My buddy Andrew Fine (yes, he's a realtor, but a helpful one) posted a story on his blog on March 1st about a Chuck E. Cheese in Harlem having a sign at the front door prohibiting gang attire.The NY Post ran a story today about the same thing without crediting Andrew or his blog as a source and acted as though they got the scoop.
This is nothing new, folks.
The old guard feels very threatened by the popularity of blogs.
They've done the same thing to Miss Heather many times.
Apparently, they don't think it's either appropriate or necessary to give credit where credit is due. Now if bloggers saw something in the Post and then repeatedly reported the Post's exclusives as if they discovered them, I'm sure there would be a scathing editorial in the Post or perhaps a Peyser piece about how wrong this is.
You'd think a billionaire like Rupert Murdoch would be able to employ enough talented people to get enough original material to fill his rag on a daily basis.
Instead they have employed Queens Tribune alumni to recycle bloggers' stories.
8 comments:
Up with A Fine! Down with the NY Post!
It's infuriating when they do this, and they seem to get just about everybody. They - and the local chains they own - have lifted stories from Sheepshead Bites countless times.
On the one hand, you want to say "Enough is enough."
On the other hand, you sort of feel bad, like the feeling you get when a mentally handicapped nephew keeps fondling himself and peeing his pants.
Do we yell at them, or pat 'em on the back and murmer, "Maybe next time, champ. Maybe next time."
Ned, you crack me up! It is infuriating and the more I read and the more bloggers I hear from, the more I can't believe how darned common this practice is!
Crappy- thanks to you and Miss Heather for your support. The more this practice is exposed, the more we can shame these publications, the more likely a change can be reality.
Crappy- Story just linked by Gawker: http://gawker.com/5486789/will-christiane-amanpour-wear-a-safari-vest-when-she-interviews-joe-biden
What gets me is why they didn't interview you for the story since you were the one who noticed it and felt it was wrong. I mean they still could have written about it but included you and it would have been acceptable. Instead they just factored you out completely.
That would have worked for me! Still haven't had a response from The Post.
Now if bloggers saw something in the Post and then repeatedly reported the Post's exclusives as if they discovered them, I'm sure there would be a scathing editorial in the Post or perhaps a Peyser piece about how wrong this is.
Or, worse yet, threaten the blog's author with a lawsuit for reprinting copyrighted material without their authorization.
It is unfortunate, but there's nothing illegal about this.
Post a Comment