Remember this old thread... (see below) Now, in the context of "What could *possibly* go wrong...." look at this:
Google News farce triggers Wall Street sell-off http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/10/online_news_farce_drops_united_stock/ Note the bit at the end: Update The Tribune Company has now said that traffic to the Sun-Sentinel's archive pushed the old bankruptcy article onto the "most viewed" section of the paper's web site. David (Who's feeling rather smug) David Greaves wrote: > Peter Bowyer wrote: >> On 08/01/2008, Martin Belam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> Personally I would rather the most read/most emailed reflected exactly >>> what the user was doing, and wasn't "most emailed stories from the >>> last 7 days excluding the also in the news section because we are the >>> BBC and we want our readers to look very serious all the time" > Not on the front page. > > IMHO The front page of the BBC news should not have 4 year old stories > appearing > on it 'by mistake'. > > In the entertainment section, see also section etc etc then yes. The front > page > should be current. If it *is* now current for some bizzare reason then > re-report it. > >> That misses the point - a casual reader (and even some regular >> readers) can be misled by those links pointing to old news. The 'Most >> Emailed' links are presented under a headline 'Most Popular Stories >> Now', and next to a section 'Around the world now' (on the page I'm >> looking at) which implies that the stories are current. > > Indeed. > > It was only last week I realised that 'Most Popular Stories Now' was a link > and > wasn't actually a section title!!! > >> It's a fine objective to show real data (although dubious when it >> reflects 'gaming'), but it must be clear to the reader what the >> context is of what you're showing. > > And I note that the 'See Also' stories in the sidebar *are* date stamped. > So is it a technology problem? (I could accept that See Also are edited into > the > story manually and the dates are re-keyed) > > > David > - > Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please > visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. > Unofficial list archive: > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ - Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html. Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
