|
|
Comment Text |
Response Date |
| 1. | I like it...seems to be a novel idea I haven't seen anywhere else, I'm already curious to see how that's going to turn out. | May 20, 2009 2:26 PM |
| 2. | I would try reading the capsules but wouldn't participate. My concern is the experience and quality of your reviewers. | May 20, 2009 11:11 AM |
| 3. | I think it could give people a rounder appreciation for differing points of view. | May 20, 2009 8:41 AM |
| 4. | this could be very valuable in both news literacy instruction as well as writing courses where students need to find opposing viewpoints. this would provide solid examples, and even help students in their research. | May 20, 2009 7:25 AM |
| 5. | Love this! I'm really into comparing, contrasting, fact-checking, accuracy in reporting, and including more DEPTH for increased understanding of complexity in the world. | May 18, 2009 10:53 AM |
| 6. | Would reveal some valuable comparisons. | May 16, 2009 9:00 PM |
| 7. | community of trusted news sources is most appreciated | May 16, 2009 12:48 PM |
| 8. | If your goal is to foster participation and widen the number of people doing reviews, then inviting "our top reviewers and advisors" is an ineffective strategy.
First of all, will the distinction between reviewer and advisor be prominently displayed? It should be, or could be considered deceptive.
Second of all, why invite "top reviewers?" They already participate. How about inviting NT members at random? Or, a random, "weighted" choice based on the sorts of items the member usually accesses? i.e., don't invite someone who only reads editorials to review a gardening article.
Inviting non "top reviewers and advisors" would broaden participation, potentially.
-dcm | May 16, 2009 6:36 AM |
| 9. | very much required | May 16, 2009 1:48 AM |
| 10. | I like to know how others think; comparing and contrasting thoughts/opinions is good mind exercising. | May 15, 2009 8:52 PM |