firefly212: If they had talked to the guy beforehand, I bet they could have bought the story for fifty bucks and an accurate attribution.

If you had read TFA, you wouldn't have to bet anything.

I am old and I was taught I can steal things now.

That is a great defense.

Benjimin_Dover: micuu: Stupid - ed missed a chance originally to give the story more substance by saying local man got information with his investigation.......

Who is Ed?

'Ed' is journalistic shorthand for 'editor'. Editors were once common, roaming the fields of most corporate textscapes, cleaning up errors and making things nice. Their numbers have rapidly declined in recent years and they are now endangered.

spentmiles: How is this stealing? The original paper hard copy of the article is probably sitting safely on the blogger's desk. The editor reproduced a digital facsimile leaving the original untouched. I do not understand these so called artists who are driven by tremendous advertising incomes instead of the love for their art. I hope the editor sues the blogger into financial oblivion or at least prints an expose on how the guy is an unconfirmed but obvious pedophile.

Landlords don't accept "love of their art" as payment. It's hard to fill up a gas tank with "love of your art".

The editor and his wife knew damn well what they did. He got in the guy's face until he realized there was a camera. The wife threw out "small-town newspaper" to guilt the blogger, the editor used the "back in my day when ice cream was a nickel" routine. They knew. They clearly knew they were wrong and tried to blame the blogger. The editor was making up some malarkey about states that a grade-school newspaper wouldn't even try. A simple apology would have probably sent the blogger home, instead the editor chose the douchebag route.

As for "these so-called artists", are you aware that the blogger and the editor do the exact same thing? There were two journalists there. You don't seem to have a problem with one making a living. They used the same "art", except one wrote his and the other stole it.

/ You're a Republican, aren't ya? :-)

hippyneil: I'd love to know what the editor was going to say when he squares up to the writer, snapping the letter with that "oh, yeah" look on face just before the old lady (presumably Mrs Editor) mentions the camera. You can see he's not happy about that (around 1:30 - 1:40).

But, yeah, a call to ask "can we print this?" wouldn't have hurt.
I suspect most investigative bloggers would like their articles printed - with proper attribution, of course.

This is why you don't bring your own camera. Instead, go for maximum protection and embarrassment, and call the local TV hit squad. There's nothing TV news likes more than humiliating the locally competing newspaper. And they've got professional certs and insurance.

Better yet, try to get the moral high ground. Go through channels first, with a series of first polite and deferential then increasingly earnest emails. Maybe even a paper letter or two, if you're feeling particularly tweedy. When that fails, have the local TV guys tape you making a speakerphone call to try to 'clear it up'. Then -- and only then -- call in the actual (and probably inevitable) hit. TV cameras invade newspaper offices, editor humiliated on the evening news, all that. But taking the time to reach that point through calculated escalation -- at every point giving the perpetrators a way out, and documenting their refusal -- will bring maximum ownage. Embarrassment is bad, but absolutely nothing is more devastating than being condemned in the court of public opinion.

good for him for keeping his cool. i hope someone spends some time checking to see how many other stories that paper prints are stolen from blogs. this is surely not an isolated incident.

the old guy was clearly ready to fight, and the "where you from?" routine was hysterical. but my favourite part was when he's writing the cheque and she's blabbering on about where she used to work as if anyone gives a fark. the old guy must have been steaming.

bonus hilarity when the old couple are trying to figure out who he is:

"he's from the internet" *pointing up and towards the back of the shop*

I know that he thinks he made a point, but honestly, the web is considered 'public domain' and he should be happy they just didn't 'lift' the whole article and put someone else's name on it! It happens a lot, clearly more than he is aware of, especially on college campuses, and the workplace. If he took offense and is unhappy, the newspaper is sorry, but he, as a professional should know that the article they used written by him was in very bad need of editing, and is much better now than was originally. Now it will work well for his portfolio. For that reason, they have a bit of a difficult time with his requests for monetary gain, albeit for such a fine (and very wealthy!) institution. They put some time into rewrites, he should compensate them!

In Liberty,

Duane Lester

Freeper-like typing detected.

didn't the exact same thing happen with a New England cooking magazine lifting someone's recipes recently? I believe the outcome was that the internet drove them out of business.

Twitter and facebook blew up? Awesome, I hope they won't be back.

BiffDangler: So the editor got 500 bucks for violating his own copywrite, or the blogger got 500 bucks for violating the editors copywrite?
Your headline doesn't make sense.

Neither does your spelling.

Actually, headline was fine. Your reading comprehension is also poor.

New meme!!!

BiffDangler: So the editor got 500 bucks for violating his own copywrite, or the blogger got 500 bucks for violating the editors copywrite?

Your headline doesn't make sense.

You know an intelligent person would have read the article and watched the video.

I still haven't gotten past the part where the geezer sidles up to him menacingly as if he's going to deck him or trying to give him that impression.

WTF? How do you get THAT aggressive? Somebody comes in talking to you about something in a completely calm and polite manner and has barely said anything at all, and within less than 45 seconds you're easing into his personal space and bowing up on him?

What the fark is wrong with that guy?

And I don't think it was an accident that the lady pointed out the camera just then... I'm guessing old Bob has some well known anger management issues.

This is why "respect your elders" is complete horseshiat. Getting wrinkly and gray doesn't make some swaggering entitled prick worthy of respect.

Oooh, the slow walk, the stare, gramps was ready to go nuclear on his ass, until granny mentioned the camera... too bad she noticed on time.

Jerry Maguire: Hello ... <-Had me here.

december: didn't the exact same thing happen with a New England cooking magazine lifting someone's recipes recently? I believe the outcome was that the internet drove them out of business.

Yep. The person who got plagiarized is a friend of mine, in fact. And for the record, the magazine wasn't actually a "them"; it was one loser named Judith Griggs, who (the internet discovered) made her entire living plagiarizing recipes. Some of her other plagiarism sources included Martha Stewart and Paula Deen, so she's lucky she got off lightly.

My friend, BTW, never lifted a finger beyond initially complaining to Griggs, and then complaining about Grigg's reaction on her own blog. The internet did the scum-scrubbing.

Was it not Jesus who said, "Karma's a biatch"?

donh: MycroftHolmes: I know that he thinks he made a point, but honestly, the web is considered 'public domain' and he should be happy they just didn't 'lift' the whole article and put someone else's name on it! It happens a lot, clearly more than he is aware of, especially on college campuses, and the workplace. If he took offense and is unhappy, the newspaper is sorry, but he, as a professional should know that the article they used written by him was in very bad need of editing, and is much better now than was originally. Now it will work well for his portfolio. For that reason, they have a bit of a difficult time with his requests for monetary gain, albeit for such a fine (and very wealthy!) institution. They put some time into rewrites, he should compensate them!
2/10


He's quoting Griggs, not trolling.

rnatalie: And it's copyRIGHT, gosh darn it! As in The term refers to the RIGHT to copy. Copywriting is what the bozo at the observer didn't engage in do.

/copyediting

donh: MycroftHolmes: I know that he thinks he made a point, but honestly, the web is considered 'public domain' and he should be happy they just didn't 'lift' the whole article and put someone else's name on it! It happens a lot, clearly more than he is aware of, especially on college campuses, and the workplace. If he took offense and is unhappy, the newspaper is sorry, but he, as a professional should know that the article they used written by him was in very bad need of editing, and is much better now than was originally. Now it will work well for his portfolio. For that reason, they have a bit of a difficult time with his requests for monetary gain, albeit for such a fine (and very wealthy!) institution. They put some time into rewrites, he should compensate them!

2/10

More like 10/10

Bomb Head Mohammed: but, you know, keep doing the copyright doublestep that all hipster internets posters are required to do as part of their group acceptance dance.

your particular step is called the "if only", with variants such as "if only artists sold songs for a reasonable price, like, 99c then we wouldnt have to use napster" followed soon by "99c is a ripoff for what.. for air? for bits?" We've seen "if only" in how many forms over the last decade or so?

I see; because some people pirate music, that means it's okay for news media to plagiarize websites.

That's some mighty fine fallacious logic there.

This thread is funny.

sotua: Oooh, the slow walk, the stare, gramps was ready to go nuclear on his ass, until granny mentioned the camera... too bad she noticed on time.

I loved how it sunk in what she was saying and he says "Oh."

hippyneil: I'd love to know what the editor was going to say when he squares up to the writer, snapping the letter with that "oh, yeah" look on face just before the old lady (presumably Mrs Editor) mentions the camera. You can see he's not happy about that (around 1:30 - 1:40).


This. Just when it was getting interesting.

technicolor-misfit: I still haven't gotten past the part where the geezer sidles up to him menacingly as if he's going to deck him or trying to give him that impression.

WTF? How do you get THAT aggressive? Somebody comes in talking to you about something in a completely calm and polite manner and has barely said anything at all, and within less than 45 seconds you're easing into his personal space and bowing up on him?

What the fark is wrong with that guy?

And I don't think it was an accident that the lady pointed out the camera just then... I'm guessing old Bob has some well known anger management issues.

This is why "respect your elders" is complete horseshiat. Getting wrinkly and gray doesn't make some swaggering entitled prick worthy of respect.

Sylvia_Bandersnatch: hippyneil: I'd love to know what the editor was going to say when he squares up to the writer, snapping the letter with that "oh, yeah" look on face just before the old lady (presumably Mrs Editor) mentions the camera. You can see he's not happy about that (around 1:30 - 1:40).

But, yeah, a call to ask "can we print this?" wouldn't have hurt.
I suspect most investigative bloggers would like their articles printed - with proper attribution, of course.

This is why you don't bring your own camera. Instead, go for maximum protection and embarrassment, and call the local TV hit squad. There's nothing TV news likes more than humiliating the locally competing newspaper. And they've got professional certs and insurance.

Better yet, try to get the moral high ground. Go through channels first, with a series of first polite and deferential then increasingly earnest emails. Maybe even a paper letter or two, if you're feeling particularly tweedy. When that fails, have the local TV guys tape you making a speakerphone call to try to 'clear it up'. Then -- and only then -- call in the actual (and probably inevitable) hit. TV cameras invade newspaper offices, editor humiliated on the evening news, all that. But taking the time to reach that point through calculated escalation -- at every point giving the perpetrators a way out, and documenting their refusal -- will bring maximum ownage. Embarrassment is bad, but absolutely nothing is more devastating than being condemned in the court of public opinion.

You have an interesting mind. And I like the way it thinks. As for the court of public opinion, we have all seen what that can do in the case of Mr Zimmerman recently. Public opinion can get to be worse than a judicial court of law at times.

"riverrun, past Eve and Adam's, from swerve of shore to bend of bay, brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs..."

Shanned connatering here.

I suspect the "BS" memo line on the check will make it difficult to claim as a business expense.

theMightyRegeya: I see; because some people pirate music, that means it's okay for news media to plagiarize websites.

That's some mighty fine fallacious logic there.

No.. see, pirating music is cool because you're ripping off the man _{and your "favorite band" that you a re totally a fan of unless they like, get mainstream,} but they can sell T-Shirts and sh*t and ripping off bloggers is WRONG, man and um, like pirating software isn't cool dude, sort of, but like, you can't pirate games, anyway, I mean, not well and um, movie studios are already filthy rich so, like movies are fine to get 2 teh torintz. Werd.

She kept telling Bob to call Gene.

Bob really should have called Gene.