Reprints in The Australian (was Re: [LINK] Kate Carnell to le ad arm of TransACT)

[Chirgwin, Richard]

Reprints are an accepted part of life. But without attribution? Nothing
saying "Communications Day"? 

Since the story was covered pretty well last week in other media it seems
like, ummm, "a lapse of editorial judgement". (Actually, it's "white space
next to the advert, grab whatever is handy".)

RC

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Montgomery [mailto:m0nty@cia.com.au]
> Sent: Tuesday, 28 November 2000 11:47
> To: Chirgwin, Richard
> Cc: 'link@www.anu.edu.au'
> Subject: Reprints in The Australian (was Re: [LINK] Kate 
> Carnell to lead
> arm of TransACT)
> 
> 
> Chirgwin, Richard wrote:
> 
> > Some like it in the pot, nine^h^h^h^h six days old. "It's on a wire;
> > therefore it's news."
> 
> It has been standard for some time now that the Oz prints 
> stories from 
> Natalie Apostolou which are reprinted verbatim from 
> Communications Day. 
> I don't know whether the arrangement involves Comms Day or 
> not (I'd be 
> pretty pissed off about it if I was Comms Day and I wasn't getting a 
> kickback). Her story about AusBONE was reprinted in this way back in 
> May, so the agreement is at least that old.
> 
> I guess it relates back to that old chestnut, being the "paper of 
> record", in which everything that happens is recorded no 
> matter what - 
> even if it is a week old. Most of the people who read the Oz 
> don't also 
> read Comms Day, so it's "news" to them. It's certainly not 
> the largest 
> sin in the Oz...
> 
> -- 
> Paul Montgomery, CEO @ AusBONE, the ISP peering co-operative.
> Land: not yet  Mobile: 0410 622 589  mailto:monty@ausbone.net
>