An article is a self-contained narrative which should be researched and corroborated before publication. A live blog is less detailed and formal, is more immediate, and has a higher error rate as speed is the aim.
Why is a news organization publishing things that look like news articles but which have none of the elements of rigour that is expected of news organizations? Seems like something we should firmly reject.
It may look to you like a news article, but you’re seeing a screenshot in isolation. It’s a post on a liveblog, and readers aren’t going to confuse it with an article.
Apologies for the bluntness but that is absolute nonsense. I just took a look at the article on my phone: ZERO clear indication that this is any sort of “liveblog” whatever that’s supposed to mean. It’s from a news organization, it’s not clearly marked as an editorial, the url and menu clearly mark it as “news”, and the screenshot literally says “this article”.
Thanks for the correction, you’re right, although I would push back that readers wouldn’t confuse this with a news article. It looks like a news article from a news organization to me, and since they apparently did change the title after all, I think they would effectively agree that it is still a news article even if you call it a “live blog”.
So they just leave the headline alone? They know many people don’t even go past that…
That bothered me too
Not a headline. It’s a live post not an article.
What’s the difference?
An article is a self-contained narrative which should be researched and corroborated before publication. A live blog is less detailed and formal, is more immediate, and has a higher error rate as speed is the aim.
Why is a news organization publishing things that look like news articles but which have none of the elements of rigour that is expected of news organizations? Seems like something we should firmly reject.
It may look to you like a news article, but you’re seeing a screenshot in isolation. It’s a post on a liveblog, and readers aren’t going to confuse it with an article.
Apologies for the bluntness but that is absolute nonsense. I just took a look at the article on my phone: ZERO clear indication that this is any sort of “liveblog” whatever that’s supposed to mean. It’s from a news organization, it’s not clearly marked as an editorial, the url and menu clearly mark it as “news”, and the screenshot literally says “this article”.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/sep/12/charlie-kirk-suspect-washington-utah
Grab your ponies. You’re on the wrong link.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2025/sep/12/charlie-kirk-shooter-suspect-latest-news-updates-donald-trump-utah?filterKeyEvents=false&page=with%3Ablock-68c47b768f086519d327114d#block-68c47b768f086519d327114d
Thanks for the correction, you’re right, although I would push back that readers wouldn’t confuse this with a news article. It looks like a news article from a news organization to me, and since they apparently did change the title after all, I think they would effectively agree that it is still a news article even if you call it a “live blog”.