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.
Look, if what you learned at Harvard was “we just count as news everything anyone says,” then we have an issue with Harvard’s J-school.
Did Harvard also tell you to randomly insert capitals in proper nouns? Because you’re consistently doing that.
I have no college degree. I saw no need of one because the J-school had been gutted and rolled into communications, and the writers we had on staff who were on the CMU journalism track were the worst writers we had. Assignments were 12" in three weeks; we needed things turned around in a few hours, and if you can’t write 12" in 20 minutes, this is not the correct field for you.
“Whatever his credentials, …” So you’re admitting you lack respect for actual experience. You previously argued you wanted someone with credentials. The level of cognitive dissonance you are displaying suggests Harvard is a shit school for journalism. Throw the name around all you like; you’re making yourself look like an ass when you can’t follow your own expectations.
At this point, I’d be fine with you leaving and telling everyone you know that Beehaw sucks because they chose a mod with news judgment to run a news community.
You’ll note no one has yet moved to remove you. This is not because the mods and admins agree with you by any stretch, but rather because our goal is an inclusive environment where education is a preferable step to banning. That said, randomly messaging admins to protest an act in line with what is expected of me as a mod went over extremely poorly. All you are doing at this point is unspooling rope.
If you would like outrage peddled as news, I would suggest Beehaw’s U.S. News community is not a good fit. If you are unable to accept constructive feedback without Beeing Nice, I would suggest Beehaw is not a good fit.
You are free to define news however you like. But you can’t expect an established community to say “oh, shit, we were wrong this whole time.”