1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

I done been violated, I think

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by slappy4428, Dec 19, 2008.

  1. slappy4428

    slappy4428 Active Member

    Other stories on this site say "from combined reports"; this says it's their own, including the quote.
    Since this award has been presented for more than 25 years by the state's sports writers and is the only one of its kind in the state, am not too worried about the validation. Nor am I concerned about attribution to me.
    Once again, and I'll slow it down for the visually impared.
    I think that the site's passing off work as its own, including quotes, at an event it didn't attend is bullshit. Another person shot photos for this site from the state finals; his two agreed-to requests were getting paid and credit for the photos. Can't speak to getting paid yet, but the photos say "footballblab.com" without his credit.
     
  2. buckweaver

    buckweaver Active Member

    As long as you list that you did obtain information from that source, I think it's fair game. While I think it's very, very important to document your work for historical nonfiction, it bogs down the book if you cite every source as you write it.
     
  3. txsportsscribe

    txsportsscribe Active Member

    why on earth would you want to write about the 63 crabtree bowl? that was such a snoozefest.
     
  4. accguy

    accguy Member

    Slappy,

    It seems as if you're trying play both sides of the equation on this one. You're being a PR person and a reporter.

    I agree with the above poster who said you should be happy that the picked up the story and didn't screw anything up. That's generally a good thing for your organization.
     
  5. I'm not visually impared. Or impaired. I get the picture. You want to exclude the .com. The .com in response is saying, "F--- Slappy, he didn't send us the release, but we can get it from his rag's Web site."

    As for the difference between "Staff Reports" and "From Combined Reports," that's too fine a hair for me to split.

    Want to tweak them? Call them and say innocently, "Oh, I didn't think you'd be interested in a newspaper association award. Would you like to buy a ticket and attend next year?"
     
  6. slappy4428

    slappy4428 Active Member

    I see you're point, but don't agree.
    The website, which has begged for free content all year, took a press release it wasn't sent from an event it didn't cover and passed it off as its own. Not wanting publicity for the event wasn't the issue.
    The footballblab.com staff didn't report on it because it wasn't there. The attribution is dishonest.
     
  7. accguy

    accguy Member

    The thing about a press release is that it is a press release, meaning it is available to anyone and everyone. That's what a press release is. Once you put out a press release you've given up control of the message/story.

    Back before every school/team posted releases on their website, there were times when I had the beat writer from another school in the conference fax me a release that their school put out. Would that have been wrong in your eyes?

    And my paper often takes releases from a college's SID office, runs them and calls them staff reports.
     
  8. SoCalScribe

    SoCalScribe Member

    As far as I'm concerned, any press release is fair game no matter who finds it and how. The point of PR is to get a message out in as many channels as possible. You can't distribute a press release and then get pissed that someone used it even if they weren't on your e-mail list. Did your PR say "only for selected papers X, Y and Z?" I doubt it...therefore, who can complain that A, B and C also picked up on it? Unexpected circulation is a wet dream in the PR world.

    Yes, it's mild bullshit to use the quotes from the paper to augment the PR sent out by the paper's employee, but when you send out a press release -- which by definition is begging for media outlets to repurpose it -- you have precious few rights. If it's a serious problem for you personally, either don't send out PR next time or get someone else to do it.
     
  9. Stitch

    Stitch Active Member

    I'm thinking the member organizations who ran your release are lazy for not doing your work or am I reading too much into why you don't like the .com running your stuff. What you're doing is not right in my book. You're trying to get publicity for something that you cover. Obvious conflict. And newspapers do it all the time.
     
  10. forever_town

    forever_town Well-Known Member

    It seems a bit of much ado about nothing.

    When I did a story a few weeks back about a mayor seeking answers after his house got busted into by a SWAT team, I saw the competitor paper do a similar one a few weeks later. Written differently at first glance, but still about the same thing.

    It was too different for me to call and say "yo ... HOLD UP!"
     
  11. slappy4428

    slappy4428 Active Member

    Yeah, too much there.
    The release was sent to the member papers who were not in attendance; since we had already announced 14 minor awards two weeks earlier, the only mystery was Mr. Football. Realistically, it was down to one of three candidates and their papers were there.

    Not really a conflict on my part; I was the point guy all season for the football stuff (poll, players of the week and like) for the state sportswriters association. And the state sportswriters association was the organization.
    There were two things sent out last night; A release with no quotes right after the announcement and a story with quotes for the member papers who wanted the story and were unable to attend. The release AS I HAVE SAID BEFORE had no quotes. None. Zero. Nada.
    Whether or not it ran in any other paper in the state didn't matter to me (some did, most used AP which ran its own story; My point was this .com took the story it was not sent, used quotes it didn't have access to and passed it off as if it were there. And it pissed me off because the .com decided to use free content it wasn't entitled to.
     
  12. jfs1000

    jfs1000 Member

    If you are writing a release it immediately becomes open information. Unless you embargoed the release for a select few, if it is out there it is fair game.

    As long as your quotes were on a distributed release I don't think you have a leg to stand on.

    BTW, why wouldn't you be thrilled to have them use your release?
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page