Please check the mod logs. I submitted a story to the US News group linking to an official statement by the Ohio House of Representatives on their decision to not respect a recent election result enshrining abortion rights in the state constitution. I linked to their actual statement at the Ohio government web site. That is a canonical source. And it was removed for not being actual news because it didn’t link to a news publisher.

This is an insane result. One no actual news organization would ever choose to do. They link to canonical sources.

I am objecting to this in the support group because I don’t know where else to go. The issue here is not about my submission, it is about journalistic standards. This is not acceptable.

EDIT Because there remains a dispute witj admins on what constitutes proper sourcing of documents published by a state government legislative body…

Please contact the main administrative offices of Poynter, The Columbia School of Journalism, or The Neiman School at Harvard and say that you run an online news forum, explain the particulars of this issue, and ask if a professor of journalism or other professional in referral is willing to give an informed opinion on proper practices of sourcing in this situation. Please get an external reality check by a professional in the field. Not for this submission, as that’s water past the bridge, but to craft a reasonable policy going forward for future submissions.

I believe if you’re concise and respectful and do not debate the individual, you’ll have no trouble getting an informed opinion.

  • LallyLuckFarm@beehaw.org
    27·
    11 months ago

    It’s an official party statement, which means that it’s purely to rile people up either to garner support in the form of public displays or donations. It falls outside of the posting guidelines for !usnews, which I happen to like.

    • Paranoid Factoid@beehaw.orgOPEnglish
      8·
      11 months ago

      That is the party in power. They hold a majority in both houses and the governorship.

      This is an insane decision. On the grounds of preventing bias it is biased. It deprives the audience agency to understand by a canonical source.

      You are in fact arguing for editorializing the words of an official public document in the name of unbiased news. That is the very definition of editorial bias. That is, bias in the name of removing bias.

      That source stands on its own. Especially given this is link aggregation site.

      EDIT Here’s the modlog. Note the Mod/Admin statement, ‘what the GOP says isn’t news’ (paraphrasing) and compare that to the fact that the link went to the official Ohio State House of Representatives website. Not the Ohio Republican Party website. That is not a statement by the GOP, it is an official statement by elected officials acting under state authority. That makes it NEWS, not opinion.

      https://ohiohouse.gov/news/republican/deceptive-ohio-issue-1-misled-the-public-but-doesnt-repeal-our-laws-117412

      • LallyLuckFarm@beehaw.org
        9·
        11 months ago

        I’m concerned that my affect over text is coming across as combative or dismissive and that’s really not the case - their stance is deplorable on any level of humanity and rallying support against them is of paramount importance.

        If it were the AP, or Reuters, or a local Ohio news agency (or other news group) reporting blurb that linked to the party statement, it would fit the posting guidelines by being a news report.