We're a few months into the v5 news system, and it seems like a good time to step back and see how it's working. Previously, anyone could submit news, but it had to be approved by a staff member to be posted. Most news items were posted in the galleries of the art they pertained to, while official news and notable articles and features by deviants were posted on the front page. Now anyone can post news, and while one can browse by category, the main news section has everything together. The point of this editorial is to look at the issues of v5 news and offer suggestions, but first, let's look at what's working best.

The higher visibility of news concerning different genres of art is a plus. One of the most well-written serial features of v5 news has been *Foxfires' Cut and Paste: Collage Art Spotlight. It's possible that this feature would have made front page in v4, but it's also possible it would have been visible only to those who visited the traditional art gallery. =wolfskin has been doing on-goings features on insect photography and male artistic nude photography for some time--while before they were showcased in the photography gallery, now they are seen by whomever checks the just in page after they've been posted (although =wolfskin tells me it's hard to determine whether they are getting more or fewer viewers than in v4).

While spam and copyright violations deletion is sporadic at times, it is happening. This is a relief, as deviants were first told there would be no moderation, leading to fears of a news system overrun with self-promotion and policy violations. This also means fewer legitimate articles are bumped off the just in page so quickly. Also, the +heart system, while probably still being tweaked, allows popular news only on the popular page.

The new "submitted news" and "favorite news" sections on userpages gives news visibility somewhere besides the news section, and lets deviants easily view news a specific deviant has written.

However, there are still some issues with v5 news that could be improved.

One problem has been the amount of non-news continuing to come in, despite $lolly's article and the FAQ entries. My guess is that the people who are most likely to post quickly written self-promotion are also probably the people least likely to read through news to get an idea of what the section is for or check the FAQ. In one odd incident, someone posted what was clearly a journal entry. When asked by another deviant why she had posted it in news instead of her journal, she perplexingly replied that she didn't have time to. The "article" and another like it (which the author had actually labeled as a journal entry) were not deleted by staff. The problem with such posts is that they push relevant news items off the first page of just in, greatly reducing their chances of being seen. As more people submit to the news section, articles get less time on the just in page, and non-news only exacerbates this.

A possible way of lessening this problem would be to have category descriptions stated during the news submission process, much like the deviation submission process. If deviants were confronted with the reality that their spam didn't fit any of the categories, maybe, just maybe, they would realize it shouldn't be in news. If administrators don't want to make the submission process that involved, there's another option: in the seniors forum, `madnessism suggested that at least an explanation of what is and isn't news should be in the "submit news" section. This could be as simple as a link to faq 687.

Another issue with v5 news is that it puts deviants in the tricky position of being unofficial moderators. An administrator commented on a journal that now everyone's a news mod, but is this fair? Several deviants have been commenting on non-news items, either stating that they are not news and/or offering FAQ entries. Despite the uh-oh feature, I think these comments (though one per article is enough, unless the writer needs more clarification) are needed so that deviants unfamiliar with news don't get the impression that news is a place to post about your latest deviations/chronicle what you do each day/tell everyone to check out your friend's gallery/etc. And for the record, I've seen more "Oops! Sorry, I didn't know" responses than angry ones. However, non-staff deviants are still placed in the position of "bad guy." True, some comments on non-news items have been rude, even combative, but I've seen deviants get flamed (in journals, via comments on deviations, etc.) by angry authors for even politely worded comments. I was fortunate enough to receive an unintentionally hilarious note accusing me of "torture" for stating that a piece of spam was not news (I still have no idea why this deviant thought me commenting on a news item ranked up there with Abu Ghraib). It's understandable that deviants feel hurt that others don't think their journal entry is news, and I don't mind getting the occasional annoyed comment (one could say it comes with the territory), but Joe Deviant shouldn't have to feel someone's wrath simply because he has taken on a responsibility that dA has given its users. And if dA doesn't want users commenting on non-news, they should probably say so. Soon.

I believe this issue could also be helped by a listing of categories, because not only would it hopefully reduce non-news in the first place, it would give deviants more to base claims of "non-news" on. Category descriptions would hopefully also quell bickering about what is and isn't news among those who are trying to help. Another solution could be having the uh-oh button actually move the news item down in the just in list (This might be in the works, but I'm not sure. The IT administrator I noted who has been involved with news has not yet replied as of this posting.). Either that or having the number of uh-ohs received visible might reduce the need (or the feeling that there's a need) for commenting on non-news. Of course, there are potential problems with both these suggestions, but they might be worth discussing.

If you're still reading, I thank you. Sorry if I've babbled on and on. My next suggestion is the one I'm most passionate about. News currently has two sections: popular and just in. My suggestion is for a third, merit-based section where articles, contests, and features selected for their quality and relevance would be posted. Basically, it would contain the sorts of articles that were on the front page in v4, but with a broader scope (i.e., features that would have only been seen in the galleries in v4). I would like to see this for several reasons.

First of all, I think it would make news more useful to deviants. deviantART is an art site, and I don't think artists, especially those with limited internet time, should have to click through pages of news to find a good contest or feature. For example, while someone asking for `londonxpress to be subscribed until 2030 might be a cause many deviants enjoy +hearting and sincerely care about, is helpful or art-centered? Not really. What about dead people re-appearing? Important to lots of deviants? Yes, and well suited for the popular page if the community decides. The community has every right to embrace these articles with +hearts and make them seen. I'm not saying that the articles on the popular page don't deserve to be there--they do, and I think the community has done a good job of +hearting. But a third section would give the best examples of art-focused and helpful news more of a spotlight. I've seen a number of worthwhile articles get lost in the fray recently.

`bellchild, the wonder behind *roundUP (give her a hug, y'all), and her helpers have done the community a huge favor with their "rounding up" and categorization of news, which started before v5. This feature is very useful for deviants who don't want to browse through news everyday but want an overview of what has been happening. However, with v5, there are a lot of articles to group, and `bellchild is understandably hesitant to enforce strict quality checking--that's not a role she has to take on if she doesn't feel it's what *roundUP should be about. Even the *roundUP articles themselves have had a hard time being seen in v5 without journal announcements (previously, these helpful articles were on the front page, and are good examples of something that would fit in a merit-based section).

Perhaps this sounds "elitist." After all, the popular system is the most democratic, right? True, but simply because something is popular doesn't mean it's the best or what dA should be upholding. The DTFs are balanced by the DDs. We have directors for both community development and artistic relations. We have quality approval for prints. Furthermore, I think that adding such a section would actually make the news system more fair. More and more deviants are submitting news, which means articles' time on the just in page is limited. While it's great that people want to contribute, I worry that as this trend continues, it will end up giving popular deviants an advantage. If articles in just in don't have time to get many views before being pushed down, a deviant with lots of watchers who posts a link to his or her article in a journal and asks for it to be +hearted has an unfair advantage over a deviant with fewer watchers. However, in a merit-based section, a good news article written by a lesser seen deviant would have a chance of being read--and the community would get to see another outstanding feature they might have missed otherwise.

I think just in, popular and merit-based (with a better name than that) would be the perfect news troika: unfiltered, community choice, and quality assured sections.

Keep in mind that these are just my suggestions, and I don't consider them to be the most pressing, urgent issues. I'm not asking for immediate change. I would love to see what others think about v5 news. Is it just fine how it is? Is there something I've missed? Have I put way, way, way too much thought into this as a means of avoiding annotated bibliographies for class? I'd also like to note that this is not meant as an attack on the administrators--I know they've put a lot of time and hard work into developing this system, and that they sincerely want it to be the best it can be for deviants. I'm grateful for the improvements that have already been made.