Tumblelog by Soup.io
Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

March 04 2011

15:43

Councilpedia a Hit with New Yorkers, But Not Politicians

It's been a month since Gotham Gazette launched its Councilpedia project to monitor city elected officials and track money in local politics. (To read our earlier entry on Councilpedia, go here.)

In those weeks, we've learned a lot about what people like and don't like about the service. This information will help us improve what we think is an important tool for New Yorkers and an example other local news sites might want to follow.

Popular with People, not Politicians

councilpedia grab small.jpg

First, by and large, people like it. Even though most of the information -- but not all of it -- was already scattered about on Gotham Gazette and other sites, readers appreciate having all that data in one place. As someone who, like most editors, usually only hears from readers when they have complaints, I enjoyed getting emails with comments like "love it," "great new tool," "great addition to an already fine website," and so on.

We also received favorable coverage from a number of local news organizations. The New York Daily News ran a story about Councilpedia as did the local cable news channel and some political blogs. The New York Post even used it to call out a councilmember who seems not to have done much work during the last year.

Some of the city officials did not share that enthusiasm. In particular, they did not like the focus on campaign contributions. Our information on this is not original -- we took it from the city's Campaign Finance Board, which keeps track of such things and makes them public on its own. It's a very useful site. We did, though, sort all that information in an attempt to make it more user friendly and informative. So with Councilpedia, readers can, with two clicks, find out which unions gave money to Councilmember X and which lawyers helped Councilmember Y.

What some council members really, really do not like, apparently, is that we identify contributions from the real estate industry. Real estate -- developers, brokers, construction -- are probably the most important special interest in NYC politics. Many New York politicians rely on their support. They just hope people won't notice. Councilpedia makes it a bit harder to keep that secret.

There's a lesson in there somewhere.

What We've Learned

Some of the lessons are already clear to us. One is that, while people visit the site and explore it, they have been slow to post comments. Getting the public to share information and having a discussion about money and politics are key to Councilpedia, so we will try to ramp that up.

In the next week or so, we plan to add a tutorial explaining more fully how to foster user interactions. We also hope to offer some short information sessions on Councilpedia and how to use it. And we expect that fresh information on the site -- the list of earmarks for the next fiscal year, for example -- will spur more people to get involved.

We're eager for other suggestions and would appreciate hearing from anyone who has done crowdsourcing and had a good response.

The second lesson: People would like to see more of this. They wonder why we did not include the mayor (Michael Bloomberg is a billionaire, so he doesn't take campaign contributions). Other readers wanted to see the information on state legislators, judges, and possible mayoral candidates.

More Money, More Monitoring

So would we. The problem, alas, is resources.

Councilpedia has something like 31,000 pages. While some of the data was copied or downloaded, much of it required formatting and tweaking by our technical manager JaVon Rice. And every single campaign contribution to all of the 53 officials in Councilpedia had to be hand-coded by sector and location. This required a large number of interns and freelancers working under the supervision of our city government editor, Courtney Gross. Even with a generous grant from the Knight Foundation, this stretched our resources to the limit and probably beyond.

New York's state legislature, which has been termed one of the most dysfunctional in the country and is awash is questionable campaign finance shenanigans, represent a tempting target for this type of project. Now if only we had a million dollars to do it...

February 07 2011

18:04

Councilpedia Follows the Money in New York City Politics

More than two years since the idea first began buzzing in our collective brains, Gotham Gazette yesterday finally launched its Councilpedia site.

Councilpedia, funded in part with a News Challenge grant from the Knight Foundation, is a unique new tool that will let people track the influence of money in New York City politics and help New Yorkers monitor their public officials. To accomplish this it does three main things.

First, it brings together an array of information about two citywide elected officials and the members of the New York City Council: legislative records, campaign finance information, and places to go to find out more. Most -- not all -- of this exists elsewhere, but it is scattered about -- on Gotham Gazette, on the city Campaign Finance Board website and elsewhere. We've put it all in one place. This will help people easily go back and forth between the money -- who helped fund the official's campaign -- and the politics. And in the process find out how the official vote on matters might affect those contributors.

Second it expands upon the campaign finance information previously available. New York City has a tough campaign finance law with public financing of campaigns (unless you're a billionaire and so choose to opt out). As part of that, the Campaign Finance Board pulls together a formidable array of information and makes it readily available to all who come to its site. But the amount of information is overwhelming -- long lists of names of people who gave to a candidate -- and hard to digest. We've taken those lists of contributors and broken them down by categories: labor, for example, people in the real estate industry and so on.

Reader Input

And finally, we've asked our readers to connect the dots for us. Readers are encouraged, urged (even begged) to tell us what they know about contributors and their interests or about council members. If Contributor Z gave money to Candidate X who then proposed a zoning change that boosted the value of Z's property, we want to know. Gotham Gazette reporters will try to check the allegations out; we'll mark those that we can verify and take down ones we determine to be false or abusive.

We hope to have a lively online conversation that will inform New Yorkers and help them become more involved in the politics of their city. This is an experiment in crowdsourcing on local issues. We'll keep you posted on how it develops -- in case some of you want to try something similar in your communities. (And our City Hall editor Courtney Gross and technical manager JaVon Rice, who together did the lion's share of the work on this, can warn you of some of the problems and issue you might face along the way.)

So far, we have received a lot of praise and coverage for Councilpedia. (For a sample go here, here and here for a video). People already are urging us to expand it -- to judges, to state officials, to candidates as well a incumbents. One person even wanted us to delve into records of a past governor. Given how long it took us to get this far -- and given the months of data coding, checking and re-entry, we're gong to pause for now and watch what happens, fine tune what we have, see what kind of discussion develops and, we hope, follow up on some hot tips from readers.

So if you know about New York, tell us what you know. And even if you don't know New York, tell us what you think about the project.

Sponsored post
feedback2020-admin
04:05

December 16 2010

15:23

The Challenge of Attracting Traffic in a Post-Loyal Era

Back in the early days of websites -- way back, a decade ago -- there were far fewer publications on the web than there are today, of course, and many people read them as they had read print newspapers and magazines. A reader would go to a favorite site and check in perhaps once a day, once a week or even once a month -- whenever they thought it might feature new material.

Now, of course, that has changed. While some of us remain loyal to a few sites, we're more likely to click around, using search engines, blogs, email from friends and so on to guide us to new reading. As someone interested in education, for example, I visited a lot of Washington, D.C., local sites earlier this fall, having been sent there by searches for Michele Rhee, by Facebook friends who share my interest in public education, by friends who know of my interest and by an array of education blogs. Now that D.C. is generating less education news -- at least for now -- I'm less likely to come back. That's not a reflection on the quality of any of the sites.

Further complicating the picture is the fact that one often does not have to go to the original site to read a given item. As we all know, blogs and other online publications publish not only links but lift articles in their entirety.

Should We Yahoo?

Recently Gotham Gazette -- and probably many of your local sites as well -- was approached by Yahoo, which wanted to put some of our content in its new Yahoo local sections. The whole story -- not just a link and a teaser -- would appear on Yahoo. The massive reach of Yahoo obviously appealed to a small local site like ours, but we said no because we thought we could not afford any loss in traffic, however slight. (I'll admit another part of me couldn't see why a struggling site like ours should provide free content to a multi-billion dollar corporation, but I'll let that part slide for now.)

So where does this leave us? Do hits mean what they used to? Well maybe not, but we still need them. Advertisers rely on them and so do foundations and other donors, which are key funding sources for those of us in the non-profit journalism world.

That said, it seems marketing techniques of the past -- building brand loyalty, so to speak -- are less effective now. Or are they?

And what are the alternatives. Facebook? Twitter? What else?

Good content never hurts, but how does one spread the word about that good content? And since people reading a story are often oblivious to the name of the site they have found their way to, great stories do not necessarily ensure repeat customers.

It seems any talk about sustainability has to consider traffic. Sure, a site can have readers and still not make it. But without readers -- not necessarily millions but at least success in reaching the intended audience -- can any site survive?

November 24 2010

17:01

Last Minute News Challenge Tips: Tell a Story, Be Realistic, and More

Planning to spend the long weekend finalizing your Knight News Challenge application? It's too late for my favorite bit of advice ("don't wait until the last minute!")m, but as someone who's been involved with three different winning projects, I like to fancy that I've got got some insight into what makes a good project.

A half dozen prospective applicants have sat down with me to workshop their News Challenge ideas, and I think I've helped them think through their projects to get them to a more viable place. The application process isn't hard, but you do need to give some sincere thought to your project or you're just wasting your time. Here's the advice I keep giving people:

Tips for the News Challenge

Focus on work you really want to do -- If you have a great idea but aren't really personally invested in making it happen, you're going to face a long, long slog if it gets funded. Three different people have complained to me that software developers put a ton of time and energy into developing Knight proposals that didn't wind up getting funded. That's always a let down, but it shouldn't be the end of the world. If you do make it past the first round, Knight is going to ask you a lot of hard questions and work with you to revise your proposal. If you don't get funded, you're left with a pretty solid and well thought out proposal that you can shop around if you really want to raise the money you need to get funded. That's a good thing!

Tell a solid story of engagement -- I'm not an expert on what is and isn't news, and I cut my teeth most recently at Gotham Gazette, which has pretty distinct standards for what qualifies. The most fascinating story won't find a home there if it doesn't have any apparent policy implications. I'm pretty sure that Knight doesn't look for policy implications alone, but if you can't tell me a solid story that takes me from your project to citizens (and non citizens!) and helps make them more engaged in decision making in their communities in some tangible way, something is missing from your project. That, or you're making me work far too hard to understand why this matters. So spell it out.

Make a realistic budget -- Grants awarded by the news challenge vary wildly in amount. Meaning: You should be honest with yourself about what it will cost to see your project through. A low ball request could leave you without enough money to finish what you started, and could be a sign to Knight's reviewers that you don't have a good understanding of what your project is going to take. A stratospheric budget isn't any more realistic.

Have a realistic outreach plan -- If you've got a great idea but no idea how to connect with the users that should be taking advantage of it, you've got a silo. Think this will be useful to a community? Go out and talk to people about what you're trying to do, how you think it will help and listen to what they say about how they want to use it. Not just what they think would be nice for other people to use, but what they want and will use.

Proofread! Proofread! Proofread! -- Your goal is to impress people, and to impress upon them that they should take a chance on your bright idea. Attention to grammatical details doesn't matter to everyone, but to some people a misplaced modifier is like nails on a chalkboard. Why risk alienating a reviewer?

Don't give up -- Knight's reviewers are going to look at zillions of proposals. If you're convinced that yours is a good idea but Knight turns it down, don't just quit. Keep looking for ways to make it happen, and keep listening to your community for insights that might make it a stronger project next time.

PS. I really have been involved with three Challenge winners. I wasn't around to help write the proposal, but I joined Gotham Gazette full time as director of technology after they won a 2007 news challenge grant to develop a series of games about public policy. Two years later, I helped develop Gotham Gazette's winning Councilpedia proposal before I joined the DocumentCloud team.

October 06 2010

14:50

Pushing the Limits of What a Wiki Can Do with Councilpedia

Barely two decades into the digital age, we take online media for granted. So much is so easy and convenient -- at our fingertips -- that we can forget technology can only do so much. Then we come up with a great idea that leaves us with the challenge of how to successfully push the limits.

This is what has confronted Gotham Gazette as we move into the final stages of creating our Councilpedia site. Councilpedia, a Knight News Challenge winner that I've blogged about here previously, will explore more fully the links between money and politics in New York City.

Councilpedia will enable visitors to the site to share what they know about politicians and their donors. It is to be powered by MediaWiki to let people flag something -- noting, for example, that one contributor to a candidate owns land she hopes to get rezoned for a Walmart. Gotham Gazette staff will then confirm -- or delete -- the comment.

Filtering Data

The core of Councilpedia is information already on Gotham Gazette, information from City Council (on earmarks, for example) and, above all, the massive records from the city Campaign Finance Board on giving and spending. The sheer magnitude of all this data has posed an array of problems.

The city data, while thorough and accessible, is inscrutable to most New Yorkers -- a list of largely meaningless names. To make it easier to search and understand, we set out to code the data (to indicate large donors, those from the city, unions, real estate industry etc.). With some candidates having thousands of contributors, this presented a massive task. Fortunately, we had some conscientious interns this summer who, between their other reporting responsibilities, dutifully researched and coded line after line of information under the supervision of our city government editor, Courtney Gross.

Readers will be able to examine this data in a number of ways. They can view by candidate. They can find out who else the contributor helped fund. They can look at intermediaries and determine whose money they bundled and then who it went to. And so on.

For the wiki, though, this mountain of information has been a bit much. When technical manager William JaVon Rice began uploading the data into spreadsheets he had created, the process took 36 hours and produced some 31,000 pages -- a sure indication no one would ever attempt this in print. The system balked, overwriting pages, for example, which required Rice to check every candidate's list of often hundreds of contributors to determine which ones had been overwritten. Then he had to undo the overwrite.

Pushing The Limits of MediaWiki

We're still planning to have this ready to show you in the next several weeks. And we think you'll be impressed. Not to boast, but the reporters, campaign finance aficionados and followers of city government who viewed our test felt that way.

But we do see a number of issues looming ahead. Councilpedia is intended as a living, breathing site, meaning data will continue to accumulate as officials collect more money, award more earmarks, pass more bills, and so on. The updating poses a challenge for a small non-profit like Gotham Gazette.

The magnitude of the new information -- added to the volumes we already have -- is likely to push the limits of MediaWiki even further.

With this in mind, we're looking for ways to automate the process more. And we hope someone -- any takers out there?-- will make MediaWiki more robust or create or an alternative.

As always, we appreciate your ideas, so feel free to share them in the comments below. And stay tuned for Councilpedia.

August 19 2010

18:30

Seeking Sustainability, Part 3: VOSD’s Scott Lewis and others on engagement, community-building

Seeking Sustainability: Presentation on engagement and community-building from Knight Foundation on Vimeo.

This spring, the Knight Foundation hosted a roundtable discussion exploring a crucial issue in journalism: the sustainability of nonprofit news organizations. This week, we’re passing along some videos of the conversations that resulted (and, as always, we’d love to continue the discussion in the comments section). We posted Part 1 of the series, a talk focused on business-model viability over time, on Monday, and Part 2 — on revenue-generation — yesterday.

In today’s pair of videos, Scott Lewis, CEO of Voice of San Diego, leads a discussion on the crucial topic of community engagement: how to leverage limited resources to build community, how to develop meaningful comments boards and conversations, how to use new technologies to develop audience affection, how to translate loyalty into money — and how to measure the murky issue of “audience engagement” in the first place. Scott’s introduction is above; the video below features a conversation among Knight’s panel of heavy-hitters.

Among them, in general order of appearance: the Center for Investigative Reporting’s Robert Rosenthal, Texas Tribune’s Evan Smith and Higinio Maycotte, The Bay Citizen’s Lisa Frazier, the St. Louis Beacon’s Nicole Hollway and Margaret Wolf Freivogel, the Chicago News Cooperative’s Peter Osnos, Voice of San Diego’s Buzz Woolley and Andrew Donohue, the New Haven Independent’s Paul Bass, the Gotham Gazette’s Gail Robinson, the FCC’s (and formerly Beliefnet’s) Steven Waldman, the Huffington Post Investigative Fund’s Nick Penniman, and Seattle CrossCut’s David Brewster.

Seeking Sustainability: Discussion on engagement and community-building session from Knight Foundation on Vimeo.

July 16 2010

17:44

Councilpedia In Private Pilot, Overcoming Tech Challenges

Over the last several months, Gotham Gazette has made major strides on its Councilpedia project, which will help New Yorkers keep tabs on their local officials and share their knowledge with others. Over the last year, the project has evolved and -- we think -- improved from our original plan.

Currently we have a pilot for the site with the design, the structure and information for three office holders. We are not ready to release this to the world, but if you would like a sneak preview please email me at grobinson at gothamgazette.com.

Councilpedia Brings City and Candidate Information to Life

Councilpedia intends to bring an array of information about City Council members and other city officials -- the bills they sponsor, background information, member items (a.k.a earmarks) -- to one site, along with campaign finance information. New York City, which has public financing of campaigns, requires a lot of disclosure on the part of candidates as to where they get their money and how they spend it, but the information can be hard to read and comprehend.

That is one way Councilpedia will be useful. First, it sorts the donors by various categories, such as unions, major givers and intermediaries. By having the campaign finance information along with voting information, Councilpedia can help people make possible connections between money and politics. They can then comment on the site.

The city information on donors is essentially a long list of names. Councilpedia will enable readers to identify who those people are. One example would be that John Doe, who gave to candidate X, owns a lot in the candidate's district and wants it re-zoned.

Anyone who registers can -- and is urged to -- comment. Gotham Gazette staff will review comments, verify them and use the leads from our readers to inform our reporting. Overall, we hope Councilpedia will enrich the debate about money and politics in New York.

Making Tools Work

In putting this project together we have grappled with adapting two disparate -- and balky -- technical tools to our needs.

The first was the
Campaign Finance Board
information. While the board provides a wealth of information (and has a very helpful staff to boot), the information can be hard to read and is not formatted the way we wanted it.

After trying various techniques to import the data, we eventually confronted the cold reality: The only feasible way -- given our limitations -- to create an attractive, user friendly site that did what we wanted it to do (and what we promised Knight it would do) was to re-input the data and code it ourselves.

This is incredibly painstaking. Luckily, we have several excellent interns this summer who pitched in to help.

The other issue dealt with adapting the wiki to our needs. While our technical manager, JaVon Rice, has pushed the limits of the wiki, we found there were things it would not do. For example, we had hoped to flag items that have recently received comment and have the comments appear along with the item.

Instead, we will have comment pages. We will indicate if a comment has been posted on a contribution or piece of legislation, but that also will not be automatic. Gotham Gazette staff will have to mark the item themselves.

Keeping the site current will also require staff intervention -- to add bills, to update financial reports, to remove offensive or simply incorrect comments.

Will it be worth it? We certainly hope so and are eager to move to the next step and engage New Yorkers in this conversation about money and politics.

March 18 2010

21:26

In Seach of a Wiki with Track Changes

Most of us have become so used to being able to do so much online that is comes as a surprise when we want to do something and can't find the tools to do it.

That's the situation confronting the Gotham Gazette staff as we move forward with our Councilpedia project that will use crowdsourcing to probe the links between money and politics. I'm hoping you can help. (For more on Councilpedia see my earlier post.)

Monitoring Revisions

The project will enable registered users to contribute information on campaign donors and the politicians they help. Like Wikipedia, Councilpedia needs to allow readers to easily provide us with information. But we also want the ability to monitor revisions much the same way that Microsoft Word's track changes does.

Our technical manager, JaVon Rice, has found that Mediawiki simply does not do everything we need it to do and is looking for something essentially like Writeboard or Google Docs, except for public rather than just internal use.

Any ideas? Please share them in the comments.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

January 13 2010

03:23

How Gotham Gazette Redesigned a Decade-Old Website

Gotham Gazette, our website about New York City policy and politics, unveiled its redesign recently. (Please take a look and let me know what you think by emailing grobinson at gothamgazette.com).

For our readers, we hope the redesign will create a more useful publication by making it easier for visitors to find information about New York City issues. For our advertisers -- who we hope will increase in number -- it offers more space and more options. And for the GG staff, it reflects our evolution -- and to some extent, the web's evolution -- over the past decade.

When Gotham Gazette launched in fall 1999, its publisher, the Citizens Union Foundation, wanted to use the power of the web to engage and inform citizens about local government. As part of that, Gotham Gazette included links to all the news sources in the city, as well as to government sites, a variety of organizations, and so on. Back then, that was unusual. Many sites would not link to other sources.

Aside from those links, though, Gotham Gazette in its early days resembled a print publication. We posted most of our stories at the beginning of the week and left them up for seven days. We did offer a daily news digest but rarely, if ever, updated the site during the day. And, of course, interactivity had not yet emerged.

Over the years, the web changed and with it, so did Gotham Gazette. Under former editor Jonathan Mandell, we began creating news games and added a blog -- the Wonkster -- to provide updates and short items. We increasingly focused on original reporting and commentary. Recently, we began posting more content throughout the week, offering multimedia, and creating interactive graphics.

While we continue to provide links and a daily news summary, we no longer have that field to ourselves, as even the blogs of some of the big N.Y. newspapers (such as the Daily News) link to material on our site and in other city media.

Focus on Original Work

With the redesign, we wanted to address these changes and give ourselves a more modern look. (There had been an interim redesign about five years ago, which brought us into the 21st century.) This involved an extensive effort by current and former Gotham Gazette staff, as well as valuable advice from the staff and board of our parent organization. As a veteran of several print redesigns, I found that the challenge of making one work online -- on a site with hundreds of pages -- at times seemed overwhelming.

This latest incarnation of Gotham Gazette focuses on our original work, while still offering the daily news summary and links to the best resources on New York City. We will also roll out more stories throughout the week. Articles are now listed and archived by subject area (art, environment, health) instead of labels (such as issues of the week and feature), which meant something to us but not to our readers. And we've done a major housecleaning.

The design was largely the work of former web producer, Ya-Hsuan Huang. Our technical director, W. JaVon Rice, played the key role in making her mockups a working reality.

We think our redesign represents a major step forward. Of course, we know we must continue to evolve. As part of that, we plan to launch our first crowdsourcing project in the coming months (more on that in a future post.) And, as always, we seek new ways and new formats to keep our readers informed about the city that engages, enchants and infuriates them.

January 06 2010

17:26

Advertisers Still Prefer Print to Online

A rare bit of good financial news for journalism points once again to the difficulty of financing online media.

PaidContent reported this week that Politico raked in more than $20 million last year, finishing with operating profits of about $1 million.

That's the good news. But as Molly Fischer wrote in the New York Observer, Politico's print publication -- something few of us outside the Beltway ever see -- accounted for 60 percent of operating revenues. This was the case even though the paper version has an estimated circulation of 32,000 compared to the more than 3 million unique visitors estimated to visit the website every month.

As Fischer said, "Even if Politico's success testifies to print's demise, print advertising remains the best way to make money."

Politico, of course, is fortunate enough to have both a print and web presence. Those of us at web-only publications (such as Gotham Gazette) cannot help but be frustrated by seeing ads -- and revenue -- going to print publications that may have fewer readers and weaker content.

People like seeing their ads on coffee tables -- particularly on the mayor's coffee table, as an ad salesperson told me when I wondered why Gotham Gazette did not get more image ads from unions and advocacy groups. So far, it seems, even the people at Politico have not been able to break that habit.

December 02 2009

15:30

How Gotham Gazette Used Games as Storytelling Devices

With the launch of its energy game Switch, Garbage Game, for example, told us that it gave them a whole new appreciation of the complexity of the problem -- both how difficult it is to reduce solid waste and how expensive it is to dispose of this material.

Budget games, such as Balance (or the national one, Budget Hero), also do this. They make it clear that, whatever politicians might have us believe, closing deficits means raising taxes or cutting things most of us like, such as police officers, teachers and firefighters.

Games that are more instructional, such as ours about how the budget process works, have a role to play, too. But my hunch, based on our experience, is that unless they can be made extremely entertaining, people are less likely to try those out just for the heck of it. Instead, these games can play a valuable role for a community group seeking to inform its members, say, or a civics or political science class. (This realization owes much to a talk by Alice Robison at MIT last year.)

Building Good, Low Budget Games

Creating a good game requires a lot of work, money or both. When I spoke at a conference last year, people repeatedly expressed amazement about the low budget for Gotham Gazette's games. But for us -- and for many other small news publications -- the cost seemed huge. We never would have been able to do the games without Knight's support, and even with Knight's generosity, it often was a scramble and a struggle.

Part of this is technical: finding programmers or having one on staff. But reporting for the games is also extremely time consuming because you can't "fudge." So, for example, as we compared electricity savings for Switch, we had to insure they were all in the same units, covered the same period of time, and applied to the same geographical area. We could not use a mix of figures for the city and state, which is something we might do in a story.

If small organizations such as Gotham Gazette are to use games as one of their storytelling techniques, we need to create games with a long shelf life -- our Garbage Game gets many hits two years after its launch -- or ones that can be recycled. We are, for example, going to try to reuse Balance for the next budget cycle, by inserting new numbers. I've gotten some queries from others about how they could adapt this game to their locality.

Conclusion

Are games worth doing? I'd give a qualified yes. One great thing about the web is that it offers journalists so many tools for telling stories: conventional text, interactive databases, audio, video, and so on. Games are another valuable tool.

As the web matures, the key question we should ask ourselves is not, "Should we have an audio slide show or should we make a game?" Rather, we should ask, "How can we best engage and inform our readers about the topic at hand?"

And sometimes the answer will no doubt be, "Yes, let's make a game."

Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.
(PRO)
No Soup for you

Don't be the product, buy the product!

close
YES, I want to SOUP ●UP for ...