Re: journalism award signals

Hello Sandro, all,

This just a quick email to introduce myself as a new member to the group, from King’s College London. I had applied to the credible web WG several months back, but got approved by our University contact just days before, and have since been added to this email list.

We have done a bunch of work looking at

  1.  hyper partisan websites, in the context of the US Presidential elections:

  *   https://nms.kcl.ac.uk/nishanth.sastry/publication/nrswww-2018-b/

     *   This provided inputs for a major expose by Buzzfeed News: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/craigsilverman/inside-the-partisan-fight-for-your-news-feed

  *   https://nms.kcl.ac.uk/nishanth.sastry/publication/nrswww-2020/

     *   Showing that right leaning sites track more intensely than left leaning sites (Covered by WIRED: https://www.wired.com/story/right-left-news-site-ad-tracking/)

  1.  bias in news and social media during political crises

  *   https://nms.kcl.ac.uk/nishanth.sastry/publication/karamshuk-16-slant/


  1.  And finally, on transferring trust across domains (which is very aligned with what I see in the signals draft. We also use age as an “ungameable” signal to transfer trust across domains. We do this for IDs of individuals rather than domains, but the paper develops ways to calibrate trust, answering questions such as – is a 10 year-old Facebook ID more trustworthy than a 15 year old Gmail ID, for example):

  *   https://nms.kcl.ac.uk/nishanth.sastry/publication/nr-swww-16/


I will join the Zoom at 7pm GMT, and can add any further details that may be interesting to the group. Looking forward.

Best wishes
nishanth


From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Date: Wednesday, 19 February 2020 at 15:51
To: Credible Web CG <public-credibility@w3.org>
Subject: journalism award signals
Resent from: <public-credibility@w3.org>
Resent date: Wednesday, 19 February 2020 at 15:51

I did a bit more work on the Journalism Awards, framing it as a general signal and one more specific signals.

I put them into the "reviewed signals" draft, marked as "pending".

Here's a dated version of that draft: https://credweb.org/reviewed-signals-20200219/<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fcredweb.org%2Freviewed-signals-20200219%2F&data=01%7C01%7Cnishanth.sastry%40kcl.ac.uk%7C1c1f34f786234483d96c08d7b5539380%7C8370cf1416f34c16b83c724071654356%7C0&sdata=Vf7GBSfAxU5%2BtP8oOqK1vMf0Oxw2DgDXLWtBoQ8f4k0%3D&reserved=0>  (The undated version presumably wont show them as pending after today, which could confuse someone reading this later.)

Meeting in about 3 hours, as usual.   Agenda<https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Fdocument%2Fd%2F1-KcB121I6D6J2ZdQET-qatqCaqv3ttlZkfhgyWEk7nM%2Fedit&data=01%7C01%7Cnishanth.sastry%40kcl.ac.uk%7C1c1f34f786234483d96c08d7b5539380%7C8370cf1416f34c16b83c724071654356%7C0&sdata=fu%2FG4cV3ziND%2BcDFacnZsRAKJLiVYuYwRF9c9Ik%2FSFM%3D&reserved=0>.

       -- Sandro