HOME
          
LATEST STORY
The Internet Archive hopes to boost its collections through funding from the Knight News Challenge
ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
July 30, 2012, 1:30 p.m.
Aggregation & Discovery

The Verge is giving extra credit (and links) to primary sources

The tech site has always been good about providing a persistent structure for source credit. Now it’s linking out more prominently, too.

When technology site The Verge site launched last fall, Josh wrote a broadly laudatory review on the site’s design and infrastructure. We had one quibble, though, about how The Verge gave credit to other sites when it aggregated/curated/summarized/rewrote (your pick) their stories. Rather than link to the source in the body text of the story, The Verge would move that link to a small “Source” box at the bottom of the story, where it seemed likely fewer people would click on it. It didn’t seem sporting. (Many of The Verge’s editorial staffers previously worked at Engadget, which had a very similar link policy.)

Verge managing editor Nilay Patel defending the practice in the comments:

I will defend our decision to break out vias and sources, though — we think it’s incredibly important to consistently and canonically show people where our stories come from, where are primary sources are, and how they fit together. A reader who comes to a post on The Verge can immediately trace our steps and check our work against the primary source, since we put that information in the same place every time. It might not be the “standard” across the web, but we think it’s much cleaner and clearer for people.

To which Josh replied:

Re: source credits, I agree with you it’s a good idea to be consistent in how you show where you’re getting your stories from. My complaint would be that that admirable consistency is no reason to avoid also linking to the source story in the actual text of the post, which, let’s be honest, is much more valuable real estate than a 22px-high box the eye jumps right over.

The debate went on in the comments, and others have made the same complaint since. Here’s a back-and-forth on Twitter among tech writers Jim Dalrymple, Jason Snell, Dwight Silverman, and John Gruber:

Well, we noticed a change in The Verge’s behavior lately. Links to sources were showing up more frequently in the body of stories, along with in the “Source” and “Via” tags at story bottom. I emailed Patel to see if this was a shift:

Yep, we’ve changed our policy and now link to primary sources inline as a matter of practice. We still think having a canonical source / via field is critically important to understanding a story’s context, though, so we do both.

He said that the new policy isn’t that new, that “it’s actually been months. We changed it pretty soon after launch…I will note that the complaints have not stopped, of course. But when do they ever?” (A random spot check of posts from two months ago today — May 30 — finds a few cases with in-story credit links, but plenty where there still were none.)

The debate over linking habits is about both the desire for credit and the desire for pageviews: More prominent links equal more clickthroughs and more traffic. For some, that traffic is the currency of exchange in a world of aggregation, the implicit deal that hyperlinks enable. Here’s more from Patel on the thinking behind the change:

The decision was itself easy: we always want to be as clear as possible about sourcing and vias with readers as possible — that’s why we’re one of the few publications that always exposes all primary sources and vias at the bottom of every news post. We also train our writers to aggressively seek primary sources and do not accept coverage based on a chain of via links. And when I say we train our writers, I mean it — our training process is rigorous, lengthy, and notoriously intense.

Because finding and crediting primary sources is such a core part of our editorial process, the argument over where the link was placed always seemed silly to us — more about people wanting traffic than about attribution. The attribution was always right there, next to a bright orange box that said SOURCE in all-capital letters. So adding inline links was a very minor step for us, and we took it without any great debate.

It should be noted that, while The Verge’s editorial policy might be criticized in the tech-blogging world, it’s always been ahead of outlets born outside online media. (See, for instance, Mark Coddington’s study of the linking habits of news sites, which found that 91 percent of news sites’ links were internal links to their own content. That number was 18 percent for independent blogs.

POSTED     July 30, 2012, 1:30 p.m.
SEE MORE ON Aggregation & Discovery
SHARE THIS STORY
   
Show comments  
Show tags
 
Join the 15,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
The Internet Archive hopes to boost its collections through funding from the Knight News Challenge
The home of the Wayback Machine and other efforts to preserve the Internet is among 22 projects based around libraries receiving $3 million in funding through the Knight News Challenge.
Constantly tweaking: How The Guardian continues to develop its in-house analytics system
Since its launch in 2011, The Guardian has consistently made changes to its in-house analytics tool, Ophan.
Bloomberg Business’ new look has made a splash — but don’t just call it a redesign
Bloomberg digital editor Joshua Topolsky on uncomfortable news design, new ad units, and why they killed the comments.
What to read next
2902
tweets
Don’t try too hard to please Twitter — and other lessons from The New York Times’ social media desk
The team that runs the Times’ Twitter accounts looked back on what they learned — what worked, what didn’t — from running @NYTimes in 2014.
728From explainers to sounds that make you go “Whoa!”: The 4 types of audio that people share
How can public radio make audio that breaks big on social media? A NPR experiment identified what makes a piece of audio go viral.
722Q&A: Amy O’Leary on eight years of navigating digital culture change at The New York Times
“In 2007, as digital people, we were expected to be 100 percent deferent to all traditional processes. We weren’t to bother reporters or encourage them to operate differently at all, because what they were doing was the very core of our journalism.”
These stories are our most popular on Twitter over the past 30 days.
See all our most recent pieces ➚
Encyclo is our encyclopedia of the future of news, chronicling the key players in journalism’s evolution.
Here are a few of the entries you’ll find in Encyclo.   Get the full Encyclo ➚
Tumblr
Grist
Amazon
New West
DNAinfo
Vox Media
DocumentCloud
Connecticut Mirror
Journal Register Co.
Newser
St. Louis Globe-Democrat
O Globo