| Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Media Issues > Topic: using blogs/bbs for quotes |
Topic: using blogs/bbs for quotes
| Author | Message |
| Guiseppina S. | Posted – 4/15/2008 2:46:43 PM | show profile One of my writers has gotten into the habit of posting or requesting information about her articles in bbs forums and on blogs. I've seen it done here, so I never really questioned it. Those tend to be followed up with a phone call or an email. But how kosher is that? Is it cool to pull quotes or suggestions from an internet site when the posters are not informed that their information could be used. Furthermore, I consider it slightly suspect because although there is a real person behind the screen name, that person may not have a credible point. The topics are not terribly controversial and do not require anonymity to get support. I have a feeling that my writer is (no comments please) just being lazy. The magazine is mostly geared toward a 20s crowd of urban professionals, or so we hope they are professionals. :) Are there policies governing this? |
| dribbledrive1 | Posted – 4/15/2008 3:24:23 PM | show profile Legally, it's perfectly to quote from an online forum or blog. Posting on the Internet is no different than publishing something in the newspapers -- it's open to fair use. You, however, can set up whatever policies for your pub you want. If you don't want your writers to quote anonymous people from blogs, then tell them they can't. |
| Louisewasnothalfbad | Posted – 4/15/2008 3:27:52 PM | show profile If your writer is asking for comments and following up with a phone call, how can those people NOT know they'll be quoted? How else is she supposed to get a wide spectrum of views? Who cares how "credible" the point is--is an online POV less credible than one soliticed by standing around a mall and asking passers-by? Just calling her Facebook friends isn't very different. |
| Guiseppina S. | Posted – 4/15/2008 4:20:14 PM | show profile Louise, She isn't following up with an email or a phone call, that's the problem. That's just how I've seen it done here. That would be the acceptable route and it will more than likely become the policy that all sources must have a real name other than "Smartypants356." The more I grapple with it, the more I think it's cool to do when the story doesn't require any kind of brain power and reports on trend. For harder-hitting pieces that require an expert opinion is where I have the trouble with throwing it out on a chat board to anyone posing as Dr. so-and-so. Thanks for the info! |
| can't say | Posted – 4/16/2008 11:07:20 AM | show profile You should just insist that the writer give you the person's full name, along with age and occupation, location, whatever. I don't see how your lazy writer can get all that info without contacting the source directly, right? |
| Guiseppina S. | Posted – 4/16/2008 12:34:19 PM | show profile That's really the point of my question. Other urban professional magazines will either make up a name or give a location with initials. I'm referring to opinion article where a person may or may not give their real name. However, the internet also opens the magazine up to pov's from all over the country, not just the big cities and the writer's contacts. Therein lies my dilemma. There is a difference when you are talking to someone in person or on the phone. You can at least get a sense of their of their age and whether they are bullshitting you or not. On a blog, there is the potential that a person posting could be 45 or 12, clearly outside my mag's age range. While a 45-year-old may have a valid point, it's not the pov that we are looking for. In the past, we've always stipulated that a quote or a source be accessible. Real name, etc. I suppose my issue is the credibility of the information we are receiving. The articles we publish are hardly rocket science, but I'd still like to present accurate urban culture to my readers and not the opinions of some site scammers. |
| ferdinand | Posted – 4/16/2008 7:32:08 PM | show profile i work with a lot of freelancers and tell them up front that interviews should be in person or on the phone, and that email is only ok for follow-up or if they're contacting someone in australia or whatever. the quotes are better that way, you get more specific information, and as you say, you can tell whether the person sounds credible or like a flake. there's no reason why you can't just lay out a policy like that to the writer you refer to - you don't even have to have any other reason besides "that's what i prefer." |
| snappiness | Posted – 4/17/2008 9:13:36 AM | show profile not kosher As a freelancer I pull a lot of sources from newsgroups and email lists, but I call every single one. I wouldn't use the quote or info unless I called. Fine disguising the identifying features (name, location, etc) in print, but for fact checking I always provide real info to editors. And I disagree with dribbledrive on the "publishing" of posting something on the Internet. I know there are precedents for that, but I pull from newsgroups and email lists also, which can be considered private, so I always check with the source to make sure they're okay with it. |
