Talk:Occupy Democrats: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 12:21, 8 March 2022 editNewslinger (talk \| contribs)Edit filter managers, Administrators63,062 edits →Gun stance: Reply← Previous edit		Revision as of 18:21, 31 May 2022 edit undoGrantstern (talk \| contribs)15 edits Subject of Article Asking hard working Misplaced Pages editors to please review and modernize our listing.Tag: use of deprecated (unreliable) source Next edit →
Line 12:		Line 12:
	}}		}}
	{{Ds/talk notice\|topic=ap}}		{{Ds/talk notice\|topic=ap}}

			== Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2022 ==

			Dear All,

			I am the new Executive Editor of Occupy Democrats having started implementing journalistic controls in 2020 and taking over the news website in 2022. As our masthead indicates (there was not one in the past), the Rivero brothers are solely acting in the capacity of website publishers now, they don't control the newsroom in an editorial capacity (or even enter its chatroom). We properly handle the news, opinion, and analysis stories. That is why we earned a 100/100 rating from NewsGuard for our truthful portrayal of the news and our improved journalistic practices. Our journalism criteria and pledge to the public are here:

			https://occupydemocrats.com/about-us/

			But this is not just a short-term improvement over the poor stories written starting in 2017. The site received a poor rating from NewsGuard, an independent 3rd-party rating company that assigns real people to thoroughly review a site's content. They reviewed two years' worth of our content, questioned our sources, and sometimes pointed out articles that required correction.
			Anyone with a Microsoft Edge browser can see the NewsGuard rating for free, and the rating history.

			https://www.newsguardtech.com/ratings/rating-process-criteria/

			What changed? Our implementation of new criteria for handling news/opinion/analysis stories (older stories are labeled as legacy reports or "politics" but do not fall under the new system) and our multi-year track record of correcting inaccuracies when discovered, purging the website of anonymous author's accounts, and a complete break with old editors and old policies that lacked the essential disclosures the public needed to evaluate our work. On top of that, OccupyDemocrats.com retained an entirely new staff of four writers who are both reputable and contribute quality content to our website, including exclusive reports observing journalistic standards for confirming information before publication, and seeking comment when appropriate.

			It is understood that past editorial management at the OccupyDemocrats.com website was opaque and did not adhere to any known standards, but that is we have worked tremendously to re-orient our news offering to be a high-value complement to the meme makers' opinion posts and other content on the Facebook page. The Facebook page team constantly strives for accuracy too, but as noted, gets more attention for its mistakes which it ALWAYS corrects when discovered - this is verifiable too - which is the journalistically appropriate way to handle erroneous content.

			I write all of this in the hopes that someone will review the OccupyDemocrats.com website and the NewsGuard rating and update the heading of our Misplaced Pages appropriately. Misplaced Pages is considered a basic resource for millions of people, but our listing focuses on events that are often 5-7 years in the past and overlooks other things that would show both the website and the Facebook page to be extremely prolific and only occasionally erroneous. A team of people works hard to publish approximately 15,000 pieces of content onto Facebook annually, alongside the website's 2000-3000 stories. But fact checks draw the most attention, not the thousands of wholly accurate posts or the ones that are simply political opinions and not a matter of fact or not.

			Thank you,

			Grant
			grantstern@gmail.com



	== Semi-protected edit request on 17 August 2021 ==		== Semi-protected edit request on 17 August 2021 ==

Revision as of 18:21, 31 May 2022

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Socialism Low‑importance

	Socialism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Socialism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of socialism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SocialismWikipedia:WikiProject SocialismTemplate:WikiProject Socialismsocialism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Template:WikiProject Libertarianism

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Internet Low‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Internet culture Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

The following Misplaced Pages contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Omarrivero (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2022

Dear All,

I am the new Executive Editor of Occupy Democrats having started implementing journalistic controls in 2020 and taking over the news website in 2022. As our masthead indicates (there was not one in the past), the Rivero brothers are solely acting in the capacity of website publishers now, they don't control the newsroom in an editorial capacity (or even enter its chatroom). We properly handle the news, opinion, and analysis stories. That is why we earned a 100/100 rating from NewsGuard for our truthful portrayal of the news and our improved journalistic practices. Our journalism criteria and pledge to the public are here:

https://occupydemocrats.com/about-us/

But this is not just a short-term improvement over the poor stories written starting in 2017. The site received a poor rating from NewsGuard, an independent 3rd-party rating company that assigns real people to thoroughly review a site's content. They reviewed two years' worth of our content, questioned our sources, and sometimes pointed out articles that required correction. Anyone with a Microsoft Edge browser can see the NewsGuard rating for free, and the rating history.

https://www.newsguardtech.com/ratings/rating-process-criteria/

What changed? Our implementation of new criteria for handling news/opinion/analysis stories (older stories are labeled as legacy reports or "politics" but do not fall under the new system) and our multi-year track record of correcting inaccuracies when discovered, purging the website of anonymous author's accounts, and a complete break with old editors and old policies that lacked the essential disclosures the public needed to evaluate our work. On top of that, OccupyDemocrats.com retained an entirely new staff of four writers who are both reputable and contribute quality content to our website, including exclusive reports observing journalistic standards for confirming information before publication, and seeking comment when appropriate.

It is understood that past editorial management at the OccupyDemocrats.com website was opaque and did not adhere to any known standards, but that is we have worked tremendously to re-orient our news offering to be a high-value complement to the meme makers' opinion posts and other content on the Facebook page. The Facebook page team constantly strives for accuracy too, but as noted, gets more attention for its mistakes which it ALWAYS corrects when discovered - this is verifiable too - which is the journalistically appropriate way to handle erroneous content.

I write all of this in the hopes that someone will review the OccupyDemocrats.com website and the NewsGuard rating and update the heading of our Misplaced Pages appropriately. Misplaced Pages is considered a basic resource for millions of people, but our listing focuses on events that are often 5-7 years in the past and overlooks other things that would show both the website and the Facebook page to be extremely prolific and only occasionally erroneous. A team of people works hard to publish approximately 15,000 pieces of content onto Facebook annually, alongside the website's 2000-3000 stories. But fact checks draw the most attention, not the thousands of wholly accurate posts or the ones that are simply political opinions and not a matter of fact or not.

Thank you,

Grant grantstern@gmail.com

Semi-protected edit request on 17 August 2021

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

{{subst:trim|1= Occupy Democrats' is a United States-based, left-wing media outlet built around a Facebook Group and corresponding website. Established in 2012 to counterbalance the Republican "Tea Party" online presence, it publishes memes and links to media stories relating to United States politics. Some critics have accused Occupy Democrats of spreading false information, hyperpartisan content,

FenrirKyramud (talk) 05:05, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. —Sirdog9002 (talk) 05:43, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

References

Cite error: The named reference lat was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Cite error: The named reference atlantic was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Cite error: The named reference asan was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Cite error: The named reference iowa was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Cite error: The named reference king was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Cite error: The named reference rae was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Barfar, Arash (2019-12-01). "Cognitive and affective responses to political disinformation in Facebook". Computers in Human Behavior. 101: 175. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.026. ISSN 0747-5632 – via Science Direct. To construct the political disinformation sample, we focused on Facebook posts from ten popular sources that are known for promulgating political disinformation in Facebook...Among the selected hyper-partisan disinformation sources...Addicting Info, AlterNet, Daily KOS, and Occupy Democrats are extreme Liberal.
Marwick, Alice E. (2018-03-22). "Why do People Share Fake News? A Sociotechnical Model of Media Effects". The Georgetown Law Technology Review. 2 (2). Georgetown University Law Center: 474–513 – via Gale OneFile. The term "fake news"...expanded to include hyper-partisan news sites like Breitbart, DailyCaller, and Occupy Democrats...
LaFrance, Adrienne (December 15, 2020). "Facebook Is a Doomsday". {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |url= (help)

Need Review

This article is extremely biased. 2602:306:83B3:6D20:68AB:6831:B9BA:479A (talk) 06:58, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Lots of misleading information in the wiki Arashitora (talk) 13:07, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Newslinger talk 12:20, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Gun stance

They are not totally anti-gun. In February 2022 they approved and cheered Ukraine president handing out rifles to civilians Joaeko (talk) 15:54, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

References

https://twitter.com/OccupyDemocrats/status/1496946340521119747

The article currently doesn't mention guns, so it looks like this has been removed. — Newslinger talk 12:21, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

Categories: