Credit Where It’s Due

I’ve noticed a disturbing trend among a lot of local and national media outlets lately, and it isn’t one that’s improving over time. It’s taken Old Media a while to adapt to the New over the past ten or fifteen years, but they sometimes need a little help moving along.  I hope I can help in doing that by pointing out something that has been extremely irritating to me lately.

That Old Media that I mentioned has evolved lately by becoming increasingly aware of New Media outlets such as YouTube or Facebook.  I’ve seen many local news stations look outside of their own traditional means for news and information from their fans or followers.  Which is an adept thing to do on their part in that they’ve realized they can’t be everywhere, but their followers actually are.  For example, perhaps there is a wreck snarling a major traffic artery.  A viewer might have caught a picture or video that they posted to Twitter, which the local news station passes along so that drivers in the area are aware of exactly where the slowdown might be happening.

This is great for both sides, but here’s the problem that I’ve continually noticed: Attribution.  National media has caught up with this for the most part, but the local tragically has not.  If a photo is used in print or on air, far too often it’s attributed only to “Facebook” or “YouTube.”  Sure, that content came from those sources.  But Facebook or YouTube are only acting as intermediaries here.  In this context, those sites delivered little more than the delivery method.  The viewer that took the time to take the photo and submit it was doing the brunt of the work.

Attribution is a problem here not only because the media isn’t taking or care to properly cite sources, but because it’s effectively taking away ownership of the content.  There have been debates over the past few years about who really owns content posted to social media sites.  The Terms of Service of each site buries ambiguous language under dense legalese, which makes it unclear whether or not you actually retain ownership over your own created work.  Once ignorant media picks up on user created content and lazily attributes it as “Courtesy of YouTube,”  they create problematic case example.

There’s also one more issue that I’ve noticed.  Now that local news stations have ventured into Facebook, they seem to be under the impression that anything posted by their fans or friends are under free reign of use.  Images and video posted by other users are not necessarily approved by their originators for extreme public exhibition such as what’s seen on the local 5PM news.  The images and video that you’re using are quite possibly from individuals who are very careful and concise about who their friends are and what privacy controls they are using.  By signing Facebook’s Terms of Service, they are not entering into any agreement with you.  Don’t betray their trust by improperly passing on what they may not intend for you to.  Simply contact them and ask.  Granted, many news outlets have gotten better about this.  Hopefully out of respect, but more likely out of liability reasons.

So any media outlets taking a look at this post… I beg of you.. please properly cite, attribute, and contact.  This is something that you should have learned on day one of any high school class teaching this topic.  Once you do this correctly, you’re doing a service to your viewers and are no longer making yourselves look insolent.


2 responses to “Credit Where It’s Due

  • Geof F. Morris

    Indeed. It’s like saying that “radio” or “television” were your sources.

    I think that part of the issue in particular is the pseudonymity of the Internet. You list your name as Daniel Horton over there in the sidebar, but “DRayKenobi” sounds like … well, a 14 year old down in the basement, in the parlance of our time. Moreover, there’s just as many people who don’t reveal their pseudonymity. Mass media wants a name and preferably a face, and the Internet often obscures both.

    • Daniel Horton

      I have to agree. Part of the reason that I make effort to include my name elsewhere on my blog is because of the old handle that I’ve kept around for whatever reason since I was fourteen years old.

      But in the case of finding names, I think the burden is on the reporters to do that. They are journalists after all, so I don’t think that’s asking much. And if an online handle is all they can find, so be it. At least that is better than just chalking up something as “Courtesy of Facebook.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: