What is Logipedia About?
“The best of both sides better”
Media today often only shows one side of the story and is heavily sensationalized. If you are like most people that we’ve talked to, you understand how much of a problem that is for our society. Though you probably also realize how much time it truly takes to be informed about both sides of any given topic. The founders of Logipedia have seen this and wants to help fix it. Our end goal is to create a site that allows you to become more informed on more topics from both sides faster.
And we think we have a solution that can do this! Essentially we seek to do for debatable topics what Wikipedia did for generally agreed-upon topics ... and make it ten times better! Logipedia empowers those who research politics to share the research that most people don’t have time to do. Our volunteers gather together important research, studies, articles, and news on different topics and translate them into non-sensational pro/con articles that we send out weekly. With each release readers rate each pro and con with how well written each point is, and whether they agree with what is being argued for and against. Our volunteers use these ratings to see who can write the highest quality material that is convincing to both those who agree and those who disagree. And because any civil-minded individual can write as long as they meet the publishing requirements, readers will get quality information from all sides of every argument.
Readers get the best of both sides better
Writers get to make a real difference to real people
The world becomes less sensationalized and increasingly informed
YOU Can Make a Difference! Here’s How...
💌 , follow Logipedia on social media, and start reading articles that come out! 💡 and its newsletter with others so they can escape one-sided media too! ✍️ to help inform others or 💰 to support our the site and our writers
And watch as one by one we help turn the tide against one-sided media and help everyone see the best of both sides better! As with any change, we only succeed if we all pitch in!
How do I become a writer?
You can start by clicking the “add pro” or “add con” button on any article or by helping with a new article ! If you want to join a dedicated writing team and have weekly discussions with a group of civil individuals, send an email to expressing your interest and we will get connected with a group! We offer info sessions if you want more information before you join a writer group.
Can I donate to help support the mission?
For sure! Donations help us to keep our website up and running, share our content with more people, cover more topics, support our writers, and reach a wider audience. You can !
How does Logipedia help prevent misinformation?
Logipedia is built to be resilient to misinformation because we understand that making informed decisions requires accurate research. Our strategy requires that all written content be sourced and we don’t allow misrepresentation of sources. The community and volunteers work together to flag and remove any entries with misinformation.
The reason social media is so prone to misinformation is because:
There is no accountability for people who post what is untrue People do not have any ability to quickly fact check sources Content shown is designed to promote engagement not accuracy
At Logipedia, we solve these problems by doing the below:
Anyone can provide feedback on any pro and con and either comment or flag it if it breaks our content publishing requirements (such as misrepresenting or not using quality sources). Our volunteers then verify the comment and flag and when there is general agreement, the entry is removed. We give readers the sources related to each pro and con and the ability to quickly click the URL and see where the information came from We rank pros and cons by order of how convincing people on both sides find the content. We don’t rank by engagement
How reliable is Logipedia?
Logipedia acts as a curation site, so we are as reliable as the sources that we bring in and summarize. We seek the same level of reliability as Wikipedia and so do not seek to be as reliable as things like research journals. However Wikipedia by and large is reliable on the majority of topics and is only unreliable on the minority of cases (and can often be as reliable as research journals on a number of topics). Crowdsourcing content, Wikipedia-style will inherently have some minority of misrepresented information, but we prefer that you have all the information you need to make an informed decision, and so error towards giving more information rather than less. Our publishing requirements has a strict no-misinformation rule but beyond that we give you the power to decide yourself what research you think is convincing and most reliable. (Because different people have different definitions of misinformation, we define misinformation as information from very clearly unreliable sources or that misrepresents or is unrelated to a what a source actually says). Because we give you this freedom, it is also your responsibility to qualify some of the pros and cons and how powerful each one is. Remember that not all pros and cons are equal, though we want to give you the ability to choose which ones are most worth listening to rather than arbitrate truth for you.
👇 Get our Newsletter! 👇