressed homo.

>>49918
Why do some of /news/' older threads still have Halloween theme?

>>81866
The leftover effects of the Halloween custom theme affect all boards that way. The stickies on several other boards are the same way.

fuck this is really cool. App or RSS feed when

>>49918
remove the fucking infowars links.

>>50169
or at least filter "first posted on infowars"

>>50268
>>50268
how about we call it 4chan news..
Shouldn't it develop it's own identity as a news source instead?

Sorry for the bump but I've got a few suggestions

First off, this is a great site to use for a homepage and I've gotten a fair few people onboard with it. However, it'd be cool if you could add/remove sites you want to see on the homepage, as sites like RT do churn out a fair bit of a crap.


Maybe allow the user to shift stuff around, so you could have a reduced number of articles displayed across the page but with more detail/images used in them displayed instead.

>>49918
Wow this is good

Can you please allow users to hide articles from specific sites or delete Sputnik international? Sputnik writes tons of crap that fills up entirely too much of the headlines, and it's sickeningly pro Russian and so unreadable.
Love everything else about the site, I check it daily.

>>88495
If you look at earlier posts by spidr he specifically states he wants the bias there as it is important to see a diverse list of sources as every article has an agenda but by having multiple perspective on the same story more information is gleaned then simply one source which might not tell the whole truth think of the story of the Blind men and the elephant https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant

>>88506
I understand this but the site puts out a massive amount of articles to the point where it affects the readability of the site. I don't mind biased sites being on spidr, I'm fine with RT being on there despite the fact that it has the same Russian bent to it. I just think that Sputnik overdoes it because of the high article count. Some headlines can be more than 70% filled with Sputnik articles.

>>88511
That is a good point I think the remedy though is simply to find more sources talking about the same story as the high volume on multiple stories implies they are the only one covering it or the only source out of the ones configured to post about a certain issue. If you have more sources you think should be added feel free to post them in this thread or send them to spidr directly at [email protected]

>>49918
>February 2016
>has now been running for about four months
read that and just assumed February 2016 was four months ago. Didn't even click that this was an old post from June
Being a real adult sucks, I lost all sense of time :(

>>88518
Not sure if "SPIDR !io/McUpQz." or not...

Bumping because spidr is so cool

Your algorithm has a few problems with selecting a specific word which just so happens to be used in a lot of different headlines. Check out this snapshot: http://spidr.today/23767/Russia_sets_out_its_policy_on_terrorism,_nuclear_war_&_global_ties_in_new_Foreign_Policy_Concept

Notice how every headline has to do with Russia, but each has wildly different topics? It's particularly difficult when you have news sources from Sputnik and RT; Sputnik alone accounts for nearly all of that entire snapshot. I'm not sure how your algorithm groups news stories, but it's clear that some improvements can be made.

Your snapshot feature is broken. Instead of showing a box with all the different links, I get a single link which sometimes isn't even related to the original article I wanted to snap.

>>89028
The algorithm has a punishment factor for terms that are frequent within a source to cancel phrases like 'the latest' or 'read more'. It should be able to handle Sputnik's articles about 'Russia'. I think the issue is that Sputnik has a high broadcasting rate and it also publishes lots of articles not talking about Russia so the effect is diluted. I tightened the punishment threshold a bit to see if that helps.

>>89029
I noticed that once too, but I couldn't reproduce the issue so I did nothing. Now I accidentally purged the snapshot database so all snapshots were lost, including >>89028

>>89071
Thank you for listening to our concerns about Sputnik keep up the good work!

ALL HAIL KING SPIDR!!! THE KING OF /news/!!!

Hey, props on adding the percentage of each source on the info page that's a really nice feature.

Current Bugs:
US:
Forbes icon is currently broken.
Business Insider currently reads as Feedburner (by the way get a better RSS manager, Feedburner is probably going to die soon)
ZeroHedge and HNN are lacking icons (what the fuck is HNN anyways)
ZeroHedge name is missing

German:
Both Spiegel sources and taz.de are lacking an icon

Italian:
Euronews RSS is lacking an icon

Russian:
Mail.ru and ramblr.ru icons are broken

Finnish:
Savon Sanomat is lacking an icon

Additions and changes:
One or two more leftist news sources should be added to counter Infowars and Breitbart. Perhaps Vox?
Eastern Asian news e.g. China or Japan, is notably missing
Canadian and Australian news sources should be added seeing as they represent a relatively large portion of /news/
Remove common phrases like "Breaking", "The Latest", "Watch", etc. from your algorithm
Rename sources such that The Daily Beast isn't "articles", and I don't have to see that each CNN source is from the RSS channel

cont.

from previous

Features Requests:
Sort the percentage of sources by frequency.
Check mark a particular news story "read" which hides it from our newsfeed until a new story gets added or permanently hides it (I'm tired of the Oakland fire being the first thing I see)
Sort news stories by type, e.g. world news, politics, business. That's probably difficult, but maybe you could group sources according to type? CNN - World, World - One America News, and NYT > World could be grouped together under a filter called World News, and a story from a nonspecific source such as Breitbart, FOX news, NPR, and NBC gets added underneath it. When the story is broken by a nonspecific news source it could remain ungrouped until enough filtered sources have headlines as well.
Dedicated sports page to remove it from the main news pages (lowest possible priority)

Keep working on this, you've got a great thing going here, and I can't wait to see what it becomes. This is basically my mobile homepage now, and this is the first place I look for the latest news and differing viewpoints.

Someone make this SPIDRman a mod already, yeesh

>>90047
Zerohedge, infowars, and Breitbart should be taken out and not "countered" with libral trash blogs

None of those sites do their own reporting anyway. Instead they just regurgitate, rewrite, and reframe stories from places like The Associated Press to fit their respective narratives.

>>90125
>
None of those sites do their own reporting anyway. Instead they just regurgitate, rewrite, and reframe stories from places like The Associated Press to fit their respective narratives.

You won't catch me disagreeing, but they serve a purpose in that they allow a reader to view different perspectives of the same story. I will argue that Sputnik International be removed, as they currently compose 5% of all news stories which is more than the WSJ and NYT combined. In fact, Sputnik is one of the largest single contributors. Russia Today is adequate for an alternative viewpoint, seeing as both are basically Russian government propaganda.

>>49918
I know this is beyond the scope of this project but I would dearly like to see an archive feature that takes a snapshot of the articles. You know, for when the juicy ones inevitably disappear shortly after being posted.

New bug:

When a snapshot of a news article with a "%" sign in the URL, the link provides a 400 Bad Request error

http://spidr.today/2102/74%_of_%E2%80%98underage%E2%80%99_asylum_seekers_in_Denmark_are_adults,_teeth_&_bone_tests_show

is it permanently down ? Please OP, it's the greatest news site out there.

As a suggestion, you could create a tech section/filter. I've been using jimmyr.com for that, but your platform would be way better. I hate that most tech news sites are politicized (there's always an article about how trump will be the end of all science, but never one about how the TTIP or the left mentality are posing the same risks). I'd rather see no political tech news if it means reading through the biased rants of barely out-of-teens snowflakes.

>>91664
>is it permanently down?

never mind, it's back up again, never should have doubted you senpai.

>>49918
i like.
are there similar things out there?

I like the previews it presents when the mouse hovers over headlines. It'd be great if there was a way to know which headlines had an image in their preview. Maybe a symbol or dot at the end of the headline.

>>49918
>share on facebook

Besides that it is a pretty amazing website.

Does this website delete articles after a certain time period? I tried filtering the word "transsexual" and nothing came up.

Perhaps make an additional section of the site which archives all of the web pages. This could be an amazing tool when working on research papers.

Always wanted a news aggregate that was easy to browse. Thank you Spidrman.
Keep it the way it is, i come for news not flashy crap, and spidr.today fulfills that need.

ALL HAIL THE SPIDRMAN, LONG MAY HE REIGN AS KING OF /news/

>>90047
>>90048
Thanks, these icons are now fixed. I also made the source contribution sorted by percents viewable in the main view. The option to hide news stories is doable but not my highest priority. Classification to domestic and international categories could be done and I see some value there, have to look for that.

For country suggestions, please contact [email protected]. I have myself little time to search for sources for countries I'm not familiar with and I appreciate your help with that. Adding a country is very simple when I have the list of feeds.

>>90127
I made some Sputnik-specific measures to hinder its contribution. I think it's now 5th - 8th largest contributor.

>>90392
Thanks, the URL issue should be now fixed with new snapshots

>>91664
Sometimes the upload fails for unknown reason, I haven't been able to catch the cause. It should not be down for more than 20 minutes, though.

>>93948
I could do the image indicator quite easily, thanks.

>>90330
>>93950
Articles are deleted after 18-hour time span or if the group shrinks to contain less than 3 news. The headline should stay even if the source had deleted the story. I take a history snapshot two times a day for archiving purposes, I will implement the archive search function on one day.

>>94553
>>94555
Thanks for the support.

>>94609
Check your inbox

>>90048
>>90048

>>94609
On the mobile version of the info page the country flag links always redirect you to the front page and not to that country's news.

Otherwise stellar work

Quick suggestion:
When a particular news story has many different sources reporting on it in a short amount of time, that story should appear higher up on the list. For example with Carrie Fisher's death, despite it having the most recent story it is not the first displayed (as of 1856 UTC) due to it being so new that out doesn't have as many articles as other old ones.

https://blog.kissmetrics.com/psychology-of-color-and-conversions/ hopefully this helps with the color....great site keep up the good work

>>49918

my advice is limit your sources further to improve quality

and eliminate entertainment stories. entertainment is not news

>>95290
>>49918

also, change the name. people have a natural aversion to spiders, lad

name it something goo-

>>95290
>>95291

finally, fit like 9 stories on the page (3x3). currently it's not that many. would be easier to compress after you limit stories (say 3 instead of the current 9).

>>95293

*limit sources/links

>>95293

Don't do this, 3 sites is not a large enough sample to see if the headlines are consistent across different sources.

Could you get rid of America One News Network though? Literally all the do is copy and paste stories. It doesn't add anything of substance to the conversation if they're not even paraphrasing (and sometimes including the name of the original news agency that carried the article right before claiming it as their own.)

bamp for King spidr

>>95302
>get rid of America One News Network though
seconding this. it is click bait tier.

>>51311
>If you think a certain source isn't reliable, then why don't you just ignore it and move on?
I sometimes do that, then I realize how stupid it is

I guess it boils down to getting triggered by new sources you hate with passion

>>60392
>Is FOX considered neutral?
Couldn't stop laughing for two minutes straight

They have a stong Republicam bias, but it helps cancel out CNN, CBS and co.
Sometimes good for a laugh when Tucker tucks some cuck in
If they at least tried to sound neutral they would be less shitty, but don't take them out of your list, specially not before Breit and IW

>>97532
I'm liberal af and even I think FoxNews should be included in the feed as a counterbalance. Not AmericaOne though, they're complete shit.

>>49918
Thanks i've been looking a long time for something like this in french.

>>78870
>hipster-nazis
The term is nipster. It was even coined over in Germany.

all the feeds are a bit to liberal for me,
is there a more neutral alternative with the same kind of feed?

>>49918
>>82012
Is anybody planning to create an android app? It would be much handy to use.

>>50549
why? sputnik is just as stupid

>>99883
I subscribe to this.

>>99883
I have the website bookmarked and saved to my home screen. That is effectively an app, yes?

Is the site gray screen for everyone or just me?

>>101244
not just you, seems to be grayed out for me too today

>>101246
>>101244
ahh works now

>>49918
Use these links along with Snopes.com for fact checking and propaganda filtering: https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/960x742q90/924/W2LJLf.jpg
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10eA5-mCZLSS4MQY5QGb5ewC3VAL6pLkT53V_81ZyitM/preview

Hopefully, these would help in finding good reliable source and not conspiracy bullshit like InfoWars or KneeJerk reactionaries like the Mary Sue.

>>101277
>Snopes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qu2zLSEsW7s

>>101278
>tomonews.com

goes underneath CNN in the diagram

https://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/960x742q90/924/W2LJLf.jpg

>>101282
Are you implying that the story did not happen? Because it did. Also quit trying to shit up Spidr's thread.

>>101283
It didn't happen the way that biased source said it did.

>>99634
What the fuck are you smoking, this is as neutral as you can get

>>49918
Needs ssl, look up "let's encrypt". It's free

>>49918
an amoled theme with jet black backgrounds would be nice

>>101283
Tomonews is horrible. They constantly put out falsified information, they have been doing this for years now

>>102155
why the fuck would this website need ssl

>>49918
Hi there, I don't browse this board much, and I learned about spidr.today very recently.

It looks very good, thank you for your hard work.

If you wouldn't mind, could you go into some detail about how SPIDR gathers and organizes articles? Like what software you are running and your methodologies for grabbing and parsing articles?

Also, do you have a custom web crawler for each site, or do you use provided RSS feeds, or something else?

On an unrelated note, has anyone else on these threads played with the idea of allowing users to "vote" on selecting new sources to add to the aggregator?

>>101282
That's the worst fucking graph I've ever seen. That shit was made by a diehard Bernout.

>Huffpo above meets high standards
>Vox is analytical
>WaPo is neutral
>USA Today higher quality than CNN

>>103543
t. Matt Drudge

>>103545
It's funny because I'm an ardent Hillary supporter

>>103551
Sure you are, and I'm Dick Cheney.

>tfw this thread is the oldest on /news/

>>101283
>Are you implying that the story did not happen?

No I'm saying it is click bait sensationalism that presents a story with an emphasis on laughs.

It at least seems to lampoon everyone, left or right, so it goes in the centre.

>>103561
>Turns out to actually be dick Cheney

>>49918

Looks good. I have two serious questions for you OP.
1. How are you going to monetize on it?

2. Does it collect all news or specific category from various news sources?

>>49918
Cool site.
Fix up the design (bootstap, material anything will do) and shill it on hacker news.

Please no voting options or removal of news sources. Upvoting and downvoting will only serve to change it into a feed of whatever the top 3 most popular sites at the time are, not to mention if there ever is a huge influx of users/a raid it could easily be gamed to move whatever they want to the top. Removing sources altogether is just as bad, sometimes I actually like to read the other sources and this gives me the availability to do so without digging elsewhere plus once again removing sources just changes it into popular sources and will eventually lead to anons wondering why their news sources aren't on there if whatever they use ever dips in popularity.

For actual feedback, adding a sports section would be nice as would a world news tab so one can have local (or national depending on how you look at it) and world events filtered separately for convenience.

The site is genuinely nice and easy to use, thank you for all your hard work.

>>108634
Also to add to my own post since I forgot, some of us actually like tinfoil bullshit (some for entertainment, some genuinely like reading about reptilians and shit) so don't remove the over the top silly stuff. If an anon can't tell that it isn't a good news source for serious discussion then they most likely won't be offering much good discussion at all regardless if it's included on SPIDR or not.

>>108640
>tinfoil bullshit
You're talking about infowars, right? I agree with this.

I think it's dangerous to start trying to rank news sources by quality, even though it would be great in theory. In practice though it would probably lead to an ideological bias, and the one thing I love about spidr above other aggregators is how unbiased it is. Much better to assume that anyone using an aggregator like this has a decent understanding of various media outlets and their skews, and is using spidr specifically because they don't want to be spoonfed a single viewpoint. Reading both the Breitbart and Salon takes on the same news story is infinitely more useful than just AP.

Speaking of AP, many sources copy AP articles directly. I think something similar to this might have been mentioned above (just skimmed the thread), but if there was some way to check if an article is directly copied from AP that would be cool. It's not really helpful to have a dozen copies of the same piece under a headline.

To OP: thank you for your work on this. It's one of my all time favorite sites, and I've been using it every day for several months now. Spidr is miles ahead of anything else I've found, even by corporations and big name media.

>>108644
Yeah. Infowars is some real bullshit but I still read/watch it because how fun it is for me. I also like to listen to coast to coast sometimes (for entertainment) so I don't know if I count. All I'm saying is that I find that kind of thing fun to listen to, but I can tell that it's not real news. I am all in favor of it staying on SPIDR cause like I said, people who actually believe infowars is gonna seek it out even if it's not there and still post about it so all removing it would do is keep a few anons from seeing one easy to ignore line that they don't have to click.

>>49918
I've had one of the popups from a story say 404, I'm guessing it's because the site has a paywall?

Also, Canadian news sources would be welcome.

>>49918
Never add comment sections and turn it into reddit cancer

>>49918
love what you're doing
i found an issue with the site
there needs to be more clearance at the bottom to allow the hover drop downs for the articles to be read
it is impossible to scroll down to read it
http://dl.asis.io/JBVrO4dh.png

>>50297
as much as I don't like Infowars.. I think it and others should stay.

freedom of speech includes speech you don't agree with.

>>49918

I remember when you introduced it originally. I think it's a good idea. still would prefer a name change. spiders have negative connotations, it repels people. I know presentation is largely bullshit, but it matters if you want to be successful

other than that I would say eliminate entertainment "news". I just went to the site and the second story is about beyonce. fuck that, that's not news. that's gossip

>>110976

and as I've mentioned before, limit the number of sources. maybe 3? I think it's better than before, but it's still too many. nobody is going to click on 7 articles for the same story

>>110976 Is >>52669 you? You're cute!

>>110980

no that's not me

>>49918
Been using it for a year.
Any chance of an Irish tab?

>>110786
It isn't about not agreeing with infowars, it's about infowars being tinfoil bullshit.

>spidr
>news crawler
pottery

There used to be an info section at the bottom of the page so that you could see the sources that are crawled. It appears to be missing. Can this be added back?

>>49918
Https?

>>113004
Https should now be working (though I still don't understand why this site needs one). Images are hidden in https because they are hotlinked.

>>112738
The sources can be viewed by hovering your mouse over the number next to the Last update string. It's not supported in the mobile version.

>>111248
Yes sir, Irish could be added whenever I have the time to look for irish sources. Spanish tab is also under construction.

>>110978
I'm not sure which country are you referring to. In some countries like in Finland and Netherlands news sources just copy their headlines from some agency feed and the boxes end up looking silly with the same topic for each source. I think it's still useful because the overlay content may vary in length and you can learn about the topic by hovering around.

>>110976
You're right about presentation. Recently I've been educated that SPIDR has a repelling meaning in russian. That is one issue I have to address in the future, however it's not easy to make up a new name.

>>109501
Thanks, I will look for how to fix that.

>>108728
It should not relate to the source being paywalled. There's a few second gap between updating the front page and generating the popup contents, if you're lucky you can pop up a 404 because of that. Also, sometimes the content generation could possibly fail.

>>108601
1. Monetization is not topical because the traffic is still not large enough for that. Ads are one option but also the last option. 2. Typically I add top, domestic, international and politics categories from a source. Sports and entertainment are off.

>>102318
I wrote a python script that downloads RSS feeds, parses them and groups them with my own algorithm. The results are fed into sqlite database which can be read by the web server.

>>110978
>tfw I sometimes click through to 10 articles on the same story to fully understand every interpretation of it
Feels good, man. If you don't want to click a link you don't have to.

>>113343
/ourguy/

>>113343
I have this website saved to my phone's home screen, so it is effectively an app.

The only thing missing is notifications when new stories update.

Is this possible without creating an app?

>>113346

and if the site is too cluttered and I don't want to go to the site I don't have to either

OP is asking for recommendations to make the site user friendly, hence..

>>113343

>Sports and entertainment are off.

good, it's improving :)

>>113509

I'm looking at it now, however, and I still see entertainment and sports...

What's the mechanism by which this works? How does it determine which key words are important?