If you go to http://news.google.com, you will find a section called Editors’ Picks – this is located on the lower right portion of the page. Various media companies can participate here – including their favorite 5 articles that want to be highlighted perhaps to get free publicity. If you’re a regular, you may find online articles from The Atlantic, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Forbes, Washington Post and The Christian Science Monitor.
When you access Google News, even though the lists above are considered regulars, there’s some rotation among other online sources. For example, you may find Fox News, ESPN, Reuters, CNET News and others who may appear from time to time. These providers can choose their top 5 articles to highlight for those perusing the news with links to each article. It’s quite common providers may change throughout the day and as news develops, their content might change as well.
My focus here is on ESPN – they are commonly listed once or twice each week although this is not empirically observed — just an intuitive guess. Needless to say, I’ve seen them at least once per week and since March ’12, these articles have not changed — each of these articles currently displayed are 6 months old! Amazing that a Sports’ media empire which is constantly updating their stories and highlights throughout the day on TV and Radio would not have updated these picks over the last 6 months. What gives? Using a sport’s analogy, did someone drop the ball?
One has to speculate why this hasn’t changed in so long…something that should have been changed at least 50 times since their last update. Why are they still included if they’re no longer relevant? Does it have something to do with a subscription based system? In other words, many of their current articles on ESPN.com are subscription based so maybe they’re trying to limit the amount of “freebies” to consumers. If this is the case, why continue to be included under the Editors’ picks?
I don’t think this situation helps their brand although have readers noticed or do they even care? After a while, regular users to the Google News site will gloss over ESPN knowing their content is at least 6 months old. I’d be interested to know how they could benefit by such a PR model with outdated articles. Anyone got a clue what’s ESPN doing here?