The editor's eye: Curation and comment relevance on the New York Times

Nicholas Diakopoulos*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

14 Scopus citations

Abstract

The journalistic curation of social media content from platforms like Facebook and YouTube or from commenting systems is underscored by an imperative for publishing accurate and quality content. This work explores the manifestation of editorial quality criteria in comments that have been curated and selected on the New York Times website as "NYT Picks." The relationship between comment selection and comment relevance is examined through the analysis of 331,785 comments, including 12,542 editor's selections. A robust association between editorial selection and article relevance or conversational relevance was found. The results are discussed in terms of their implications for reducing journalistic curatorial work load, or scaling the ability to examine more comments for editorial selection, as well as how end-user commenting experiences might be improved.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationCSCW 2015 - Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing
PublisherAssociation for Computing Machinery, Inc
Pages1153-1157
Number of pages5
ISBN (Electronic)9781450329224
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 28 2015
Event18th ACM International Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, CSCW 2015 - BC, Canada
Duration: Mar 14 2015Mar 18 2015

Other

Other18th ACM International Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, CSCW 2015
CountryCanada
CityBC
Period3/14/153/18/15

Keywords

  • comment curation
  • computational journalism
  • News comments

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Computer Networks and Communications

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The editor's eye: Curation and comment relevance on the New York Times'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this