Meet Newser.com

There’s a new news aggregator in town, called Newser.com, and from the quick look I gave it this morning, it immediately looks like one of the best I’ve seen. It summarizes the major news stories in a good paragraph or two, then provides prominent links to the major newspapers and wire services that did the original reporting, which makes the aggregating feel less parasitic and more … well … aggregating. Here, on PaidContent.org, is a brief story behind the Newser creators.

(Hat tip: Jim Romenesko.)

Leave A Comment

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

 

COMMENTS: 7

View All Comments »
  1. Anonymous says:

    It certainly looks very nice. It doesn’t seem, however, that the way in which it aggregates stories is all-together groundbreaking. According to the About section on the site -
    “Newser’s story selection is based on a proprietary formula that measures the ubiquity of coverage by the top-ranked 100 English-language news sites; the prominence with which those sites feature the stories; and the popularity of a given story with readers; and overlooked points of view, angles and scoops uncovered by our editors.”

    I remember talking to one of the editors at Bloomberg News last year and one of the big hurdles which still hasn’t been crossed is determining which stories are indeed important well before the process of filtration by thousands of people. This is particularly pertinent for Bloomberg’s news feed which is watched by rather time-sensitive individuals.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
  2. Songe_a_SoHo says:

    It certainly looks very nice. It doesn’t seem, however, that the way in which it aggregates stories is all-together groundbreaking. According to the About section on the site –
    “Newser’s story selection is based on a proprietary formula that measures the ubiquity of coverage by the top-ranked 100 English-language news sites; the prominence with which those sites feature the stories; and the popularity of a given story with readers; and overlooked points of view, angles and scoops uncovered by our editors.”

    I remember talking to one of the editors at Bloomberg News last year and one of the big hurdles which still hasn’t been crossed is determining which stories are indeed important well before the process of filtration by thousands of people. This is particularly pertinent for Bloomberg’s news feed which is watched by rather time-sensitive individuals.

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  3. cootie_two says:

    my favorite is still the newsmap:
    http://www.marumushi.com/apps/newsmap/newsmap.cfm

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
  4. cootie_two says:

    my favorite is still the newsmap:
    http://www.marumushi.com/apps/newsmap/newsmap.cfm

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
  5. cyberstever says:

    So, a few people at HighBeam research decide to create a site to show off some of their wares. It’s interesting to note that there’s no way their current plan can scale to the level that would be interesting to a lot of people. They are only categorizing things by hand (or so it would appear) and the number of news articles flowing through the system are very very small.
    To me, non categorized aggregated news with a limited number of sources is not interesting. Google, Newsvine and Topix (in particular) do a better job of categorizing news. Topix (www.topix.com) even allows people to sign up to help edit any of their 360,000 topics. Each of those topics are edited by their algorithms otherwise (with varied levels of success). I’m prejudiced though, I edit the San Mateo, CA news page on Topix. http://www.topix.net/city/san-mateo-ca
    Which news aggregators have you tried that you think this one was worthy of recommending? Also, why is lifting more of the article and summarizing it seem like its less parasitic than taking the headline and the first few sentences (like a search engine)?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
  6. cyberstever says:

    So, a few people at HighBeam research decide to create a site to show off some of their wares. It’s interesting to note that there’s no way their current plan can scale to the level that would be interesting to a lot of people. They are only categorizing things by hand (or so it would appear) and the number of news articles flowing through the system are very very small.
    To me, non categorized aggregated news with a limited number of sources is not interesting. Google, Newsvine and Topix (in particular) do a better job of categorizing news. Topix (www.topix.com) even allows people to sign up to help edit any of their 360,000 topics. Each of those topics are edited by their algorithms otherwise (with varied levels of success). I’m prejudiced though, I edit the San Mateo, CA news page on Topix. http://www.topix.net/city/san-mateo-ca
    Which news aggregators have you tried that you think this one was worthy of recommending? Also, why is lifting more of the article and summarizing it seem like its less parasitic than taking the headline and the first few sentences (like a search engine)?

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
  7. Michael Khalili says:

    I created a site that’s similar to Newser called “Skim That”. Just like Newser, you’ll find summarized top stories of the day but our summaries are written by members of the site. Anyone can register and write a summary. The best summaries will be featured on the homepage and through our social media sites.

    As Songe mentions, it’s difficult to know what’s popular so we scan other news websites to create a list of popular stories. Anyone can pick a story from that list and create a summary for it.

    Check it out at http://SkimThat.com

    Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0