I have an idea for a news web site (or television program or newspaper or whatever): I want to get my news relative to everything that’s going on in the world. I want to get my news in relation to “the big picture”. What does that mean? It means taking into account all the things that are going on the world today, and organizing things based on what the real important things are.
Take a look at what the news media is giving you. For example today, December 18, 2006, the “top news stories” include things such as Kate Moss getting out of rehab, an NBA brawl, and various small (yet still tragic) events that affect very few people. Do any of these really matter? To me, no. I don’t mean to say that I don’t care, but that there are greater things to care about, and I (and I would assume others) don’t know enough about them because these other items take up the remaining consciousness of the audience.
I want an editor (or hive-mind, whatever) to
- group the news into buckets (ala Buzzfeed)
- ask the question of each bucket, “Does this really matter in the big scheme of things?”
- place them in order accordingly
The hope for my news goes like this: if there’s a war going on, it should be the top story every single day. It should be the top story until it stops, and even then some more afterwards. It’s the most important and potentially life- and world- changing event going on, so I want to know about it.
It seems nowadays the most important issues in the world are the elephant in the room that only get a passing mention. Everyone knows they’re out there, but somehow smaller and fresher news takes their place even though they really don’t matter to an overwhelming majority of the audience. I’m not saying that there isn’t a place for all of the “news” that happens every day, but it could at least be placed in its rightful order compared to everything else that’s going on.
When I get some time, I will put something together to illustrate this idea further, but I’d like to hear your thoughts on the subject.
Sounds fascinating and provocative, but I’m having a hard time “seeing” it.
This article sort of touches on it a little:
“There are too many instant celebrities. Too many two-day crises. Too many ‘defining moments’ from people in search of instant history. In a world where everything is considered critical, nothing needs to be taken very seriously.”
I want to read (or create) the kind of news media that doesn’t have two-day crises or instant celebrity/history. I want the “big deal”… the kind of thing that fills in the kind of phrase that goes, “with all the problems in the world today, like [blank] [blank] and [blank]”. Stuff that everyone needs to either care about or at least know about, and be reminded that its still out there so it doesn’t get overshadowed by some other piece of two-day news or pushed out by our short attention spans.
I still plan to flush this out a little more, given some time…
I thought of an easier way to describe this idea… A news source that would be edited, organized, and presented in relation to how many people are affected.
very much agree. such a construction of information would be very liberating. if constructed, such organized information could bring about world peace and that is the reason it will (VERY probably) never be allowed to be constructed.
the real news happens everyday behind closed doors – to me, the real news is decisions made concerning war initiatives and legislative debates over minor (baby steps) breaches of freedom. such breaches set precedents for further breaches. such breaches and such war initiatives (one in the same) are worth billions of dollars and keep certain interests in power.
I thought we had a chance with the structure of wikipedia and wikinews but wiki rejects “invalid” entries based on the opinions of “noteworthy persons.”
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/g/georgeorwe109402.html