ABC News has taken all FiveThirtyEight articles offline
386 points
• 3 days ago
• Article
Link
截至 2026 年 5 月 15 日，ABC News 已将 FiveThirtyEight 的所有文章全部下线，相关页面现重定向至 abcnews.com/politics 。 FiveThirtyEight 前高级编辑兼高级选举分析师、 Votebeat 现任主编 Nathaniel Rakich 称此举是"对数千页知识的无谓抹除"。
Rakich 在原帖中强调了这次档案消失的重大意义。由 Nate Silver 创立的 FiveThirtyEight 以数据驱动的报道著称，尤其在政治、体育和选举领域，多年来积累了大量分析性文章和预测内容。
围绕此事的讨论反映出新闻界与数据界的普遍担忧。许多人认为，删除这些内容意味着失去一项宝贵的公共资源，这些材料长期以来被广泛引用并用于教学和研究。
将内容重定向到 ABC News 的通用政治页面，表明这些内容正被并入更大的 ABC News 品牌。这符合媒体公司精简数字资产的趋势，但有时会以牺牲小众却有影响力的媒体为代价。
FiveThirtyEight 档案的消失成为数字媒体史上的重要一刻，也引发了关于在线知识保存以及媒体机构在收购专业出版物后应承担何种责任的深刻疑问。
ABC News has taken all FiveThirtyEight articles completely offline as of May 15, 2026. The articles now redirect to abcnews.com/politics. Nathaniel Rakich, former senior editor and senior elections analyst at FiveThirtyEight and current managing editor at Votebeat, called this a "needless erasure of thousands of pages of knowledge."
The original post by Rakich highlights the significance of this archival loss. FiveThirtyEight, founded by Nate Silver, was known for its data-driven journalism, particularly in politics, sports, and elections. It built a substantial archive of analytical articles and forecasts over the years.
The conversation around this move reflects concern within the journalism and data communities. Many see the removal as a loss of valuable public resource. The site's content was widely cited and used for educational and research purposes.
The redirect to a general politics page on ABC News suggests a consolidation of content under the broader ABC News brand. This is part of a larger trend where media companies streamline digital properties, sometimes at the expense of niche but influential outlets.
The erasure of the FiveThirtyEight archive represents a significant moment in digital media history. It raises questions about the preservation of online knowledge and the responsibilities of media organizations when they acquire specialized publications.
172 comments • Comments Link
• ABC 拒绝以任何价格将 FiveThirtyEight 的知识产权卖给创始人 Nate Silver 。据报道原因之一是他曾批评该品牌的管理方式，许多人认为这更像是出于个人恩怨而非商业判断。
• 有评论者对 Nate Silver 本人持批评态度，认为他把公司卖给一家企业后不应对企业行为感到意外；也有人认为他有权套现，并指出他保留了最关键的模型。
• 许多人认为，ABC 拒绝把一项对公司来说无关紧要的资产卖给愿意买家的做法是双输，等于把管理层的私利置于股东价值之上——一位评论者称此举"侮辱股东"。
• 关于 ABC 的拒绝是否构成违反信托义务，讨论触及法律问题：有人指出在 Delaware，信托义务包括谨慎义务和忠诚义务，但并不要求在每笔交易中都必须追求收入或利润最大化。
• 在 Clare Malone 掌舵时期，FiveThirtyEight 被视为最严肃的政治新闻来源之一；有人推荐 G. Elliott Morris 的 Strength in Numbers 博客，认为它是目前数据驱动美国政治报道的最佳继承者。
• 许多人对 FiveThirtyEight 的可视化和数据新闻式微表示惋惜。尽管 GitHub 上的仓库仍可见，但有人担心这些内容最终也会被关闭或移除。
• 讨论还涉及企业收购媒体资产常常导致管理不善的模式：ABC 未能在总统选举年之外保持盈利，公司的财务无法应对投入与回报之间的长期滞后。
• 2016 年大选预测的争议被重新审视：辩护者指出，Silver 曾给出特朗普约 35% 的胜算，远高于多数人的估计，他的模型在统计意义上校准良好，但公众更在意结果而非概率本身。
• 有人认为，ABC 可能拒绝出售是为了避免 Silver 以后以低价回购并再度成功，从而使 ABC 领导层在关闭该网站后尴尬难堪。
• 评论者还指出 ABC 正在系统性拆解该网站，删除文章和项目，并通过 WordPress VIP 做重定向，表明内容或许仍存在但被刻意隐藏。
总体讨论显示，广泛共识认为 ABC 对 FiveThirtyEight 的处理更多出于自我和公司内部政治，而非合理的商业判断。尽管对 Nate Silver 在事件中的角色存在分歧，但大多数人认为拒绝以任何价格将其卖回给创始人的做法适得其反。讨论同时凸显了企业所有权下数据新闻面临的挑战、公众对概率预测的持续误解，以及为专业政治受众服务的独特媒体遭遇的损失。 • ABC refused to sell the FiveThirtyEight IP back to founder Nate Silver at any price, reportedly because he had criticized their management of the brand, which many see as petty and driven by personal spite rather than business logic.
• Some commenters are critical of Nate Silver himself, arguing that he sold out to a corporation and shouldn't be surprised when it acted like one, while others defend his right to cash out and note he retained the models that mattered most.
• Several people argue that ABC's decision to withhold a dead asset from a willing buyer is a lose-lose scenario that prioritizes ego over shareholder value, with one commenter noting it amounts to a "fuck you to the shareholders."
• There's debate about whether ABC's decision could constitute a breach of fiduciary duty, with legal discussion clarifying that fiduciary duties in Delaware (where Disney is incorporated) consist of the duty of care and duty of loyalty, neither of which strictly requires maximizing revenue or profit in every transaction.
• The Clare Malone era of FiveThirtyEight is remembered fondly as among the most serious political journalism, and G. Elliott Morris's Strength in Numbers blog is recommended as the best current successor for data-driven US politics reporting.
• Many commenters lament the loss of FiveThirtyEight's visualizations and data journalism, with some noting the GitHub repos are still up but expressing concern they may eventually be taken down too.
• There's discussion of how corporate acquisitions of media properties often lead to mismanagement, with ABC failing to maintain profitability outside presidential election years and corporate bean-counting unable to handle the long latency between investment and return.
• The 2016 election prediction controversy is revisited, with defenders noting that Silver gave Trump roughly a 35% chance of winning, which was far higher than most forecasters, and that his models were statistically well-calibrated overall, even though the public narrative focused on the outcome rather than the probability.
• Some suggest ABC may be refusing to sell to avoid the embarrassment of Silver buying it back cheaply and making it successful again, which would make ABC leadership look bad for having shut it down.
• Commenters note that ABC has been systematically dismantling the site, removing articles and projects, and redirecting through WordPress VIP infrastructure, suggesting the content may still exist but is being deliberately hidden.
The discussion reveals a broad consensus that ABC's handling of FiveThirtyEight represents a case of corporate mismanagement driven more by ego and internal politics than sound business judgment. While opinions are divided on Nate Silver's own role in the saga, most agree that refusing to sell a defunct asset to its founder at any price is petty and counterproductive. The conversation also highlights the broader challenges of data journalism under corporate ownership, the public's persistent misunderstanding of probabilistic forecasting, and the loss of a unique media property that served a niche but dedicated audience of politically engaged professionals.