Should Newspapers Hattip?
Decatur Metro | April 2, 2009The battlelines between journalists and bloggers have long been drawn with all the old, familiar criticisms.
Journalists pshaw bloggers lack of journalistic cred, while bloggers scoff at journalists meager understanding of the online medium and all that it offers. This furious “why I’m important and you’re not” argument is indicative of any medium in transition. Its a fight for professional survival.
But in my opinion, there’s a much more interesting conflict out there that isn’t getting nearly enough attention.
Newspapers have long gnashed their teeth regarding the frequent blogger action of using “fair use excerpts” from their articles in postings. At their best, these excerpts give bloggers a jumping off point where they take a recent topic discussed in a paper and use it to steer the conversation in another direction, providing a different and often more critical point of view. At their worst, “fair use” is interpreted too liberally, resulting in excerpts that are anything but, leaving the blog reader with little reason to click-over to the actual article.
This issue has long put thoughtful bloggers on the defensive, with each having to personally reconcile this reliance on a disapproving host. My own solution includes cutting out most “fair use excerpts” from my posts and instead I provide general summaries in my own words. Its not a perfect, guilt-free methodology. I acknowledge that if I “over-summarize”, I pose the same risk as the liberal “excerpter” and veer into those dangerous waters where the click-over becomes unnecessary.
But it is on this point that I wish to turn the tables on newspapers and provide a long overdue counterpoint to the “fair use” rage.
…and ask, should newspapers hattip?
While the newspaper industry has no real history of giving print credit to their sources when obtaining leads and tips on stories, when they enter the realm of blogs – where CREDIT (aka hattiping) is KING, do they have a responsibility that they aren’t fulfilling?
On many occasions over the past year, Decatur-related stories that originate on this site – thanks either to my own efforts or to those of my intrepid neighbors – have been picked up by the AJC. They usually flush flesh the story out, get a couple of quotes and move on. No mention of where the story came from or how it ended up on someone’s desk down on Marietta Street. Was there a press release? Did the city call them up and ask if they were available to cover an event? Or did they pull it off a blog?
And IF the story is pulled off a blog, where it originated, does the newspaper have an obligation to give it credit? If not, how is this lack of acknowledgment any less severe than the blogger’s “fair use excerpts?” At a minimum, in an effort at full disclosure, the blogger will usually give credit and a hyperlink when invoking the “fair use excerpt.” The newspaper, on the other hand, provides no transparency when it comes to its life-blood: sources.
Is this a fair trade?
I’m not sure. And I’m not convinced that newspapers are even willing to engage in this discourse yet. But as newspapers continue to move online and more successful hyper-local blogs fill the gap, be prepared for this debate to intensify.
Summed up another way – Will the raucusly free internet destroy the integrity of Journalism (with a capital “J”)? Or will blogs influence newspapers to be more open about their sources?
Latest from Decaturish
“They usually flush the story out, get a couple of quotes and move on.”
Even though you probably meant “flesh” out the story, as written it seems a much more accurate description of the typical AJC treatment. Flush-worthy indeed!
Scott, that’s a bit glib. While the Atlanta Journal-Constitution isn’t the newspaper it was a decade ago (and that’s quite the understatement), I don’t know what to say for you if you’re essentially claiming there’s nothing of value left in the paper each day. Like most metro dailies, it’s still a helluva bargain at 75 cents a pop. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution as it is now is still preferable to no Journal-Constitution at all.
As for Decatur Metro’s post, it’s interesting. I’m unware of newspapers upset with bloggers using their work. Papers, for the most part, are doing everything they can to get hits. And bloggers help that. When I was working in South Carolina as a reporter, I knew some reporters who would send particularly crazy or silly stories they had written to aggregators like fark.com just to see if they could get on the site. Last week, Arianna Huffington of The Huffington Post claimed she gets e-mails constantly from editors and reporters asking her to link their stories on The Post.
Many of those same editors and reporters believe newspapers are devaluing their product by offering it free on the Web. But that’s a much larger issue that’s more difficult to address. Today even, I read an interesting column that claimed newspapers lost the fight when The Associated Press began giving away its content to search engines like Yahoo! and Google in the late ’90s. At that point, newspapers were sort of pushed into doing the same.
So, for now, as newspapers do everything they can to “get hits.” (The AJC does this much to the great frustration of many of its reporters and photographers.) And if blogs can help their stories find new audiences, I think they’re more than happy — for now, that is. If newspapers were to ever bring their content inside and charge for access, blogs, I think, would start seeing tougher times. But there’s disagreement over whether that’s feasible. I think most newspapers would literallly destroy themselves if they tried to do it right now.
As for credit to bloggers, I don’t think it’s always necessary. In fact, I think it’s fine to treat bloggers the same as newspapers treat other newspapers. If a blogger does a story… say a feature on somebody. Let’s say Decatur Metro writes about a guy who invented something. And Decatur Metro found out about it because whoever runs the blog is friends with that guy’s neighbor. An editor at the AJC reads the blog entry in Decatur Metro and assigns a reporter to the story.
Should the AJC credit Decatur Metro?
My argument would be “no.” As long as that reporter went and completely re-reported everything. Now, if Decatur Metro had information the newspaper couldn’t otherwise get, yes, the AJC should definitely attribute that information to the blog. But newspapers cherry pick stories from each other all the time, and credit is rarely given. However, if Decatur Metro got a helluva scoop, that’s a different story. If the blog discovered the mayor had, at one point, a relationship with an underaged girl, that would likely warrant credit. Because when a blog or a newspaper discovers something like that, the discovery is news and so is the source. And everyone else sprints to catch up. I can’t imagine a paper not crediting a blog under those circumstances.
These are general newspaper values, however. It’s a different culture. Less communal.
Ease up there, Cribbster. I made no such claims. My comment refers specifically — as DM does — to how the AJC typically treats local stories picked up from blogs. I’m not implying, much less flat-out making, any blanket condemnation of the paper.
I’m a daily, traditional paper consumer of the AJC as well as a daily reader of Decatur Metro and I can tell you without hesitation that, as it relates to Decatur-specific content, both accuracy and analysis are stronger here. The typical AJC treatment of these stories pales.
The paper has its strengths. As I said, I read it — paid for, btw — every day. But local coverage is not currently one of them, and there ain’t no foul in pointing it out.
I read Decatur Metro everyday. The AJC ….maybe twice a year.
OK, a couple points.
Cribbster, I think you make a valid point about the “different cultures.” And that’s part of my argument. You’re response seems to take for granted that the newspaper model should dominate over the blog model going forward. I would argue that it is possible that the blog model could influence newspapers in the future…especially if hyper-locals begin to take off (something I’m still not sure will happen. But that’s another post.)
But even if we stick with the newspaper model, I would argue that the AJC still has a bit of blood on its hands. There are many examples of stories pull off blogs for the AJC’s use (BTW, notice I don’t mention Creative Loafing here. They are much better about giving credit where due). They range the spectrum from simple author blurbs that result in AJC interviews to much more indepth topics. The two examples that come to mind at the moment are a Decatur restaurant closings article and one on the Crescent Moon Staff walkout.
In both cases, I can’t take all the credit for drudging up the details of each of these stories (readers helped), but I believe the blogs were essential instruments that lead to these stories. Let’s put it this way, without us, no one would have known about them. And we got no credit. So even by the newspaper standard, I think we got a bit stiffed on those and a few others I’m not remembering right now.
On the other less involved stories, I think I”m in general agreement with you. They can use those without credit…though it still gets my goat, since credit is everything when it comes to communal New Media.
In terms of the AJC covering Decatur better than the local blogs, I’ll let others debate that.
Scott and Freak, thanks.
“I’m unware of newspapers upset with bloggers using their work.”
You haven’t been to any of the meetings I’ve been to. It’s a common refrain.
As far as “hat tipping”, when it comes to the AJC, I gave up hope on that a long time ago. Hell, they don’t even credit their print journalism peers on stories previously broken. (Jim Galloway is one notable exception)
Just another reason I find any previous sympathy for the AJC fading away.
On the credit question, How do you know you published
anything first and should get credit? Since there are millions
of blogs and God knows how many social networking
sites, what make you sure those items weren’t reported
there long before here?
And, a couple of big differences between the blogs and other media–
1. Blogs can be what is called hyper-local — you can discuss and report a restaurant closing, a stop sign down, a traffic light out, a house break in — all things that are important to those close by but have no resonance beyond that very close group. Larger media won’t be interested in those things except as a trend because they are trying to reach a broad market.
2. Blogs cost money. A lot of people spend a lot of time but no
one has figured out how to make blogs profitable. That’s why many come and go. People simply can’t keep them up for ever for free.
Media is designed to make money (hence the attempt at a broad appeal base), although
it’s falling short of that right now, clearly.
“Media is designed to make money”
Maybe some, but certainly not all. Some is designed to bring like-minded communities together or as an organizational tool. Media in China is designed to foster allegiance through government sponsored messaging. A century ago, much media was designed to empower workers being exploited in the early days of the Industrial Revolution. Media in the middle ages was designed to propagate Christianity. Two hundred years ago to foster independence.
Which is all to say, never get too comfortable with the current model. Time is one evil beyotch.
Hack, there may be millions of blogs, but few cover Decatur regularly. In terms of social networking, that’s more of an issue today than it was even last year. But my examples were AJC articles written in response to conversations that were had here and no where else. No question about it. For example, the Crescent Moon staff thanked me for the forum to air their grievances. Can I be absolutely sure without the AJC admitting it? No. But its happened far too often to be pure coincidence.
And just to be clear…there are many instances where I may report things before the AJC, but deserve NO credit, since the story is quite available for anyone to pick up…I just have a quicker turn around.
I don’t think the posting said all media. Nor did it say all
media since the dawn of time. Blanket statements
are rarely true.
Here’s the point, whatever the form of media, someone
has to pay for it. And, it’s a little much to expect folks to spend
hours every day for years and years entering info, updating
websites, searching out info, etc and doing it all for free.
Eventually, someone’s got to figure out how to make money or it will go away.
IMHO: As a matter of courtesy and community support, yes, newspapers should hattip local bloggers. As a matter of professional ethics, they are under no obligation unless quoting directly or sole-sourcing the information from the blog. That is one way you can tell if your newspaper is really community-focused … AJC is not and couldn’t care less if it offends local bloggers.
Perhaps I was a bit too eager to jump on your comments. I have a tendency to write more severely than I am for some reason. I agree with you on one thing: If you want to know what’s going on in Decatur, the blogs are a very good resource, surprisingly good, I’ve found. You’re absolutely right: The AJC is not committed nearly enough to intensely local coverage — much to its own peril. However, when the AJC does come in and actually write about something in Decatur, I do think you’re more likely to find a more well-rounded, objective and thorough story than what you’ll find on local blogs.
And that isn’t a necessarily a criticism of the blogs. As it stands, blogs are less governed, more flexible and less restrained, and there are very big benefits to that.
I’m a very big supporter of newspapers and blogs. I think they can compliment each other brilliantly. On any given day, if I want a quick snapshot of the City of Decatur on that particular day or that week, Decatur Metro and inDECATUR, together, provide me with a pretty assured picture. But if something serious were to ever go down in Decatur, the AJC would likely own that story, and I don’t think blogs are capable — yet — of doing the heavy lifting to match them. That could change in the future. More and more blogs each day are making enough money to pay writers. Perhaps that’s in the cards for the future. Quite honestly, even one well-trained, self-employed blogger — with no other obligations — could drastically affect media coverage in a city like Decatur.
I don’t want you to get the impression that I’m saying the AJC should reign supreme or anything like that. In fact, for Decatur residents, I think Decatur Metro and inDECATUR are far more useful when trying to grasp what’s going on in Decatur. Without a doubt you guys are killing it in that respect. I read both blogs every morning. You guys are connected to the community in ways the AJC never will be.
But, as you said, with regard to “credit,” newspapers tend to reserve it for extreme circumstances, usually when something has been reported they can’t confirm on their own.