Ask Slashdot: How Do News Organizations Keep Track of So Much Information?

dryriver writes: Major news organizations from CNN, BBC, ABC to TIME magazine, the New York Times and the Economist publish a tremendous amount of information, especially now that almost everybody runs a 24/7 updated website alongside their TV channel, magazine or newspaper. Question: How do news organizations actually keep track of what must be 1000s of pieces of incoming information that are processed into news stories every day? If they are using software to manage all this info -- which makes a lot of sense -- is it off-the-shelf software that anybody can buy, or do major news organizations typically commission IT/software contractors to build them a custom "Information Management System" or similar? If there is good off-the-shelf software for managing a lot of information, who makes it and what is it called?

Comments

Novel idea here.

[Gravis Zero]

Have you tried contacting and asking such an organization this very question?

Re:If it's the left, just a narrative will do.

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's the right, information is not needed. Just shout it loudly and it must be true.

Re:If it's the left, just a narrative will do.

[ShanghaiBill]

If you have ever read a news story where you have first hand knowledge of what is being reported, then you should know that most articles get a lot of facts wrong, and sometimes are wildly inaccurate. So the premise of the questions is wrong.

Q: How do news organizations keep track of so much info?
A: They don't.

Re:If it's the left, just a narrative will do.

[KermodeBear]

There is truth to this.

You don't have to keep or manage information if you can just make up whatever you want and cite "a source familiar with the situation." I have never before in my life seen news organizations rely so heavily on anonymous sources. CNN, ABC, MSNBC, etc., they slap whatever they want up onto their sites, say that "someone told them so," and when the story is later proven false, eh, maybe they issue a correction. Maybe. Mostly they just let it sit out there.

Pretty sad, but news organizations don't seem to care about the truth anymore. They care more about pushing an agenda and, even more so, making money. What gets money right now? Yup, trying to convince the world that Trump is the next Adolf Hitler, we're all going to turn into cannibals by 2040, and every police officer in America just wants to shoot black people for funsies.

It's pretty sad. I get more reliable, fact-driven news about the USA from European sources than domestic sources.

Hate Trump all you want (I'm not a fan either), but he has thrust into the spotlight what many people have known for a long, long time now: The major news media companies are Democrat party lapdogs (save Fox News, which is a Republican party lapdog but that is changing with the Murdochs running the channel). I don't see it getting any better either, because as long as they publish negative stories about Trump (and glowing stories about Obama and Clinton) their audience doesn't care if the stories are true or not. They're stuck in a tribal mindset. "My people GOOD. Those people BAD."

And that's it. That's all most people seem to care about anymore. Us vs. Them. The truth doesn't have a place in Us vs. Them. Us vs. Them makes money, it makes you Feel Good, it makes you crave more.

Instead of Us vs. Them, all of this rampant tribalism, I highly suggest trying Truth vs. Fiction. Be on the side of Truth. If that means your guy is a jerk sometimes, well, then your guy is a jerk. If it means the other guy does something good, well, he does something good. What's wrong with that?

You cannot have a meaningful dialogue about anything if you don't start from a position of truth.