SFist: SFist Poll: HuffPo, Yea or Nay?

Chris Weekly

Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:59:47 -0800

A little self-conscious about the spotty posting habits of those at SFIST maybe?

doublegin

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 21:23:29 -0800

Good lord, I can barely keep up with all the local politics / muni bitching blogs, never mind 100+ more articles a day!

IMHeAsURHe

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 21:00:53 -0800

But yeah the design is bewildering...reminds me of Foxnews!

IMHeAsURHe

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 21:00:04 -0800

Well, I admit I like it at least to get a good range of unabashedly leftist commentary and story mining. But I'm not that learned in the entire field of progressive website...

twsf

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:12:19 -0800

HuffPo is unreadable - both the site, which has the worst design of any major online presence, and the firehose of articles each day if you try to read via RSS.

Generic

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:24:01 -0800

I thought I was the only one who felt that way about HuffPo.

sfsnark

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:20:45 -0800

check out Buzzflash: a compendium of (mostly liberal-angled) news stories/ editorials gathered from various news sources - even small townish rags, just to keep the finger on the pulse. I can get lost in it all day long....

manys

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:04:40 -0800

Similar to hudu, any HuffPo article I read is likely linked to in a story on any of the blogs I follow with a more manageable feed. One possibility, can you just pare your RSS down to particular sections/authors you like? I think the whole feed, especially if it's 100+ stories per day, is and should be unmanageable unless you get paid to follow those topics.

JulioD

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:57:55 -0800

I think I had it in my reader for a couple of weeks as well. Anything of value posted on her site will filter through to the other media outlets I follow.

jcsnotes

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:55:29 -0800

Nay. I'm a slave to RSS and I turned them off for the reasons cited. It's a firehose of stuff of varying quality. And as someone else said, often the best stuff will be cited somewhere else if it's any good. I'd feel differently if they'd do like some other sites (the Atlantic for instance) and customize feeds for each author.

mushmouth

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:46:49 -0800

HuffPo has an alarming habit of printing a headline that either has nothing to do with the article, or actually contradicts what the article says. Case in point, the front page has had "Spanish Plane Crash Caused By Overheated Valve... At Least 153 Killed" The article that this is linked to has "an air intake gauge under the cockpit had detected overheating while the jetliner was taxiing, causing the plane to turn back. Technicians corrected the problem by essentially turning the gauge off" "two aviation experts interviewed by The Associated Press said it was not likely that such a seemingly minor problem could bring down a modern plane."

andyc

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:43:36 -0800

i find the huffpo to be a bit tabloidy and generally find that the quality of the editorial content varies widely. arianna is a pretty great writer but there's a lot of writers reiterating the same tired old points. their celebrity gossip coverage and stuff also seems sort of out of place on site that is ostensibly political but in the end that's where i probably end up doing most of my celebrity gossip reading (not much of it, mind you) so i guess i can't complain.

Brock Keeling

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:17:27 -0800

i don't.

Greg

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:13:12 -0800

I only read it if someone I know, like Paul Hogarth, writes for it and lets me know about it. But I only know Paul and maybe one other person who's ever written for 'em, and as such avoid it. It is a bit pretentious, overall.

hudu

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:11:58 -0800

When you have 8 hours a day to browse around online, you're bound to come across one or two HuffPost articles in your wanderings. I sortof try to avoid them though, politics rots the brain.