Whoa, how about that! I just invented a new word – plagiournalism.
Plagiournalism means plagiarism disguised as journalism, and it happens more often then you think. In fact, it never ceases to amaze me how often it happens – to yours truly, no less.
Take my recent yarn on the impossibility of Windows on Power. The interest in that article was quite high, both here and internationally. As you would expect it also caught the eye of competing ‘publishers’, like those behind the Inquirer.
Instead of doing what any respectable media outlet would do if it was interested in a story, follow up with quotes of its own, the Inquirer took it upon itself to rape, pillage, and plunder my story (owned by IDG) for its own benefit. I appreciate the fact that a link to the original was placed at the end of the ‘article’ [I say linked but it simply was a case of ‘more here’] but that doesn’t mean much when the crux of the story was lifted verbatim without any permission. Even the headline is nearly identical.
I can hardly believe someone actually put their name on it. If you’re going to be a plagiournalist, at the very least hide your shame (and incompetence).
What makes the whole thing really weird is that the Inquirer specifically states that reproduction of its content is strictly prohibited without written permission. Is there no end to how the mind boggles? Do media wannabes really expect to live by a “we can steal from you but don’t even think about stealing from us†creed? Ahhh… the foul stench of hypocrisy.
Appalled? I am. But I can’t say I’m really surprised. This has happened far too many times in the past that I’ve lost count. The actual number is left as an exercise for the reader.
I could go on for days on this topic, but I’ll throw it open instead. What are your thoughts on plagiournalism – fair game or foppery?
Rodney
I’m hearing you Rodney. It’s not right, but if you were to spend your life chasing up people to do something about it (which they generally aren’t going to agree to anyway), you’d spend half your life doing it. I remember it used to happen a lot when I was writing on PC Week for some reason, but it happened during other postings I had, too. For better or worse it’s become “an Internet thing”. By posting the link to the original story, people think they’re home & hosed.
Thanks for siding with me Rob :-).
I’ll never lose sleep over such activities but it would be interesting to witness the legal outcome for one of these ‘copyright-aware’ leeches after being dragged to court by a fed up publisher.
Now to add you to my blogroll…
Rodney
Oh, yeah, sorry to hear the same happened to you 🙁
R
Yeah, call it an occupational hazard. Still, even in spite of stuff like that and with some slightly rose tinted glasses, being a journo was some of the happiest days of my life. Thanks for adding me to your blogroll… I don’t tend to write about the PR game, and I seldom even talk about IT journalism before that… but I’m sure something in there will appeal 🙂
If you’re really worried about this you might also like to add (c) to your blog! Or perhaps even use Creative Commons http://creativecommons.org/
Hi James,
I already have. I may decide to release some content under cc in the future.
Rodney
I’d suggest you might want to add it to your footer or something on everypage…
Sorry Rod…not really feedback re your point…only to ask is that James Dellow of EY or ex EY as the case may be
Yes, Mark, there aren’t that many James Dellows in the world, and I’m the one who is ex E&Y (since last year).
Hi James…obviously still in the knowledge world…good to hear from you
cheers…Mark
Actually Rod, I did have some feedback re this topic. There are some jurno’s who appear not to give a toss about plagiournalism.
Just saw this on the front page of Graeme Philipsons’ site – “I am firmly on record as saying that I regard the concepts of copyright and intellectual property to be dead, or at best anachronistic, in the digital age. I’m not a hypocrite, so you can rip off anything you want from this site and use it for any purpose not harmful to me, though appropriate attribution would be nice.”
nuff said
cheers
Interesting point Mark.
I wonder if Fairfax, which pays for Graeme’s words, shares his sentiment.
Rodney
Rod,
This is a really interesting issue but I don’t agree with you in this case. I think The Inquirer did most things by the book – ie it only took a subset of your story, it credited it properly, and then provided a link. It’s common practise and its not just an internet thing, wire services will commonly write stories based solely on stories broken by the newspapers..
When you do it on the Net, at least you are providing an opportunity to drive traffic back to the original site and therefore compensating that publication for making use of their original material. Thats why most sites love to have their stuff picked up by sites like slashdot.org…
It would be nice to see the AJA or Media Alliance put together a code of conduct on this… Whats acceptable – to “borrow” two pars, 20 per cent of a story, none. It’s a debate the media industry really should have. What is proper etiquette to linking, etc..
Phil,
I understand your point but I think rags like The Inquirer go too far by basically copying the key quotes and theme of an article while having the nerve to put a copyright notice on all its ‘content’.
Sure it links to the original but the thunder has well and truly been stolen once a visitor has read the fake version.
In the case of blogs or news feeds like Slashdot or Google News, only an introductory sentence or two is displayed on the page and a link directly accompanies the text. So it’s not like such sites are out to steal the news, just aggregate it. That works well for them and the publisher of the original.
Rod