Source reliability rating feature

[669532]

Macrumours.com is one of the biggest Apple speculation and news communities on the internet.

Everyday there are many articles presenting latest rumours, guesses, facts and leaks.

These mostly quote a source.

One of the 1st comments on any major story is "Can we trust this?" or '[name of source]: in the past they've been...'.

A good/interesting thing for the site do would be to, for each article, note the source + their prediction. When the big day comes as well as updating the buyers guide they could check the rumours and rate the accuracy of the sources predictions. You could even account for the time that the predictions were made, and an accurate prediction from earlier on would have yield a greater score.

After 1 or to major events there would be sufficient data on all the major sources to use as a tool.

This data might be a small icon at the top/bottom of an article that represents the past accuracy of this source.

While the accuracy of most sources will vary and not all rumours from all sources are quoted on the site, still I think you would eventually find that some sources are more accurate than others.

I know that the history of the source is often discussed in the article, but i'm looking for a quick numerical aggregate score or rank to enable us to quickly formulate an opinion of the new rumour.

What would this be like to set up?

 

[stridemat]

Don't quote me on this, but I would guess MR probably do something similar to this already behind the scenes to track sources.

 

[669532]

Don't quote me on this, but I would guess MR probably do something similar to this already behind the scenes to track sources.

this is quite likely but then why not let us see that data too? I would quite like to see it ending up like the buyers guide, a kind of table/ranking page.

 

[stridemat]

this is quite likely but then why not let us see that data too? I would quite like to see it ending up like the buyers guide, a kind of table/ranking page.

You quoted me! I said not too!

I like the idea, the only problem being this information could be deemed as confidential to MR's.

 

[669532]

I like the idea, the only problem being this information could be deemed as confidential to MR's.

Confidential to other similar sites/competitors?

I knew there would be a problem

Surely competitors would then need to quote MR's (to verify their claim to their readers) and might even generate more traffic/visits/whatever they want.

 

[arn]

Macrumours.com is one of the biggest Apple speculation and news communities on the internet.

Everyday there are many articles presenting latest rumours, guesses, facts and leaks.

These mostly quote a source.

One of the 1st comments on any major story is "Can we trust this?" or '[name of source]: in the past they've been...'.

A good/interesting thing for the site do would be to, for each article, note the source + their prediction. When the big day comes as well as updating the buyers guide they could check the rumours and rate the accuracy of the sources predictions. You could even account for the time that the predictions were made, and an accurate prediction from earlier on would have yield a greater score.

After 1 or to major events there would be sufficient data on all the major sources to use as a tool.

This data might be a small icon at the top/bottom of an article that represents the past accuracy of this source.

While the accuracy of most sources will vary and not all rumours from all sources are quoted on the site, still I think you would eventually find that some sources are more accurate than others.

I know that the history of the source is often discussed in the article, but i'm looking for a quick numerical aggregate score or rank to enable us to quickly formulate an opinion of the new rumour.

What would this be like to set up?

We've actually had this feature in development on/off for a while. There's a good amount of interpretation involved in such a system though, and manpower in maintaining it. Not sure when it will be made public.

arn

 

[669532]

Not sure when it will be made public.

But that is the plan eventually?