Sharing content from competitors

[MNgremlin]

In my mind, though, if you're telling readers "Outlet X had this" and "According to Outlet X," why would they ever want to come to you? You're telling them the other outlet has more information.

Different information, but not necessarily more information.

Why do newspeople expect customers to only get their information from one source? There's also a matter of different perspective. Two writers from two shops can take one thing and use it in completely different contexts. Doesn't make one right and one wrong, just different.

 

[ICanRowCanoe?]

When Adam Rubin covered the Mets for ESPN, he was my absolute favorite Twitter folo. He covered the Mets extensively but also every morning posted a rdp with links to stories from the New York tabs, NJ papers and other outlets. I saw it as serving the readers by giving them stuff that complemented his own coverage.

 

[MNgremlin]

When you're down to one beat reporter at most shops, it becomes increasingly difficult to attend every presser that needs to be attended, be in every necessary scrum, attend every game that needs to be attended, and write every story that needs to be written all within a 40-hour week. And I haven't even gotten to the other parts of the job, like tweeting, following up with sources, following leads, etc. So sure, if your boss lets you work 100 hours a week with overtime, maybe you'd be able to get all that done and be the only source for everything on your beat. But only getting 68 hours a week off the job is probably going to make you burn out fast.

Until then, I'm perfectly fine letting a fellow journalist get his time in the sun. Do we want the entire newspaper industry to succeed, or just the shop we work at?

 

[playthrough]

Is it different when the retweeted link comes from a multinational outlet, as in Double Down's example, rather than a local community paper? I think the "report, don't retweet" mantra comes from a desire not to drive readers to the much larger competitor.

I'm kind of meh on one huge outlet retweeting work from another huge outlet. It's more impressive when they share a great story from a small paper. Those RTs can really make a reporter's day.

 

[Tweener]

I'm kind of meh on one huge outlet retweeting work from another huge outlet. It's more impressive when they share a great story from a small paper. Those RTs can really make a reporter's day.

And when that happens it's rarely in direct conflict with the day-to-day coverage of a specific beat. So, that's usually appropriate.

I've had writers at bigger publications in my surrounding market give me a hat tip, but it's always been on a story that was way off their radar. The conflict comes, I think, when it's a story both are seeking and one beats the other to it. If you then re-tweet rather than doing your own story, well, there's a real problem there. I've seen this happen.

 

[Deskgrunt50]

I love the two posters above me but I disagree on this one. Someone does a nice job, show them a little professional love/courtesy/whatever. Is it really going to hurt your business that badly? I used to do it now and then at The Times (and one of my writers didn't much like it but whatever). Now, we weren't exactly even-strength competitors with the Post (though we held our own in some areas). But now and then I'd tweet something like "our esteemed competitors at the Post did a great job with this piece on (whatever)" and I wouldn't lose a lick of sleep.

I still do it some today. I recently posted a great piece on Facebook by another outlet and my boss was among those who liked it. Tweeted it, too.

Don't do it regularly but doing it periodically isn't a bad thing.

Recognizing and giving a nod to quality work shouldn't be frowned upon. But maybe that's just me.

Totally agree. I love sharing great work. Just can’t be from the No. 1 competitor, really. An old-school policy in a new-media world.

 

[stix]

I love the two posters above me but I disagree on this one. Someone does a nice job, show them a little professional love/courtesy/whatever. Is it really going to hurt your business that badly? I used to do it now and then at The Times (and one of my writers didn't much like it but whatever). Now, we weren't exactly even-strength competitors with the Post (though we held our own in some areas). But now and then I'd tweet something like "our esteemed competitors at the Post did a great job with this piece on (whatever)" and I wouldn't lose a lick of sleep.

I still do it some today. I recently posted a great piece on Facebook by another outlet and my boss was among those who liked it. Tweeted it, too.

Don't do it regularly but doing it periodically isn't a bad thing.

Recognizing and giving a nod to quality work shouldn't be frowned upon. But maybe that's just me.

I agree with this.

Particularly if you're covering high school/small colleges, and maybe the newspaper in the next city has an interesting nugget about a rival team that a local school is playing. They know more about their local players than you do. Nothing wrong with sharing an interesting nugget, with proper credit.

At my shop, we've developed a pretty good relationship with the reporters at the paper in the next county. We help each other out at games, if we're chasing scores, have a question, etc. They're doing the same work we are, it benefits everyone to develop a good working relationship.

 

[stix]

For years, we had one of the local talking heads consistently present our newspaper's breaking news without any attribution to who broke it.

In recent years, he's acquiesced to the point of saying, "According to a local newspaper ..."

What an ass.

God, I hate that ****.

There's a local radio outfit that broadcasts football and basketball games, and they literally read our stuff verbatim on the air. You can hear the paper crinkling, but they never give credit. It drives me nuts, but the guys are such morons, nobody listens to them, except for us for the unintentional comedy they provide.

So I guess I don't lose sleep over it.

One time I was covering a HS football game where the school has built a brand-new stadium and was playing its first game there. A fairly prominent current NFL player was a star at this school and had donated a good chunk of money for the new digs. I direct tweeted him for a quote on the opening of the new stadium to run in a preview story I was doing. He responded immediately, gave me a nice quote.

During a dedication ceremony the next night, the school principal read the tweet over the PA, and the crowd got all fired up. He presented it as a message sent from the player, but he never credited us as the source. That pissed me off. I called the principal the next day and asked him where he got the quote, knowing full well he'd just say, "Someone shared it on Facebook." Which of course he said.

I explained to him that I had done the work to get the quote. Those things don't just float through the air, and while I had no problem with his reading it out loud, I'd appreciated proper credit. I don't think he understood.

 

[MNgremlin]

I explained to him that I had done the work to get the quote. Those things don't just float through the air, and while I had no problem with his reading it out loud, I'd appreciated proper credit. I don't think he understood.

While technically you "did the work," how much of your time did it take to send him that tweet....30 seconds? Maybe a minute if you're a reeeeeally slow typer?

Of course people need to be better about giving proper credit, but the work it took to send a tweet is a battle I probably wouldn't fight. If you drove 100 miles roundtrip to get a quote, sure I can see myself getting upset too.

And really, if the former athlete or someone else posted it on Facebook without attribution, how was he supposed to know where it came from. Do you read every direct tweet sent from everyone you follow in your coverage area? I know I don't. So maybe the principal just didn't know.