Dear WSN Editors,
It’s no secret that you read NYU Local every day, just as we do your publication. And for the hits, we thank you. But something about your visits has been bothering us lately: it seems you’ve been leaving with things that we sought out, claiming them as your own and never acknowledging their source. I’m talking, of course, about our posts.
Last month alone, your pilfered posts four five times, putting out the same stories we had days before you, with nary a link in sight. Though you may be print-based and subsequently confused about the ways of the internet, the fact remains that you also produce an online product. With that fact comes an obligation, at least to some degree, to learn how things work online.
If such a thing were possible, the term “link economy” would induce simultaneous snoring and vomiting. In order to avoid this, I will spare you the web-geek details. All you really need to know is this: “link economy” means you shouldn’t be reporting on printing charges at NYU two days after NYU Local
@Damon Beres
I think everything you said was very wise. However, I don’t think that they need to be cross-linking just for the greater good. I think keeping the two in actual competition is still useful. NY Post and Daily News, to keep using that example, don’t just link to each other’s stories. It’s kinda like saying that McDonald’s menu should say that there’s also a Wendy’s right down the street. Would it benefit the fast-food lover? Would it be convenient for the customer? Yes, but the one point that some people in this forum are missing is that just because you wish things were done a certain way – that doesn’t mean that it should change.
If you have a tumblr, or a blog, and you are taking other people’s photos and posting them as your own, you should put up a “via” link and send traffic back to the creator so that you are not taking traffic away from their creation. Two competing news outlets should not feel the need to show their readers how someone else is also reporting the same stuff. Right?
The examples of the NY Post/Daily News and McDonald’s/Wendy’s doesn’t work for me, because they are money-making juggernauts, and NYU Local and WSN are not. They’re student publications that have absolutely no reason to be at odds with each other.
I think you guys have a point and I feel your frustration, but I’m inclined to say this stuff should be kept private.
@ Nick Divers
First of all, this forum IS open for debate, and there’s no reason Local contributors shouldn’t be able to participate in that debate. The point is to inspire discussion between blogger/commenter etc. It’s also especially important that we clarify when people are lobbing claims that are legitimately factually inaccurate, so that the level of discourse doesn’t sink to fighting over things that just aren’t true.
I understand what you’re saying here, but I guess I just fundamentally disagree re: linking. If Lily discovers there’s no more free printing, that is FINDING the news, which is a huge part of online journalism. If WSN finds it because of us, they should link. It doesn’t matter if they “could” have found out about it through another channel– if we are the primary source that tipped them off, they should at the very least give us a “hat tip.” This is obviously not standard print journalistic practice, and I think a lot of people are trying to compare it to that. We know our traditional print ethics– this is an issue outside of that, and one that we believe is newly important with the rise of online journalism. I guess this idea is just embedded in me from blogging culture; I would never write about a piece I found online without linking to it, even if I also heard about it from one of my friends. Should we stop linking to WSN when we hear about something from them and then do our own reporting on it? That would be easy to do, but it’d be silly to refuse to acknowledge that the other campus news source commented on it first.
It’s strange to me that this became such a giant shitstorm, because that wasn’t the intention AT ALL. What we really wanted was to get WSN’s attention so that people like Sergio can stop posting things like “NYU Local/WSN duel” and we can start to produce content in a much friendlier environment. We also wanted to use this as an example of a greater debate about “the link economy” and online journalism ethics. See this post from Nieman Lab for a similar situation happening outside of NYU.
I completely agree with you that competition can push both publications to produce better content, but we’re never going to get anywhere until WSN acknowledges our existence. Until then, it’s like competing with a ghost.
@Philippe Teston
It’s not just about the hits, it’s about the fact that, though we may have differing philosophies on how to approach reporting the news, we are, on a very fundamental level, trying to do the same thing: deliver things we feel are important into the consciousness of the NYU community. We respect the work that WSN does, which is why when we get a story idea from them, we automatically link–even if we also do additional reporting for it. I think both of our publications have a lot to learn from each other, but we can’t do that until WSN actually admits that we’re a competitor and communicates with us beyond vague tweets. It’s just immature; we’re trying to be transparent and honest here, so that we can move beyond this bullshit ‘duel’ and actually start to find ways that we can learn from each other. We’ve tried to reach out to WSN in other ways, but have been categorically rejected. We felt that, in light of Sergio’s post, it was better to air our grievances, address the issues that have very much been boiling beneath the surface, stimulate a discussion, and then finally move on.
Unfortunately this post may have been a disservice to our readers in the sense that no—nobody beyond WSN or journalism geeks should genuinely give a shit about what we say here. For that, we apologize, and direct you to other, less serious pieces, like this one about adorable pets.
I’m genuinely a bit curious (and excuse me if this has been discussed, I didn’t read every comment here): what, other than the fact that WSN has sometimes run a story about the same thing as NYU Local a couple of days after the fact, leads you to believe that WSN is actually getting any information from your articles?
(I’m not really taking any side here – I do think there should be sweet, sweet journalistic harmony between the two publications, attributions and hyperlinks spilling from teat to gullet like sumptuous love fluids – but I think part of why this has become such an argument is that this “open letter” kind of came out of left field and seems reactionary to an issue that isn’t really all that clear to anyone but the people handling the content that is published on either site.)
@Jessica
Why do you care if WSN recognizes you? I understand why you would want them to, but I don’t understand why you would feel the need to express that or lobby for that publicly on your site. I also don’t think that they need to “acknowledge you” in order for you to feel like you’re not competing with a ghost. That’s silly talk. Their lack of awknowledgment just makes them seem even more outdated and disillusioned. I think it actually works in your favor! The second they start acting like a blog and posting quickly and linking to you and stuff, you might get a small spike in traffic, but there goes the kind of reporting that makes you guys unique. Ha.
And yeah! I do think you should be able to comment on your own paper, I was just referring to Lily stating that the blog writers “won’t be commenting on this post for a while. We’d like to leave it open for discussion by readers.”
I’m happy for Lily’s reporting and her obvious passion about the news. I’m glad shes doing what she loves doing. And I don’t think that she doesn’t deserve credit for finding it first. What I DO think, is that when things are available publicly, you CANNOT prove that WSN stole the news from you. Let’s look at the logistics behind this! Lily found out about the printing AS A STUDENT of NYU, not as an investigative reporter, which also means that, by pure probability, she was not the first person to find out this information. Now, given the WSN has reported on all NYU news since their inception, it’s hard for me to believe that they weren’t also preparing a story at the same time. And even if they weren’t, if they are 4 days behind you, it makes it look even less like they troll your site looking for things to steal. If they are posting articles 15 minutes after yours that offer up NO additional original material, THEN you have reason to talk about linking economys and online journalism ethics. Like, for example, the whole John Mayer/Smoking Gun/TMZ thing:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0827091mayer1.html
THAT is a legitimate linking issue. THAT needs to be publicly stated.
Reasons why:
1. There is a 7 minute difference in the two posts.
2. The post includes investigative data that could not be found at any other public outlet.
So that’s basically what I mean. There is no evidence here that they stole something from you because all of these things they reported on after you was all reported on through other publicly available sources. Though it would be nice for them to acknowledge you reported on it first, it is not at all necessary!
Run your blog well, report on things quickly, keep producing some bangin’ original content, and you may soon have double WSN’s traffic. You seem like you are well on your way, which presents even less reason for you guys to complain about lack of attention from them, right? I’m sure your readers are smart enough to figure out for themselves who is doing a better job of reporting the news.
@ Nick Divers
Okay, I really don’t have the energy to argue with you about this anymore. I guess agree to disagree.
And now, back to producing some bangin’ original content.
This is part of the Duke University Student Guidelines (http://library.duke.edu/research/citing/plagiarism.html and http://library.duke.edu/research/plagiarism/), but I think it applies to this situation as well:
“It is appropriate to think of the university as a vast society of influences, composed of various formal sites of critical discussion, reporting, and debate, both verbal and written. University persons—both scholars and students—gain status and authority by dint of their intellectual involvement in written and verbal exchange [...] Since the university values the public thinking of its faculty and students, it requires that its members formally recognize who has made which sorts of statements in what settings. [...] Not to formally recognize the work and influences of others in your writing is to plagiarize, violating an ethic of mutual regard.”
And later:
“On occasion, students accused of plagiarism have claimed that their plagiarism has occurred without their knowledge or intent.” This is what a large part of the counter-argument to Lily’s post seems to be; it’s not like WSN actually got their ideas from NYU Local, even though they read this blog and saw the story on here first! After all, they did their own research/reporting, so they don’t have to credit back to us, right?
Oops, no, that’s plagiarism. “Since ignorance of convention is not a reasonable defense, it is best to become thoroughly acquainted both with the various ways in which plagiarism is construed, and with the conventions of source attribution and proper documentation. Some students seem to believe that there are different degrees of plagiarism, some not as a bad as others.”
And what is the definition of plagiarism? No, it’s not just copying a paper you found online:
“Plagiarism occurs when a student, with intent to deceive or with reckless disregard for proper scholarly procedures, presents any information, ideas or phrasing of another as if they were his/her own and/or does not give appropriate credit to the original source.”
So. If Joe Obsolete reads a story on NYU Local about free printing in a given computer lab, then makes some phone calls and gets an official university statement about it and writes his own story for the paper he writes for (WSN), he STILL HAS TO GIVE CREDIT TO THE ORIGINAL SOURCE. Nobody “owns” the news, but yes, people “own” the way that news is created. This is why journalism is an industry and not an art.
Comparing a story about NYU transportation to someone yelling about a fire is such a stretch that the analogy pulled a hamstring.
@ Josh
if you can prove they found out about the stories here and only here, then yes, you are right.
My analogy pulled a hamstring? How about your analogy of plagiarism to journalism? Stealing an idea is certainly one thing, reporting on campus happenings is not stealing ideas, dude. It’s called writing for a paper. It’s especially not stealing ideas if they are coming from websites and press releases. You linking to Duke’s (AH, DUKE! Of all schools!) plagiarism policy is way more pretentious than I ever thought this debate could get.
Do you not realize that no one here other than NYU Local is agreeing with you? And other people around the internet are saying how stupid NYU kids are? I don’t care how self-righteous you are, your determination to feel like you are right is making you look quite silly, and not just in my eyes.
@ Jessica
Yes, I think we should agree to disagree. When I got linked to this article, I was really ready to shake my head at how stupid WSN is and how awesome new media is. I root for you guys, and I actually come to your site. I haven’t been to WSN since I was in school, and even then it was mostly because of links my mother was sending me haha.
I think your “best roof talk ever” tumblr is far more pretentious than any of us could ever hope to be, chief.
@ Josh
haha what? what are you talking about there, brohan?
Your mom goes to college.
(Joke is via Napoleon Dynamite. Buy the movie here: http://www.amazon.com/Napoleon-Dynamite-Jon-Heder/dp/B00005JNBQ)
@Nick Divers- actually, everyone who knows about internet journalism is agreeing with us. Neiman, Harvard’s journalism lab, for example: http://twitter.com/NiemanLab/status/4665524993
@Lily
Ah! Newyorkshitty.com is an AWESOME blog. I found out so much about my old landlords there. It convinced me not to pay my last month’s rent for fear of losing my deposit. (go there and search greenpoint management. pretty shady stuff.)
And no, Lily, I still don’t agree with this, and like Jessica said, let’s just agree to disagree. I am not going to talk in circles and continue to bring up the same points. I could go on and on about how a small Brooklyn blog known for uncovering housing management scandals attracting the attention of a large Manhattan Juggernaut paper is slightly different than two competing NYU blogs who are arguing about who gets to report on releases and emails first, but I’m not going to.
It was obvious from my first comment that you guys love your blog, you want more attention for it, you have no interest in opening up a public discussion about this issue, and that’s just fine. Just call it like it is.
So yeah. See you around I guess.
[...] I wrote, and the feedback I’ve received has actually been, surprisingly, quite positive. And it sparked, in my opinion, a valuable discussion about the issues plaguing NYU Local and WSN. Issues which the [...]
“It was obvious from my first comment that you guys love your blog, you want more attention for it, you have no interest in opening up a public discussion about this issue, and that’s just fine. Just call it like it is.”
No interest in public discussion? 54 comments says you’re wrong.
Sorry, Henry
I should have worded that “letting the public have a discussion.”
[...] that haven’t caught wind of this. A few days back, NYU Local, the upstart publication at NYU, accused the Washington Square News of pilfering their posts without attribution. They found five examples of where NYU Local originally reported the story, only to have Washington [...]
[...] iPhone App Lets New Media Users Track Campus News (Wait A Second…) iPhoneFor all the jibs and jabs we give the WSN staff, they just might have beat us at our own game with their new free iPhone app, [...]