When looking at a post, do you read the article that it may be linked to?

[cynatnite]

I ask because lately I've noticed DUer's making statements or asking a question when the information is directly within the link. Now, I know four paragraphs are what is allowed per DU rules, but when people link to the article, usually more information can be found by going directly to the referenced web site.

It's asked because of this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=935551&mesg_id=935551

If you look through the posts you will see people made comments that they never watch Fox because of the photo included. Assumptions were made because of the photo even though the links provided would give more information to further educate the reader.

I'm hoping DUer's will take a moment to read the links the poster provides.

This only applies to those posts with links in them.

(hope this doesn't get locked)

[Viva_La_Revolution]

1. I couldn't find a link to that video...

in that specific thread... but yes, I always skim it at least.

[cynatnite]

5. There wasn't a video

The picture was a graphic showing what Fox is doing. Along with it was a link to a blog highlighting what's staring to be said about these generals.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

20. Thank you!

I thought it was just me! :crazy:

[Flabbergasted]

2. Why is this a concern with this acticle specifically?

[cynatnite]

9. Some DUer's responding blasted Fox

They did not check out the links included which goes to a blog that talks about these generals horribly.

This post is an example of what I've noticed recently here at DU. If more people would take the time to hit the links, check out the articles perhaps they could respond in a more knowledgable manner.

It bugs me. :shrug:

[Mr_Spock]

3. "(hope this doesn't get locked)"

why do you think it would get locked?

[cynatnite]

11. I didn't see anything in the rules about this kind of post...

so I'm not positive if it's acceptable or not by the DU folks.

[LearnedHand]

4. Mostly, I don't click the links,

but it's because I have dialup access and many linked pages take forever to load.

[cynatnite]

14. I didn't consider that

Many have dialup and some pages take forever to load.

[LearnedHand]

27. It's why I always hope posters will include...

...the first four paragraphs. From that, I can determine if it's worth my while to wait for the download.

On edit: I would definitely have high-speed access if I could, but it's not available where I live. (However, the national forest in my back yard is a pretty good trade-off.)

[QC]

6. Yes, if I am going to comment on the article

and find the subject interesting.

I am always amazed by how many people here are willing to pontificate on articles they did not read.

[Cobalt Violet]

7. Sometimes I read every word carefully in the link.

Sometimes I just skim.

[Skip Intro]

8. not always/only sometimes - thread by thread basis...

maybe ask if people read linked stories before posting - that's different, but anyway...

[sheelz]

10. I voted other--

If I'm passionate about the issue or find it interesting, then yes.

[TahitiNut]

12. Only if the poster actually initiates a decent discussion.

I blow right past the lazy, disrespectful posts ("OMFG" etc.). If the OP doesn't make a personal investment in posing points worth discussing, then I don't think anyone else needs to.

[Catherine Vincent]

13. No, because most of the time I'm too lazy to read it.

[lpbk2713]

15. Not always. A lot of the time it doesn't look worthwhile.

The OP might only say "This is cool" or "Check this out" and then give a link. When the poster doesn't bother to give a short description I usually don't bother to go any further.

[RoyGBiv]

16. Yes, if I intend to comment ...

I don't read every article linked in a post I view, but if I intend to comment on that article, I do read it.

[Robbien]

17. If I am going to post, yes I always click thru to the article first

just as I did this time and I see why you are asking the question.

[mike_c]

18. all of the above-- depends on the nature of the post and...

...the quality of the article. And whether it's posted on a subscription only site, or even just one that gathers info via login. I don't enable that. Ever.

[Swamp Rat]

19. I like to vote.

:D

[cynatnite]

21. Love the * graphic with Washington

Been meaning to tell you that. :rofl:

[Swamp Rat]

23. Thanks. It's a variation on yesterday's:

:D

[Mr_Spock]

22. Me too!

I knew there was something of substance that would come from this post!

[cynatnite]

25. Gee, thanks

I'm taking away your ear privileges for the night :P

[serryjw]

24. I always at least skim it

if I can when I was on dial up. Depend on the subject if I read it completely.

[Neil Lisst]

26. I never follow a link if the OP just slaps a link or two up

without saying anything about what the substance is.

I prefer they cut and paste some of it, so I can see if I want to read the rest of it. If they don't take the time and trouble to do that, I blow off the thread entirely and move on.

[man4allcats]

28. I always read the article unless the answer is blatantly obvious,

otherwise I don't feel I have a right to express my opinion.
------------------------------------------------------------
“Rendered weak and ignorant by a spoon-fed climate of fear, you slack-jawed inbred flatlanders have sought refuge in the traditional twin towers of mindlessness--jingoistic patriotism and fundamentalist religion. God's on your side. Like hell.”
Clif Garboden in the Independent Weekly, November 17, 2004.

http://www.indyweek.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A23089

[banana republican]

29. Sometimes

I tend to trust my fellow DUer's to post informed responses; responses that are reasoned, read, and realistic.

That being said; it depends on my interest in the issue and it's "maturity".

If it is a new issue of which I know very little I will most likely read the linked article or at least skim it. One of the important items i consider is if there are enough <snips> in the posting at DU to make an "informed judgment" about the article(or at least peak my interest).

[Toucano]

30. Are you nutz! I didn't even click on the link in your post!

Just joking!

If I have a question, I always read the article. If not, I may make a small comment based on the excerpted part presented. I'm low bandwidth, though, so that's my excuse.

[Nicole]

31. Other: Sometimes

If I have any questions, I will read the link completely to see if the answer is there.

[Alamom]

32. Yes/other. Headines can be misleading and sometimes, only 4

paragraphs is not enough for the article's intent to be clear.

Choosing the best 4 paragraphs to get the complete story across is not always possible.
If I'm going to comment, I read the link.

I have dial up and it gets aggravating when it's a story with a sensational headline and all kinds of comments are being made. I want to know why. I've been here long enough to have many more posts, but I read the article before making a comment unless I have already read the story on another post and know what it's about.


I realize everyone does not have time to do this.

[TheBaldyMan]

33. I think it depends on the site, eg FReeper.com I don't give them the link

traffic, if it's a subject that I feel is important then I usually read the full article.

on edit: if it is just a link with a "you must read this" headline I am not likely to click on the link at all, unless the poster is someone whose judgement I can trust. If it is someone whom I trust they are more likely to give an extract or at the very least an explantory paragraph however short.

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

34. Always, if the story compels me to post a comment

Often, if I'm unfamiliar with the story or if the link may lead to new information on a story I'm following

Never, if the link is obviously to Drudge or FR, because I won't give them hits. Also, real stories will appear on sites other than Drudge, and I don't care about freeper threads.

And never, ever to imbedded links that hide the site URL, even if I'm interested in the story, because I have been unpleasantly surprised too many times.