weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
53 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

weeklyteam
The weekly round-up of OSM news, issue # 382,
is now available online in English, giving as always a summary of all things happening in the openstreetmap world:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/en/archives/9699/

Enjoy!

weeklyOSM?
who?: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WeeklyOSM#Available_Languages 
where?: https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/weeklyosm-is-currently-produced-in_56718#2/8.6/108.3
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

sdoerr
On 17/11/2017 08:20, weeklyteam wrote:
Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called Sophox). Yuri is perceived by many as unreasonable as before and tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM.


"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man."
-George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903)


Anyway, it's sad to see that WeeklyOSM has abandoned all attempt at impartiality.


--

Steve


Virus-free. www.avast.com

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Christoph Hormann-2
On Friday 17 November 2017, Steve Doerr wrote:
>
> Anyway, it's sad to see that WeeklyOSM has abandoned all attempt at
> impartiality.

Huh?

"perceived by many as unreasonable as before" is a clear statement of
distancing themselves from this opinion.

Impartiality does not mean you have to present every marginal opinion on
a matter equally.  Supplementing a news item on a discussion with a
summary of the results of the discussion is just good journalism.

My criticism would be that "unreasonable" - while it applies - is not
the main impression people have got from Yuri here.  I could list a
number of words i would find fitting but stating them here would
probably be considered offensive by some.  I could imagine the
weeklyOSM editors were looking for a word that avoids this and ended up
with "unreasonable".

And George Bernard Shaw's idea does not work with any of these other,
more fitting terms - sorry. ;-)

--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Rafael Avila Coya
In reply to this post by sdoerr
Hi:

I've read the majority of the posts of the "New OSM Quick-Fix service"
thread in OSM-talk, and I don't see any partiality in the post of the
WeeklyOSM. In fact, I think they have been very polite and diplomatic.

Cheers,

Rafael.

On 17/11/17 11:34, Steve Doerr wrote:

> On 17/11/2017 08:20, weeklyteam wrote:
>> Yuri Astrakhanre-started
>> <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2017-November/079504.html>the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called/Sophox/). Yuri is perceived by many as unreasonable as before and tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM.
>
>
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
> persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress
> depends on the unreasonable man."
> -George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903)
>
>
> Anyway, it's sad to see that WeeklyOSM has abandoned all attempt at
> impartiality.
>
>
> --
>
> Steve
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
> Virus-free. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>
>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Mikel Maron-3
Anyway, it's sad to see that WeeklyOSM has abandoned all attempt at impartiality

Impartiality is an ongoing issue for any journalistic enterprise. WeeklyOSM has at times done better, and done worse. I think WeeklyOSM is a really valuable service, and I hope the editors there are open to our help to become a better service for the whole OSM community.

Let's look at this example, and see if we can come up with something better. 

Compare the original version...

> Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called Sophox). Yuri is perceived by many as unreasonable as before and tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM.

and this version

Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called Sophox). Yuri is as unreasonable as before and tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM.

This is worse, but I posit not much worse. While the published version does semantically avoid WeeklyOSM making this judgement, the meaning comes through much the same.

Now try this version...

Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called Sophox). The discussion continues to be quite contentious.

This is better. It gets the same substantial information across, but does not call out judgement on an individual, and allows the reader to enter the discussion with an open mind.

-Mikel


* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron


On Friday, November 17, 2017, 6:52:25 AM EST, Rafael Avila Coya <[hidden email]> wrote:


Hi:

I've read the majority of the posts of the "New OSM Quick-Fix service"
thread in OSM-talk, and I don't see any partiality in the post of the
WeeklyOSM. In fact, I think they have been very polite and diplomatic.

Cheers,

Rafael.

On 17/11/17 11:34, Steve Doerr wrote:

> On 17/11/2017 08:20, weeklyteam wrote:
>> Yuri Astrakhanre-started
>> <https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2017-November/079504.html>the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called/Sophox/). Yuri is perceived by many as unreasonable as before and tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM.
>
>
> "The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
> persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress
> depends on the unreasonable man."
> -George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman (1903)
>
>
> Anyway, it's sad to see that WeeklyOSM has abandoned all attempt at
> impartiality.
>
>
> --
>
> Steve
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>     Virus-free. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>
>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> talk mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

>

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

dieterdreist
2017-11-17 16:53 GMT+01:00 Mikel Maron <[hidden email]>:
Now try this version...

Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called Sophox). The discussion continues to be quite contentious.

This is better. It gets the same substantial information across, but does not call out judgement on an individual, and allows the reader to enter the discussion with an open mind.


Thank you Mikel for the insights, but I believe the version you propose is still biased, because Yuri says his tool isn't about performing mechanical edits. ;-)

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Mikel Maron-3
believe the version you propose is still biased, because Yuri says his tool isn't about performing mechanical edits.

Good point. Try this..

Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the tool now called Sophox. The discussion continues to be quite contentious.

* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron


On Friday, November 17, 2017, 11:23:23 AM EST, Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> wrote:


2017-11-17 16:53 GMT+01:00 Mikel Maron <[hidden email]>:
Now try this version...

Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called Sophox). The discussion continues to be quite contentious.

This is better. It gets the same substantial information across, but does not call out judgement on an individual, and allows the reader to enter the discussion with an open mind.


Thank you Mikel for the insights, but I believe the version you propose is still biased, because Yuri says his tool isn't about performing mechanical edits. ;-)

Cheers,
Martin


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Christoph Hormann-2
In reply to this post by Mikel Maron-3
On Friday 17 November 2017, Mikel Maron wrote:
>
> > Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list
> > about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called Sophox).
> > The discussion continues to be quite contentious.
>
> This is better. It gets the same substantial information across, but
> does not call out judgement on an individual, and allows the reader
> to enter the discussion with an open mind. -Mikel

Yikes!

You are aware that Yuri considers this tool not a mechanical edit tool
so maybe lets also censor that part of the message...

I sincerely hope the weeklyOSM team ignores such advise.  No one really
wants a shallow, politically whitewashed verbal ornamentation of the
links carefully vetted not to hurt anyone that could be generated by a
bot (yes, there is some irony in that).

--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Yves
In reply to this post by dieterdreist
Good exercise Mikel, but using only 'contentious' you don't mention the issues raised in the discussion.
Yves
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Ian Dees
In reply to this post by Christoph Hormann-2


On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 10:28 AM, Christoph Hormann <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Friday 17 November 2017, Mikel Maron wrote:
>
> > Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list
> > about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called Sophox).
> > The discussion continues to be quite contentious.
>
> This is better. It gets the same substantial information across, but
> does not call out judgement on an individual, and allows the reader
> to enter the discussion with an open mind. -Mikel

Yikes!

You are aware that Yuri considers this tool not a mechanical edit tool
so maybe lets also censor that part of the message...

I sincerely hope the weeklyOSM team ignores such advise.  No one really
wants a shallow, politically whitewashed verbal ornamentation of the
links carefully vetted not to hurt anyone that could be generated by a
bot (yes, there is some irony in that).

I don't know about a "shallow, politically whitewashed verbal ornamentation of the links", but I *do* want to see WeeklyOSM (and the rest of the community) try harder to not hurt individuals or make disparaging remarks about any particular member or project in this community.

There are so many things happening in the OSM community: the WeeklyOSM team could do a better job at editorial control so that they could talk about all those things without letting politics or opinions show up in their posts.

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

dieterdreist
In reply to this post by Mikel Maron-3
2017-11-17 17:27 GMT+01:00 Mikel Maron <[hidden email]>:

Good point. Try this..

Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the tool now called Sophox. The discussion continues to be quite contentious.


but then the message boils down to: "Yuri Astrakhan is discussing a re-named tool (Sophox) on the talk mailing list", and you have to go there and read through everything in order to actually get "information".

Cheers,
Martin

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Mikel Maron-3
Yes, doing this is hard work, and appreciate the job WeeklyOSM has to do. Point is, statements like "Yuri is as unreasonable as before and tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM" is inappropriate, and there are many better ways to summarize the topic.

* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron


On Friday, November 17, 2017, 12:35:44 PM EST, Martin Koppenhoefer <[hidden email]> wrote:


2017-11-17 17:27 GMT+01:00 Mikel Maron <[hidden email]>:

Good point. Try this..

Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list about the tool now called Sophox. The discussion continues to be quite contentious.


but then the message boils down to: "Yuri Astrakhan is discussing a re-named tool (Sophox) on the talk mailing list", and you have to go there and read through everything in order to actually get "information".

Cheers,
Martin
_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Yves
In reply to this post by Mikel Maron-3


Le 17 novembre 2017 17:27:05 GMT+01:00, Mikel Maron <[hidden email]> a écrit :

>> Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list
>about the tool now called Sophox. The discussion continues to be quite
>contentious.
>* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>
>On Friday, November 17, 2017, 11:23:23 AM EST, Martin Koppenhoefer
><[hidden email]> wrote:  
>
> 2017-11-17 16:53 GMT+01:00 Mikel Maron <[hidden email]>:
>
>Now try this version...
>> Yuri Astrakhan re-started the discussion on the Talk mailing list
>about the tool to do mechanical edits (it is now called Sophox). The
>discussion continues to be quite contentious.
>
Ok, now it's completely hollow.
But this is interesting, and I *do* find the original from Weekly a bit harsh.
Please, Mikel, do you want to try now to add some content on the actual thread?
Yves

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Christoph Hormann-2
In reply to this post by Mikel Maron-3
On Friday 17 November 2017, Mikel Maron wrote:
> statements like "Yuri is as unreasonable as before and
> tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM" is inappropriate,

First: This is not what weeklyOSM has written.
Second: I disagree this is inappropriate - inprecise maybe, but not
inappropriate.

> and
> there are many better ways to summarize the topic.

Here we agree - although you probably would consider most better ways to
summarize the discussion to be even less appropriate.

It is quite simply a fact that the way Yuri has interacted with the OSM
community during the last months has led to a lot of people developing
a fairly bad opinion of him, his attitude and what he does.  If you try
to prevent people from articulating these opinions and prevent others -
those in the weeklyOSM team - from reporting on and communicating about
this in the way they perceive it, including the intensity and extent of
the displeasure felt by those in the discussion, you are going to do
more damage to the OSM community than either Yuri or anyone maybe going
on occasion a bit overboard with their choice of words in the
discussion.

--
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Andy Townsend
In reply to this post by Mikel Maron-3
On 17/11/2017 17:52, Mikel Maron wrote:
Yes, doing this is hard work, and appreciate the job WeeklyOSM has to do. Point is, statements like "Yuri is as unreasonable as before and tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM" is inappropriate, and there are many better ways to summarize the topic.

Well to be fair, the article as written didn't actually say that - it said "is perceived by many as unreasonable".

Full disclosure - I'm an occasional contributor to the weekly OSM newsletter.  I didn't add or edit that article (actually I didn't contribute to any last week - you can usually tell the ones I've written because they have more links and perhaps too many words in them), but although perhaps a little over-concise I don't think you could argue with "perceived by many as unreasonable" - just wade through the recent archives of the talk mailing list again and weigh the arguments for and against.  Also, there is such a thing as "fake balance".  Imagine you're running an article about someone who's discussing ways to offset the problems caused by the Mercator projection; you don't then need to also quote someone from the Flat Earth Society for the sake of impartiality.

Secondly - and this is a point that applies to many other areas of OSM too - there seem far more people willing to contribute their copy-editing skills here on a mailing list than actually helping put _next_ week's newsletter together.  It's not a new phenomenon - a short while ago WeeklyOSM had a complaint from an OSM-centric organisation (let's call it "X") that "we never report on what's happening with X".  It was politely suggested to the complainer that perhaps they ought to volunteer themselves; then they could submit all the articles they like.  It went very quiet after that.

It's a similar situation with technical discussions elsewhere ("you ought to render X like Y", "you ought to change how the osm.org website works so I don't have to build infrastructure for $project", "Nominatim ought to support my $odd_non_address_search_example").

Although there's always room for improvement, much of what's around OSM now has a surprisingly low bar for entry, whether it's creating a map based on OSM data that shows $favourite_but_quite_rare_tag, or answering questions on the help site or forum, or as here, volunteering to submit and review a few news articles a week.

Best Regards,
Andy


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Mikel Maron-3
I don't think you could argue with "perceived by many as unreasonable" - just wade through the recent archives of the talk mailing list again and weigh the arguments for and against.

It's just not ok to call out an individual like that. It's not appropriate, not correct and not helpful.  The dynamic of the discussion be expressed much better, with full information, without disrespecting each other. I'm happy to find ways to help WeeklyOSM if you all agree that the issue of impartiality is an important and serious one to take on.

* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron


On Friday, November 17, 2017, 1:35:58 PM EST, Andy Townsend <[hidden email]> wrote:


On 17/11/2017 17:52, Mikel Maron wrote:
Yes, doing this is hard work, and appreciate the job WeeklyOSM has to do. Point is, statements like "Yuri is as unreasonable as before and tries to ignore all the unwritten rules in OSM" is inappropriate, and there are many better ways to summarize the topic.

Well to be fair, the article as written didn't actually say that - it said "is perceived by many as unreasonable".

Full disclosure - I'm an occasional contributor to the weekly OSM newsletter.  I didn't add or edit that article (actually I didn't contribute to any last week - you can usually tell the ones I've written because they have more links and perhaps too many words in them), but although perhaps a little over-concise I don't think you could argue with "perceived by many as unreasonable" - just wade through the recent archives of the talk mailing list again and weigh the arguments for and against.  Also, there is such a thing as "fake balance".  Imagine you're running an article about someone who's discussing ways to offset the problems caused by the Mercator projection; you don't then need to also quote someone from the Flat Earth Society for the sake of impartiality.

Secondly - and this is a point that applies to many other areas of OSM too - there seem far more people willing to contribute their copy-editing skills here on a mailing list than actually helping put _next_ week's newsletter together.  It's not a new phenomenon - a short while ago WeeklyOSM had a complaint from an OSM-centric organisation (let's call it "X") that "we never report on what's happening with X".  It was politely suggested to the complainer that perhaps they ought to volunteer themselves; then they could submit all the articles they like.  It went very quiet after that.

It's a similar situation with technical discussions elsewhere ("you ought to render X like Y", "you ought to change how the osm.org website works so I don't have to build infrastructure for $project", "Nominatim ought to support my $odd_non_address_search_example").

Although there's always room for improvement, much of what's around OSM now has a surprisingly low bar for entry, whether it's creating a map based on OSM data that shows $favourite_but_quite_rare_tag, or answering questions on the help site or forum, or as here, volunteering to submit and review a few news articles a week.

Best Regards,
Andy


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Yuri Astrakhan-2
One important aspect was missing in the announcement. The tool's new name is a tiny part of a much bigger set of community suggested and requested changes. Fully ignoring functionality changes that many community members suggested is biased. 

Mechanical edit claim was also never justified -- saying it's a mechanical edit tool doesn't fit with the community's own definition, per wiki. Just the other day the importance of using the right word was mentioned - when I allegedly missed the word "deprecated". Let's keep things consistent, and not dilute or change the meaning of existing terms to fit the immediate agenda.


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

sdoerr
On 17/11/2017 20:50, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:

> One important aspect was missing in the announcement. The tool's new
> name is a tiny part of a much bigger set of community suggested and
> requested changes. Fully ignoring functionality changes that many
> community members suggested is biased.
>
> Mechanical edit claim was also never justified -- saying it's a
> mechanical edit tool doesn't fit with the community's own definition,
> per wiki. Just the other day the importance of using the right word
> was mentioned - when I allegedly missed the word "deprecated". Let's
> keep things consistent, and not dilute or change the meaning of
> existing terms to fit the immediate agenda.
>

+1


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Mikel Maron-3
One request. Can we not relitigate thie topic of Yuri's tool on this thread. Want to focus on helping WeeklyOSM to improve its coverage of our whole community.

* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron


On Friday, November 17, 2017, 4:29:39 PM EST, Steve Doerr <[hidden email]> wrote:


On 17/11/2017 20:50, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:

> One important aspect was missing in the announcement. The tool's new
> name is a tiny part of a much bigger set of community suggested and
> requested changes. Fully ignoring functionality changes that many
> community members suggested is biased.
>
> Mechanical edit claim was also never justified -- saying it's a
> mechanical edit tool doesn't fit with the community's own definition,
> per wiki. Just the other day the importance of using the right word
> was mentioned - when I allegedly missed the word "deprecated". Let's
> keep things consistent, and not dilute or change the meaning of
> existing terms to fit the immediate agenda.
>

+1


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus



_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: weeklyOSM #382 2017-11-07-2017-11-13

Frederik Ramm
In reply to this post by Andy Townsend
Hi,

On 11/17/2017 07:34 PM, Andy Townsend wrote:
> Also, there is such a thing as "fake balance".  Imagine you're
> running an article about someone who's discussing ways to offset the
> problems caused by the Mercator projection; you don't then need to also
> quote someone from the Flat Earth Society for the sake of impartiality.

This is actually quite important. In the US, after the election, I read
a lot of media critique where people said that many papers had
misunderstood their journalistic impartiality as having to give both
sides of an argument equal coverage, however nonsensical one side may
have been. This mistake that was made by well-meaning, liberal-thinking,
fairness-aspiring journalists, it was claimed, contributed to giving the
country Trump.

Let's not fall into the same trap.

Also, let's not try and tell the weekly how to do their job. I prefer a
critical and occasionally opinionated weekly that enjoys the freedom of
the press over a sanctioned and moderated "state media" that is always
polite and only reports successes and advances, and glosses over any
acrimony that might exist in the community.

I'm immensely thankful that we have the weekly, and that it has formed
independently of the powers that be in the OSMF, and that it dares to
report things the OSMF wouldn't necessarily blog about, and that they
aren't required to submit to some OSMF redaction. I find something to
dislike in every issue, but that's not the point; the fact that we have
a free press at all more than makes up for that.

Bye
Frederik

--
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail [hidden email]  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

_______________________________________________
talk mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
123