In the comments on this post by Jo Geary a newspaper person mentions that a letter they had published has been spread around blogs and forums without any credit, linked or otherwise, to the paper. He was led to believe that bloggers were all about crediting sources since the newspaper industry is constantly attacked for not doing so. It’s a fair point and after waffling in the comments myself for a bit I realised it can probably be answered with a graph. So here it is:
Does that make sense?
Strange one that. I’ve always made a point of crediting it’s one of my ‘rules’ I’ve given myself. I think I’d find it strange if others didn’t do the same. Crediting is good practice and good manners and like my mum always told me: good manners cost nothing and can reap great rewards. When someone helps you out you say thank you. When someone informs/inspires you, you credit. Not to do so is bad manners.
Good Christ, I’m turning into my mother. :-/
Hi Pete – the graph makes sense but what puzzles me is how you determine “usefulness of credit to network.” If someone feels they need to comment/replicate someone else’s work, aren’t they already close in terms of social distance?
Two common reasons for crediting are that it’s good manners; and that if you give share with others then they are more likely to share with you.
What Pete’s graph suggests to me, and I agree with this, is that those two things are not the same. And the second reason is the one that probably motivates people.
A blogger working in a specialised field (eg Birminham arts) has an interest in crediting another blogger in a similar field – it makes it more likely that they might get a credit back in return one day (or a pint).
On the other hand, of you re-use information you got from the BBC news website, you’ve got little to gain from crediting them as they’re very unlikely ever to return the favour, not because they’re rude sods but just because the chances of them noticing, remembering and being in a position to return the favour are small.
The BBC journalist may write about Birminghm arts once a year, and Britney Spears the rest of the time.
The third reason for crediting, and one I think will become increasingly significant in mainstream media, is that readers like it, as they like being pointed to useful resources such as blogs on topics they are interested in (and if they found the BBC story interesting, they might find a specialised blog on the story’s topic interesting too).
In the case in question, I like your “letter from your gran” analogy best.
The social capital point is important too, we all do it to a degree. Often people will link BBC news as authoritative support for their point, but avoid crediting The Sun, even if they’re both using an AP sourced article.
I’m not sure ‘usefulness’ is a great way to express that caveat of ‘respect for the source’.
Ideally news sources should provide academic style references to help combat the rise of PR-by-proxy journalism (e.g. greenwash). I often note with disgust that BBC online articles rarely even list the journo/editor, let alone more remote sources.
–
You might be interested in this post by Martin Belam, an old collegue of mine at the BBC, who now works at the Guardian:
How the Ian Tomlinson G20 video spread The Guardian brand across the media
http://www.currybet.net/cbet_blog/2009/04/ian_tomlinson_g20_guardian_video.php
Actually I think you’d probably like most of what Martin writes.
(p.s. Your blog background keeps making me think I’ve smudged my screen, dammit)