@eriktorenberg thanks for the question. the quality depends on how thoughtful the responses of the community are. as the community continues to emphasize quality, we believe that we'll get amazing insights into trends that come up over and over again in current events.
@eriktorenberg@stttories thanks for the comment, tori. our intention is that posts on wonker will be insight-oriented rather than summary-oriented. use case: has something been in the news a lot that you feel would require hours of research to understand at a meaningful level? insights on wonker would help unlock what makes those trends feel so complicated.
I like the concept but a lot of the topics on the homepage are pretty controversial and thus risk being highly editorialized. How do they try and maintain a balanced view?
@ffumarola thanks a lot for the question. There's an editorial component to Wonker but it's mainly in the selection of trends. On that front we're selecting trends on a basis that's partially subjective and partially objective, a slightly more sophisticated version of "hey, this is in political news a lot; this is feeling like it may become a trend (or this already is a trend)."
The first part is both objective and subjective (i.e. something is or isn't in the news a lot: objective; but the criteria we use to determine what "a lot" is and what we define as "political": subjective). The second part (whether something is a trend) is also a combo.
On the content front, the more active users are, the more they take away Wonker's editorial influence because anyone who creates an account can contribute content, and anyone can vote.
Hope this helps!
Backchannel
Blab
Wonker
Wonker
Backchannel
fintech spy
Wonker