CapitolFax.com - Latest Comments in Unsolicited advice

Re: Unsolicited advice

Lou Grant — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 13:48:33 -0000

This is a mea culpa for the following statement in my comments above: "Over the past two months, while Iâ€™ve aggregated blogs on the Fifth Congressional District race, Iâ€™ve found several instances of the Huffington Post offering a story that is credited to the â€œHuffington Post Editorsâ€ but links to another site. They seem to have an affinity for lifting stories from the Chicago Sun-Times in particular.

(If you want to challenge me on this, Iâ€™ll site the stories. I used a strikethrough to note these to readers)."

In reviewing the entries, Google News attributes the articles to the Huffington Post News Editors, but the Huffington Post itself attributes that news to the publication and sometimes even to the writer. So, this is a shame on Google situation, not a shame on ChuffPo situation.

I apologize for the error. (The complete list of articles that GOOGLE News attributed to ChuffPo is listed in my blog entry here: http://www.chitowndailynews...

Re: Unsolicited advice

Anonymous — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 00:22:23 -0000

lol. This is definitely turning into a "theme" week!

TARP takers want to pay loans back because they "just" realized that taking the $$ was an invitation to have the Government step in and take over.

Sounds like the AP "suddenly" feel that the "ease of sharing information FREELY across the globe via the internet" was a "gotcha" invitation for others to take their stories without--what they consider--"appropriate compensation".

Workers in more countries than just the US are starting to protest that THEIR money and jobs are now beginning to float "overseas" after supporting and taking up the invitation to "share the wealth".

Here's some unsolicited age-old advice: if a Vampire shows up on your doorstep someday asking for an invitation to come in, say no...and slam the door shut! If you let him, assume he's going to outstay his welcome.

Re: Unsolicited advice

47th Ward — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 00:04:52 -0000

Well said AC.

Re: Unsolicited advice

Lou Grant — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 23:34:28 -0000

Rich,
If I understand the issue, the AP started this action due to the recent movement by Google to monetize its news aggregator. In other words, Google is now selling ads based on key words appearing in its aggregate. I think it is important for readers to understand that any site can easily insert code that alerts Google (and others) that the content may not be aggregated or archived. The news sites want Google to find and offer their pages to the public as it pushes traffic. But, they want to gain the benefits of creating the content.

Some of the older court cases involving Google revolved around the use of archived copies of web sites that Google would preserve and deliver to users. Some of that archived material appeared in general Google searches, for example with a general search of Google you would sometimes find news stories. Because those pages were monetized and because copies of the entire original page were also delivered, not the current copy of the page, the news sites said Google could be held liable for violating Fair Use.

So, first of all, the AP is concerned that Google is attempting to gain revenue from its aggregate. And, I'm guessing about this part, the method being used is a violation of Fair Use.

The second issue is the reproduction of whole articles or photos by web sites without compensation and in many cases without proper credit. The Chicago Huffington Post was caught doing this by the Chicago Reader, as noted in the comments. Over the past two months, while I've aggregated blogs on the Fifth Congressional District race, I've found several instances of the Huffington Post offering a story that is credited to the â€œHuffington Post Editorsâ€ but links to another site. They seem to have an affinity for lifting stories from the Chicago Sun-Times in particular.

(If you want to challenge me on this, I'll site the stories. I used a strikethrough to note these to readers).

The HuffPo, because it is visible and because it is held up by some people as a future for journalism is a worthy target. The CHuffPo will claim that it is driving traffic. However, sometimes it is not. The original story or blog is hidden in the SEO standings. CHuffPo is enjoying the improved SEO position, the revenue from the monetized aggregate and isn't paying the property owner for the use of their creation.

It is no wonder the HuffPo is valued at more than $50 million and the Sun-Times Group at less than $4 million.

Google, Yahoo, Drudge and sites like HuffPo are very willing to disregard the rights of property owners in return for greater profits. While the AP may be pressing for a return to the past, the Huffington Post model is highly destructive to property rights. We cannot rollback to the past. But the future of these industries (music, media and writing) is bleak.

I welcome the AP action if it clarifies property rights and allows for technical innovation.

Re: Unsolicited advice

Angry Chicagoan — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 21:07:57 -0000

There are small local weekly and twice-weekly newspapers out there that are doing just fine. A good recipe for success is:

1) Cover local news really well and thoroughly
2) Don't give away the entire product for free on the Net, just "tease" with free leading stories
3) Never, ever belong to the AP, unless you really feel you need national/international news
4) Remember your news is your reputation. Don't sully it with bias and vendettas
5) Helps if the owner is hands-on, not an absentee
6) Privately held rules, especially if owner=publisher
7) Provide value for money and good customer service to advertisers; if readership is good enough (see point #1) they'll buy in even if they have political reservations

The interesting thing is that you'll notice Rich pretty much follows all these rules, and he doesn't even have a print edition!

Re: Unsolicited advice

A Citizen — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:05:23 -0000

Not to us Rich, not to us. To us you're special! Now, about that senior citizen subscription discount . . . oh nevermind.

Re: Unsolicited advice

Rich Miller — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 18:02:55 -0000

I wasn't expecting a response. We're just little ol' us.

Re: Unsolicited advice

A Citizen — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:53:58 -0000

Rich, where is the response from AP? Have I missed it somehow or do the arrogant b...... just feel above us flyover folks? I would think a simple "Bite Us" could be offered at the least.

Re: Unsolicited advice

Ghost — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 16:56:24 -0000

VQ, provide a low price subscription edition delivered through kindle on amazon.

Re: Unsolicited advice

ghost — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 16:24:21 -0000

Blogging while talking on the phone do not mix well

Re: Unsolicited advice

Rich Miller — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 16:20:11 -0000

===There are plenty of ways for old media to pick up a few bucks if they would stop complaining and start running a business.===

Exactly.

They need to whine less and innovate more. I've had to explain to potential advertisers how to use the Web. It hasn't been easy, but it was fruitful. They need to train their ad pros and turn them loose and make some money. Or die. Their choice.

Re: Unsolicited advice

Lefty Lefty — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 16:10:47 -0000

Why doesn't the AP sue Craigslist and eBay? Probably just as effective but at least it would target the correct "offender."

I would also point out that the internet is not free by any stretch of the imagination. There are ads everywhere you turn. I pay $50/mo for reasonable surfing speed, and you pay more for faster service. There are plenty of ways for old media to pick up a few bucks if they would stop complaining and start running a business.

Someone insightfully brought up the recording industry earlier. Adapt or die--and what's left of the mainstream music industry is finally adapting.

Re: Unsolicited advice

Squideshi — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 16:05:01 -0000

This article is several years old, but it is a good primer on link law nonetheless.

Re: Unsolicited advice

soccermom — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 16:00:03 -0000

Thanks to cap fax, I read articles in newspapers all across Illinois that I might not otherwise check out. And once I get to those sites, I usually find myself clicking through to find out what else is going on in Springfield, Belleville, Jacksonville, Marion, and other cities in my state. My eyeballs count, even if I'm not likely to buy from local vendors who pay for those ads. I work at a place where we would do just about anything to drive traffic to our site, and here's Rich doing it for free on a daily basis. Rich, feel free to link to us any time!

Re: Unsolicited advice

Vote Quimby! — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:54:58 -0000

Ghost--I can buy that.

Re: Unsolicited advice

Amy — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:32:59 -0000

wait, Huff Po is a member of AP? are they into this stupidity from the AP? because HuffPo is a VERY biased site, and they
simply don't know the term moderation, allowing deeply sexist things all the time in the comments. and, they have invaded
Chicago.

Re: Unsolicited advice

Amy — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:29:49 -0000

SMOKIN' retort to the AP! you go Rich!

Re: Unsolicited advice

phocion — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:28:18 -0000

I really enjoy Rich's "Unsolicited Advice" columns. Kind of a cross between Bill Maher's "New Rules" and Andy Rooney's grouchy observations.

Re: Unsolicited advice

Rich Miller — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 15:15:20 -0000

Ghost, you're having some serious typing problems today. No worries, just wondering.

Re: Unsolicited advice

Ghost — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:57:29 -0000

VQ, I would argue that for years internet providers were hungry for ways to get traffic so they could generate ad revenue. At the same time internet providers and protals are pushing innovation and ideas to lure people, the newspapers were doggedly plodding away on their laurels instead of looking for innocation or creativity to drive their future.

Re: Unsolicited advice

Vote Quimby! — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:51:00 -0000

True, Rich, but they carved out the stuff people wanted to read and kept their paid ads (except for those wonderfully efficient banners) away from it. Just as newspapers killed the town crier, the internet is doing to them. Now they are trying to change the rules?
Dead-tree editions will only survive where people have to ride (not drive) to work, and in small, localized areas where overhead can be kept down. Not that I am biased, of course--my little newspaper actually has only "bonus" content online, but may eventually offer .pdf-type files for downloads to keep the eyeballs on the ads. Our paid staff of zero has already broken even in its second edition!

Re: Unsolicited advice

Anon — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:49:08 -0000

My apologies for the insanely long URL.

Blast those URI encoded strings..

Re: Unsolicited advice

Rich Miller — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:41:36 -0000

===suddenly giving away your product for free would change your business model?===

Since newspapers almost universally lose money on subscription and newsstand prices, they've been giving it away for free for a very long time.

Re: Unsolicited advice

make it so — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:41:30 -0000

Way to go Rich! Let them know that they are not the sun and the world does not revolve around them!

Re: Unsolicited advice

Vote Quimby! — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:35:18 -0000

Newspapers are desperate and have been growling at AP for years. Everyone has been looking for someone to blame---did it not occur to anyone that suddenly giving away your product for free would change your business model?
It is frightful to see the fracturing of America. When one time the nation only had 3 TV networks to choose from, and everyone read newspapers and actually listend to something besides music on the radio. Now, most people have over 100 cable channels and unlimited websites to educate/entertain themselves...we have lost our common identity, and newspapers will line the coffin.