News Genius - Content Guidelines for News Genius Annotations (public page) lyrics

News Genius is a collaborative project that aims to add a layer of valuable context and commentary on top of news articles and primary source documents using the Genius Web Annotator. Tone & Content Philosophy As an extension of Genius, the News Genius voice should be consistent with the best annotations Genius is famous for. We're your brilliant, funny friend who loves the news. We're the smartest kid in the cla**, who's also the cla** clown! Our annotations should always enhance their underlying text. They're interruptive by design (they stop you in your reading) and so the information they convey always has to be worth it and precisely pertinent to the parts of a text they interrupt. This is a good annotation—it does a good job contextualizing its referent, so it doesn't feel like an interruption to the reader: Here's a thought experiment: if you were sitting around with your smart, funny friend reading an article or looking at this transcript, what information would be sufficiently interesting for you to want your friend to stop reading for a second and talk to you about? Have a thesis One good way to approach things is to start with the knowledge: the first annotations on a story should always aim to earn a reader's trust, after that, you can move onto the laughs. Having a coherent “thesis of the page” early in making your annotations will help you shape a narrative or hook that grounds readers, and liberates you to become more playful as the story progresses. Ultimately, you should know before you start annotating what it is about an article that makes it worth close reading! For example, Ben Carson's “rap” commercial was a funny story that was gobbled up by social media. The News Genius “thesis” is that it's interesting because Carson tried and failed to appropriate hip-hop to seem cool and in touch to voters. The move and backlash against it points to how ludicrous and superficial 2016 campaigning has become. We annotated the story through that lens. Go at least one level beyond Google Annotations should try to address all the questions a very curious, smart person would have about a story and its topic. Ideally, it should also answer questions they wouldn't even think to ask—saving a reader a trip to Google can be good, but the strongest annotations show users information they wouldn't even think (or know how) to Google. For example, this annotation finds a Lil Wayne lyric that uses the same rhyme. This one corrects the narrative of Amazon crushing independent bookstores.. A good trick here is to ask yourself: (1) Is my annotation really doing more work for a reader than an ordinary hyperlink could? (2) Did I synthesize at least two ideas to come up with something new, original, and additive in this annotation? If the answer to either is no, you should probably keep working on it. Assume your audience is smarter than you While you're writing, a**ume you have the absolute smartest and most engaged audience (a good trick is to imagine that the author of the piece you're annotating is going to read your annotations, as well as her editor, and the experts and subjects she's quoted in the piece). What about your annotation is going to enhance the story for that person? But always be thinking about how you can give your audience something that will make them seem even smarter! The information in your annotations should be interesting enough to make the reader want to remember it so they can repeat it later to a friend, a professor, a crush at a party, or share it on Facebook or Twitter. Brevity is the soul of wit (And the authors of this doc should take their own advice!) But seriously, don't take 2 paragraphs to tell me what you can in a sentence. Respect people's time—there's a reason people like Twitter. Finally, have a sense of humor We should aim to convey information that's both legitimate (not some crazy stretch / speculation) and delightful, while not taking ourselves too seriously and cracking some good jokes if it's appropriate. Humor doesn't have a place in every news story, but it can certainly enhance a piece if used correctly. Our editors have to be tasteful, mature, and make the right call about where to use humor. Here's an example of a funny annotation on another GOP debate transcript: News Genius shouldn't troll. Here's an example of something that an editor should probably delete and certainly not promote: Restrictions Right now, the “Genius.it/” proxy is incompatible with a few major media priorities, including The New York Times, Medium, The New Yorker, and Bloomberg. However, you can still use the Genius Chrome Extension to make annotation on those sites and share your marked up versions with other users who has have the extension enabled. Sourcing: You should be confident about the information source and link to it within the text of your annotation. The only time a News Genius annotation doesn't need a source is if the annotator is verified or labeled– a very famous person whose perspective readers will immediately be able to grasp, a relevant expert, a witness, a source in the story, the subject of the piece, the piece's author or editor, etc. Here's an example of a well-sourced annotation: it quotes from a reputable publication (Business Insider) and links back to the original article. In this annotation (and the other ones on the same page) the source is less relevant, since the person writing them is commenting on her own speech. Page Level Roles: Page levels roles can be appointed by a Genius staff member. Typically, the only reason you should have a page-level role is when you have a direct connection to that page. Obvious examples include you being the primary author of the text, or the subject of it. Staff members of a particular publication can also have page level roles relevant to their position, e.g. fact checkers and editors. Verified Annotators: Account verification is done by a Genius staff member. To qualify as a Verified Annotator on Genius and get our green checkie, you should have a Verified Twitter account. If you're objectively famous and a huge deal, but you're not verified on Twitter, raise it with a Genius staff member and they'll make the call on whether or not you should be Verified in our own environment. News Genius Annotation Ideas Page level annotation / Headline annotation: This should typically be anchored on the piece's headline or the text's title, and provide a framework for the rest of the annotations on the page. The annotation should provide a concise answer to “Why is this article significant?” What is your “thesis of the page”? Other similar ideas: why did the author write about this issue now? Are they trying to persuade the reader into a particular point of view? Who is the intended audience for the piece? This type of annotation often benefits from collaboration: if you think something is missing from one, add a comment. Here's an example of a good page-level annotation: Annotating a direct quote: What does the quote literally mean? Does it refer to another moment in time, a figure in play, an element of culture? How has it been interpreted by others? Are people tweeting about it? What has the speaker said about it since its initial utterance? Here's an example. Byline annotation: Interesting facts about the piece's authors or editors, anchored to their byline. Simply copying and pasting a writer's bio isn't going to do much more than save readers a click. Make sure you're doing some synthesis in your annotation and adding information that adds particular value in context. Jay Carney's use of Medium to criticize a New York Times piece on Amazon, for instance, offered an opportunity for comment: Fact-check: annotation is a powerful tool with which to verify or disprove controversial claims. This example fact-checks the use of a rusty statistic, while this one confirms what seems like a controversial accusation. Meta-media crit: Why did the author set the article up this way? Why was an interviewer asking a specific question? Which techniques are effective, and more importantly, why? Here, a journalist questions the structure of a Presidential debate. Verified annotations/ Annotators with page-level label: Annotated pages benefit greatly from the insights of the people who wrote and edited them, and the people who they're written about. Annotations from people in this category should address things like: what it was like writing the piece, what was left on the cutting room floor, or what it was like being interviewed. In particular, when a source in a story is making annotations, they should address things like: were you fairly treated in the piece? Is this quote or anecdote accurate? Is a particular quote taken out of context? Did you mean or say something different? what's missing from the reporting? What else do readers need to know? You can find these types of annotators on Twitter and @ them when you share the story, or you can email them using this template. Here's a recent example, which incidentally got the highest number of Web Annotator upvotes of all time. Stuff to avoid Mean-spirited or unrelated gossip Generic information or administrivia about a story, site, author, or topic mentioned, as in this example. Paraphrasing what the text already says, e.g. “This article considers the effects of the Affordable Healthcare Act”. Fact-less boosterism, e.g. “This is a brilliant point!” Why is it a brilliant point? Time-sensitive phrasing that will quickly become inaccurate (“two years ago” etc). Simply identify the date itself. Speculation about what the writer or a source is suggesting—better to use evidence, there's usually good stuff to be had! Or better to get them to annotate on their own! You can get in touch with the News Genius email template. Snarking out. Show respect to the piece and don't annotate half-lines with snarky hot takes; refute whole ideas and sentences with reasoned arguments. How to Source the Facts “Explainer” pieces and previous articles covering the development of the same story. Articles on the same subject from other reputable sites and publications. The Wikipedia pages for the specific story, people and other notable aspects. Use the primary sources Wikipedia cites rather than linking to Wikipedia itself. The Wikimedia Foundation houses a range of primary sources, research articles and journals and books. Social media: what have a source's official channels said in the past? Twitter, Facebook and other networks offer a great (and searchable) archive of official pronouncements. The official website of a subject is an authoritative place to link, especially in the political realm where it often will house policies, give an official biography, etc. Books! Especially for pieces which include some history, the printed word is a great source of facts (unless they were published on CreateSpace). Tying in ideas from crossover books like Freakonomics and The Tipping Point by way of a well-sourced quote is great, but exercise editorial caution. If possible, link to the book on Google Books or Amazon so the old-world medium doesn't bring the annotation to a dead end. Information from paywalled sites, if you have access to them. This is a good way to liberate their knowledge. Interviews with the journalist and the subject of the piece. People will often speak more candidly in interviews, and applying their thoughts and opinions as expressed there can help to illuminate a breaking article.