Originally posted by Amorymeltzer
How do you think PODcasts could be utitlized for the ATSNN community?
Podcasts can be utilized firstly for live reporting. Also another idea for Podcasts is to have a weekly or daily news round up. Similiar to the 6 o
clock news but on subjects to do with ATS. Example. I could do a weekly report via podcast of Australian News. Other reporters can do a weekly roundup
of their views on the news. A Current Affairs like program of podcasts.
What are your opinions on the stricter standards kept for ATSNN?
The stricter standards are nessesary for an international top ranking xml news feed. To quote
politics.abovetopsecret.com...
Skeptic Overlord
There are some issues that come up from time to time that need attention:
1) Quality of writing and proper submission format. We're looking at ways to reward or otherwise call-out stellar submissions, rather than smack-down
marginal ones.
2) Quality of source article. Using blogs or highly-biased sources shouldn't happen.
3) Bias creeping into the opening intro. Stating your opinion or spin is fine, but it should stay out of the intro.
4) A seeming proliferation of right or left leaning articles with very little "really unbiased" content.
skeptic
These are some instances of higher requirements. ATSNN needs to be more rigid than the forum topics because its a credible news source. We do need to
have those higher standards to remain credible and not be ridiculed like Indiadaily.
Soficrow
I think ATSNN is more dynamic - and more interesting.
Everyone brings their own unique energy to the news board - and sometimes it's positively buzzing. There are new voices, new perspectives, new
interests.
...I would like to see some kind of advice 'program' for reporters - some of the glitches are quite minor, but they can prevent good submissions
from moving forward.
ah now Soficrow has mentioned in that post an idea I have been giving serious thought to lately in regard to improving standards and keeping strict
control of quality. I have noticed that submissions are staying in no man's land even when the source story is dynamite. This is usually because of
the Intro being what I would call "not top quality". The problem with the voting system is that "intro fix" just doesn't quite say what it is. It
could be one spelling mistake or it could be total lack of content. (while I mention that I thought I just had would be a "Fix Intro Content" choice
on the voting form). Then the votes start coming in. Some will vote yes because the story (source) is dynamite but then many more will vote no or fix
because of the content. So the votes go up and down. The author has a three hour time frame to edit the content of the news post although the world is
a 24 hour place. So after that three hours many more people are logging in and maybe voting fix intro and the authors hands are tied, no edit button.
The story then just sits. And if the story does get voted up into news, really its not good. It doesn't look nice, it doesn't tell the story and
makes the news look haphazard and rushed. It doesn't invite interest or comment. I will cite an example.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
The particular story is revelant to ATSNN in my eyes. But the submission needs to tell more of the story. There are many sources for this story and it
could easily have more info and interest in the intro. I am not picking on the author, he has done a great job in submitting the story, he has added a
graphic (fantastic) and other links. The story is still in submssion as I write this. I feel had that intro been fuller that story would now be news
and well ranked and a respected piece. If there was such a way that mentoring of contributers could occur that would be great. For example asking
questions about your submission and writing of someone who knows. Or someone u2u'ing the contributer and gently pointing out some improvements. In
any standard news office this occurs, with editors checking over and suggesting changes and edit for the author to carry out. Hints on how to get that
story up there quicker. After the three hour lapse as well if edits are required its the job of u2uing the mods. They are pretty busy people and may
not be able to get to it while its still hot news. This is once again where a mentoring system or "editors" could come in handy. See..... ATSNN
stories rank well on google and not just on site. I have often come across atsnn pieces in my google travels and so do millions of others.
The
standard has to be the best. The grammar has to be near perfect and the spelling exact, well once we get over which form of english spelling to
use

.
If the mentoring system takes place then contributers will start seeing their successes and be encouraged to contribute more. When other members see
contributers making news then they will be more inclined to contribute. ATSNN can be a scary place when you first start. to have a couple of people to
buddy you before you get your flight feathers would be an asset. It would save also on discouraging and disheartening no votes.
The points system on submssions and titles is fair. By the time a contributer has the 75 requirment for expert they are pretty well versed on how to
write and what to write on. I would personally like to see a title system professionally befitting like contributer - Reporter - Senior reporter -
staff reporter - editor- senior editor - staff editor - The Editor<--"Nerdling as mod" but really ...I can live with being an expert......*sigh
How do you think ATSNN can continue to try and challenge larger news organizations
ATSNN can continue to challenge the mainstream larger news organizations in a few different ways. I would like to see contributers get out there in
the community and write fresh pieces and exclusives. In example of what I mean here. When I first started submitting to ATSNN I did a story on UFO's
over Australian skies. The articles I was quoting from had a witnesses name. Had I of known ATSNN as i do now I would have contacted the witness for
an interview with ATSNN and asked them questions I thought to be pertinent to ATS readers. More interviews like this.
Contacting people and asking them direct instead of relying on reuters feeds. An article I did on Bird Flu and Australia - I am now going to try and
contact the Australian quarantine service and ask them questions on that article and hopefully get some juicy answers. Thats what ATSNN would benefit
immensely from. Interviews and exclusives. In other words I would like to see the contributers become more than armchair journo's.
I would like to see live reports, live interviews, exclusive stories. We have the advantage of having an international crew and that could be well
utilized for news articles. I would like to see some "undercover" reporting but overall all I would like to see a uniqueness. Instead of just taking
the news from the reports in front of you, research and follow up. Get off the seat, reach for the phone, send emails, ask questions, go out on the
scene.
And, finally, and perhaps most importantly, what do you think needs to be done about the drift that has occured within ATSNN from it's
original goal?
ATSNN Mission Statement
The Above Top Secret News Network is a community-driven news portal that focuses on the breaking news and current events of our volatile global
situation, that influence the complex theories of scandals, cover-ups, and conspiracies that are the core topics of ATS.
Our focus is on presenting these alternative topics with a high degree of credibility, integrity, factual reliability, and thoughtful analysis never
before encountered in this subject matter.
Any member of the community is empowered to create content; contribute to the evolution of thought through collaborative discussion and debate; and
forward the motto of "deny ignorance" through a relentless pursuit of truth, no matter where the truth is found.
I don't really think ATSNN has drifted overly far from that original mission statement but yes there could be seen to have some drift. Over the time
ATSNN has been growing legs it has sort of settled into it's own entity. Its member driven and has become what the members want. After anyone gives
birth they find the child they have given birth to is their own little person and entity with it's own personality. Sometimes it can be quite
different from the pre concieved ideas, this is indeed what has happened with ATSNN.
Conspiracy related news articles are quite often voted off the island and ridiculed by members replying. The UFO story I did got me quite a few no:not
right votes (a member has felt that your story is not right for atsnn, bearing in mind it is a ufo conspiracies related forum) That reply on votes is
enough to discourage anyone from posting fresh conspiracy stories. Couple that with the replies that poo poo the author. And if the author does have
an opinion quite often many no:bias votes will creep in, once again discouraging.
I personally see a conspiracy behind every news article i submit and try to ascertain my twist on events in my opinion section. I do not scream
conspiracy though, I like to word my article in such a way that readers can read between the lines and think for themselves. I like to raise points of
interest. Looking back over all my submissions I am happy with my stories and the way they do fit in with the mission statement. Many of the articles
on ATSNN at present are on ATS core topics. There are articles on The New World Order. There are articles on Bird Flu, Global Warming, The War in
Iraq. The problem lies when members scream source at contributers and won't vote up a story unless it has a cnn or fox news source. If a news article
has an unknown source even if its credible it doesn't get voted up. or if the opinion stated is left of centre then the members will vote no bias.
So in some ways the mission statement is in conflict with the rules of submissions and the voting system as it now stands.
But having said all that I like ATSNN for what it has grown into. Juicy interesting stories for everyone to enjoy. When i post articles if they raise
a highly emotional response in me, then i post them. Whether its about a transoceanic amazing shark called Nicole (inspires awe of nature) or if its
an American consultant telling Australia to support the war for profit (inspires anger and ire) or a researcher telling us there is no global warming
(inspires frustration) as long as the article inspires emotion and debate then I feel it's worthy. Its the heart of ATSNN and thats what ATSNN needs
to keep and hold dear and precious ....the heart and soul......AS long as ATSNN keeps that heart and soul and not just recite by rote mainsteam
articles then ATSNN will continue to be a success. Both for members responses and search engine results.
There is room on ATSNN for it all. As long as it is all top quality I do not see why stories such as Nicole cannot exist side by side with my Bird Flu
coverup stories. What needs to be done is encouragement of contributers to post interesting stories with a conspiracy related angle. Filler stories of
high interest that spark debate in my opinion are great for ATSNN. If it was just conspiracy stories screaming conspiracy then ATSNN would slow down
to a crawl.
More encouragement of the mission statement to go along with those stories everyone likes. As I said there is room for it. I personally like to see
ATSNN moving and not wake up in the morning to see the same front page headlines I saw the night before I went to bed.
More encouragement of contributers posting in the mission statement guidelines. More fascinating articles that raise debate. I like to believe that my
stories are interesting and fascinating with all different angles to raise debate.
I would like to see that across the board but at the same time i still enjoy seeing headlining breaking interesting world interest news on ATSNN.
[edit on 11-10-2005 by Mayet]