The same story over and over

Alright, I've had this little pet peeve for a while, but with Osama being dead, it's presenting itself again.

Every time there's a popular news story of some kind there's always umpteen zillion different news anchors covering it. Do we really need every single one on the sift?

Granted, there's some that are different, but the ones that are just 40-60 second clips of a different news anchor saying "Osama bin laden is dead" do we really need those?

Are they really not dupes just because it's the same story with a different backdrop? Is there a rule about this or no?

Honestly, going down the front page alone there's 3 different videos all with the exact same title of "Osama Bin Laden is Dead" and every single one gets the exact same message across.

Should there be some form of dupe ruling on this or no?
BoneRemake says...

Dont vote for it. It is not breaking the rules, it clearly annoys you, but other than this soap box to voice yourself is only that.

No we do not need them, but people have the ability and "right" to do it. Do we need cute little puppies and cats doings stupid mundane shit ? No.. but they have the ability, and the "right".

I hear your words ! I feel ya.

The dupe thing has just recently been discussed, dont try and open that can up. flat fact, its not a dupe, its just whats annoying you.

Shepppard says...

@BoneRemake

The whole point of videosift is to "sifit" out the worst videos of the internet. Granted, I understand the "Just don't vote for it" mindset, but I see this as a sort of loophole.

Puppies and kitties may be everywhere, but generally they're not doing the exact same thing, you can see distinct differences between Kitty video A, and Kitty Video B. A good example is the Maru box collection, it's a cat jumping in/on boxes every video, but the substance is different for each one. If it was a video where the only difference was Maru coloured brown then I'd tend to agree with your point.

News videos are tricky however. It's content is the same, the only difference is a backdrop. What's to stop me from posting a video of a local news agency, a national news agency, and an independant news agency all covering the same thing? Nothing. All three videos will be telling me the same thing, but because it's from a different one/two people talking about it, so it's not a dupe. Do all three convey the same message? Yes. Do all three need to be on here saying that same message? no.

What that means is that when there's a "Breaking news story" much like the Osama is dead story, we'll see umpteen billion videos all titled the same telling us the same thing. This does two things, 1) It clutters up the front page, which is honestly not that big a deal, but it means other more deserving videos won't get the views and votes they deserve. And 2) It'll make actually searching for the one you want to see somewhere down the road a nightmare.

I see potential for "Sifting" here, the original video is treated like the original for Dupes, if someone finds a video they think is better in a dupe, the original embed gets replaced with the better one. That way there's no clutter, and the video that videosift has of the story is "the best"

The dupe thing that is currently being discussed is about rewarding the person who creates the dupe, which I personally don't think is right, that only leads to people posting dupes on purpose.

This again, is just me seeing this as a loophole being exploited, and I'm bringing it to peoples attentions. I'll gladly discuss it in a civil manner, preferably without name calling or insult slinging, and I welcome your input on the matter.

BoneRemake says...

if it Clutters up the front page then it is obviously worthy to be on the sift, which as I agree, the point you made is exactly that of videosift.

I completely agree with what you said on that other discussion is about.

I enjoy the pretense you laid out, it made me smirk and grunt.

on a purely blunt statement, After one realizes what I have said within this reply, that of which is the " if it clutters up.." part, once you come to terms with that, you really do not have an argument. It is not a loophole, you may have the same story being covered and they may use the same sound bit/byte but other angles and opinions may be injected into the coverage. In this instance you may have a point, but to call for change or to even call it a loop hole is a bit far fetched.

I hope I did not hurt your feelings.

In a sense I am saying you contradicted yourself.

kymbos says...

I hear ya. It's kind of like people mistake the Sift for Twitter in those moments. I'm only interested in the Obama speech, and that's it.

Nothing you can do, though. They're not dupes, they're just superfluous. The normal mechanations of the Sift should remove them over time.

Hybrid says...

Yeah, the only one I voted for was the one riding high in the Top 15 - the full Obama speech on the mission. I don't care about news channels reporting it.

AdrianBlack says...

I've also noticed that whenever a big news story breaks, the first two pages of the sift look like youtube at a royal wedding. I agree that it's a drag, but at least it usually dissipates within 24 hours, like what Kymbos said.

gwiz665 says...

I'm just backing off for a couple of days while the Tsosama runs through sift city and reddit town. Go to the mountains, you'll be safe.

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

New Blog Posts from All Members