In the near future, the blog will "re-launch" under a NYTimes.com domain. It will retain its own identity (akin to other Times blogs like DealBook), but will be organized under the News:Politics section. Once this occurs, content will no longer be posted at FiveThirtyEight.com on an ongoing basis, and the blog will re-direct to the new URL. In addition, I will be contributing content to the print edition of the New York Times, and to the Sunday Magazine. The partnership agreement, which is structured as a license, has a term of three years.It's good to see the blogosphere's best stats guy get the props he deserves. Nate's one of the reasons I got into blogging, after all. If a baseball stats junkie can try to make sense of the world of Washington politics, then anyone can try their hand at it.
There are two particular reasons why we felt the Times was the best home for FiveThirtyEight. On the one hand, I very much see what we are doing as a type of journalism, in the sense that it consists of doing original research on a timely basis to help inform the public discourse. Thus, the Times' unflinching commitment to quality journalism makes for a natural fit, and I expect that the relationship will evolve in exciting ways as FiveThirtyEight is incorporated into a "traditional" newsroom setting. On the other hand, the terrific work of their graphic and interactive journalists was a major draw. The new blog should look and feel great, and should be substantially more robust and feature-rich than the simple, one-page design that we have now.
Nate of course is much better than most, and congratulations to him and the FTE staff. If anyone can keep the Times honest on the numbers of politics, it's Nate Silver.
Maybe he can take some of the stupid out of Village Stupidity.
Posts
14 comments:
And what? Oh don't tell me that you actually think your blog will get snapped up by the New York Times too? That's pathetic!!!!
You really are delusional. You need professional help NOW.
Shut this joke of a blog down for your own good!
Zandar, I think this guy is totally and consistently missing the point and also is stalking you. I think this mean you must be doing something right. Also.
Dear "Zandar",
Let us give you something to think about over the weekend too! You're not well liked, my friend. At best you are tolerated by the bosses and your desk. How you got to Level II when you don't actually do work is impressive but you're not as clever as you think you are! You're considered a grouchy slob with wandering eyes and people SEE you doing that. You've gotten more than a few friendly suggestions here on your blog from those of us who see you slacking off every day and it's not just us who have noticed. You are in a very, very visible spot there on the start of that row. WE SEE YOU and what you are doing and what you are NOT doing.
Don't you think you should be WORKING?
Signed,
The Stupid
Dear Stupid,
Don't you think YOU should follow the advice you give so freely?
Get back to work, slacker.
Okay, apparently making note and congratulating them is hoping for a spot in the NYT?
Two thoughts course through my head. The first is that just because there is wingnut welfare does not mean there is moonbat welfare. Second, I'd not be calling people delusional, although I'm also amenable to a lack of basic reading comprehension combined with gold-medal conclusion jumping.
So, inane or stupid.
Also, hello again, Captain Sour Grapes. Still making vague threats, I see.
Looks like Zandar's got bigger problems to worry about than just me!
Actually Star it really didn't threaten at all. Maybe I missed it..
@The_Stupid:
"Dear "Zandar",
Let us give you something to think about over the weekend too! You're not well liked" by pissy wingnuts.
Fixed.
@Lowkey
Hai2u! How ya been?
I think this is a matter best left alone, sounds to me like a work issue which while I think should be dealt with outside the blog it is entertaining and I can see why someone would be mad if their co worker was dickin off all day in a blog. Let's face it Z puts a lot of time into this blog, you can tell.
@Waffles:
O HAI! I have been hella busy lately. Normally, I can blogstalk a few of my faves during the day, but I've been on the road a lot the last couple of weeks, so I haven't been able to play with you in the comments. Apologies, I am but one man, who does what he can, etc. And you? I see that you and Arcadian have been having a good old time griefing Z lately. Wish I could have joined the fracas.
Meh, I know nothing about Z's personal life, I come for the blog. You're right about the fact that he obviously pours some sweat into it, that's why I'm here. Anyway, I just think the whole kerfuffle is hilarious, since whoever has been promising LOOMING DOOM!!!1! for months now. We're going to have to start measuring the arrival of Zandar's LOOMING DOOM in Friedman Units.
I wouldn't call it "work" if he's doing it when he should be working. Question for you big guy, you've seen the unemployment picture out there (you post about it enough). Why risk it?
Not well liked?! Oh, Zandar! I know you are crying on the couch clutching a carton of Moose Tracks.
I think many in your office may not agree with you. But still they follow your actions and your blog. Curious.
I am joyous that I see at least four new posts since this workplace harassment. Don't they know that your personal crusade is so much bigger than their cubicular opinion? Methinks that the Level I's should just go back to cruising porn and leave you to your holy mission against the intergalactic stupid.
Following.
Is Arcadian talking again?
Oh please. Douchebag: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tqEBQjWRws
Twenty ten.
will 538 still be readily accessible to people who don't wish to pay the times for online access? that's a question that should be addressed.
Post a Comment