Results matching “charge for their site”

PrBristol.co.uk was recently launched to help improve communication between journalists and the PR industry in south-west England, Hold The Front Page reported.

The site hopes to encourage debate, provide news and offer a social space named "The Watering Hole."

"Journalists and the PR industry are increasingly reliant on each other - we are all part of the news food chain," said Matt Anderson, commercial director of Montage Communications, the company in charge of building the site.

Anderson mentioned that the site won't necessarily substitute face-to-face contact or communication through media and sites, but that it could "fill an important gap."

Source: Hold The Front Page

Chances are you've heard all about the now-'resolved' dispute that opposed the Associated Press to social news sharing site Drudge Retort, over the fair - or unfair - use of AP quotes. Even more likely is the possibility that you've heard emotion-filled - and perhaps inaccurate - coverage of the affair. So this is an attempt to untangle some of the knots.

The four-point recap, clarifications
Lesson one: The blogosphere's outcry is heard
Lesson two: but the winner is?
Lesson three: AP - "Whither" or "Adapt"? Change the DMCA or set a legal precedent?


The four-point recap, clarifications

If you haven't followed the story, here's a four-point recap (or skip to next):

- Earlier this month, AP demanded that the Drudge Retort take down seven entries, which were in its view violating policies of fair use of content and the agency's copyright (AP wants to charge outside sources for using for excerpts longer than four words).
- Drudge Retort Web host Rogers Cadenhead consequently blogged about the takedown notice, and this created a ##-storm in the blogosphere, with many influential bloggers including TechCrunch's Michael Arrington and BuzzMachine's Jeff Jarvis calling on the boycott of AP content.
- Shortly after, on June 16, AP retreated, but didn't recant: it admitted that its request had been "heavy-handed" but didn't withdraw the takedown notices.
- Then, on June 19, AP issued a statement to say its conflict with Cadenhead had been resolved, after AP lawyers gave him guidelines to make the postings suitable, and that "both parties consider the matter closed." This really meant that Cadenhead agreed to modify the contested items and ended up not reposting them.

The guidelines discussed with Cadenhead have yet to be made public though, and the AP is working on a new set of guidelines for "fair use" of its content in general. "If AP's guidelines end up like the ones they shared with me, we're headed for a Napster-style battle on the issue of fair use," Cadenhead wrote on his blog. He told the New York Times' Saul Hansell that some of the key issues for AP related to protecting headlines and first paragraphs of stories.

First clarification: unlike what has been widely echoed on the Web and suggested by another New York Times article on June 16, AP was never supposed to meet the Media Bloggers Association (MBA) in order to draft guidelines for all bloggers, according to MBA President Robert Cox.

Another clarification: the blogosphere went ablaze when it learned that AP had filed a lawsuit against Cadenhead in June, seemingly out of the blue. According to Cox though, "Drudge Retort got on AP's radar due to the posting of entire articles with exact headlines which all parties agreed constituted copyright violations two months BEFORE the most recent spate of Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) Take Down Notices."

Lesson one: The blogosphere's outcry is heard

News of the Associated Press' June take-down notices was met with severe criticism, calls for boycott - and many profanities - by the blogosphere.

In one of his posts, entitled "FU AP," Jarvis wrote: "Bloggers, unless the AP recants and apologizes to Cadenhead, I urge you to avoid linking to the AP and to link to reporting at its source." Jarvis also encouraged bloggers to copy-paste full AP stories.

In a self-admittedly "ridiculous" post, after being quoted in an AP story, Harrington announced that "I've called my lawyers (really) and have asked them to deliver a DMCA takedown demand to the A.P. And I will also be sending them a bill for $12.50." According to Harrington this "is exactly what the A.P. would have charged me if I published a 22 word quote from one of their articles."

That short posting alone generated more than 230 comments - most of which were harshly critical of AP's stance at the time. The wildfire that spread in the blogosphere and the seemingly rapid turn-about of AP once again illustrated a known fact: blogs have gained enough traction and buzz-generating capacity to concretely influence and shape the media landscape.

Lesson two: but the winner is?    

One - erroneous - interpretation is to say that bloggers - won their battle against the traditional media Goliath, which was trying "to impose some guidelines on the free-wheeling blogosphere, where extensive quoting and even copying of entire news articles is common," - a quote from a New York Times story. (The Times' coverage of the affair was, according to Harrington, hindered by a conflict of interest, considering that the Times is one of AP's members and sits on its board of directors.)

But this isn't a victory for bloggers. "The A.P. is going to assert a much stricter interpretation of fair use than most people on the Internet are used to," reported Hansell on the Bits blog.

As mentioned above, Cadenhead had to agree to AP's proposed modifications, and ended up not reposting the material. Furthermore, this case is really a microcosm for the bigger issue of how to adapt "fair use" policies and copyright to the digital age in general.

"I'm glad that my personal legal dispute with the AP is resolved, thanks to the help of the Media Bloggers Association, but it does nothing to resolve the larger conflict between how AP interprets fair use and how thousands of people are sharing news on the web," wrote Cadenhead, following his two-hour conversation and settlement with the AP.

"I think AP and other media organizations should focus on how to encourage bloggers to link their stories in the manner they like, rather than hoping their lawyers can rebottle the genie of social news."

While Cadenhead may be right in terms of global news consumption trends on the Web, the AP was clearly in its own right under the US DMCA, at least regarding the stories posted in their entirety with the same headline. But the legal provisions concerning "fair use" of content for smaller excerpts have remained vague - simply undefined - until now, something the AP hopes to reform by setting guidelines.

"I think it would be helpful for bloggers and users of social news sites to know what the AP believes to be fair use of their copyrighted work," said Cadenhead's lawyer. But "I hope that any guidelines that are issued are not interpreted as an agreed definition of fair use" under copyright law.

Lesson three: AP - "Whither" or "Adapt"? Change the DMCA or set a legal precedent?

The Associated Press versus Drudge Retort - blogosphere - affair throws light onto two main issues:

- Does this case exemplify the 'old media' versus 'new media' divide? Is the AP's stance representative of its inability to adapt to a new context?

Yes, in the eyes of new media guru Jarvis: "I value the AP and don't want it to die. I want it to morph to a new model and a new future. But I am afraid that in its fights, we are seeing its inability to adapt."

On the other hand, few bloggers have pondered the more controversial view that the AP's approach may actually be a sign of its willingness to adapt - granted, not yet to the 'utopian' world copyright-lessness. But the AP, in its own way and after being "heavy-handed," is now attempting to define new standards that are adapted to the digital age. (Read this note on June 13 by Jim Kennedy, VP and Director of Strategy for AP.) No doubt some of the outspoken bloggers mentioned previously could be quick to shatter this argument.

- As is often the case, the law doesn't evolve as rapidly as the context it seeks to protect. The blurry wordings of the current DMCA must either be reformed quickly, after multilateral consultation, or the issue of "fair use" of content will eventually be settled in court and set a precedent, costing either news organizations or bloggers - presumably both.

This is the real issue at stake: how fast can the law be adapted to the reality of the Web, in order to avoid costly conflicts over subjective interpretations of "fair use" of content? As Hansell concluded in the Bits blog, "the unsettled state of the law makes it a gamble to take the matter to court."

A costly gamble, whether it ends in a loss for the AP or for bloggers. Or both.

Note that, just in case, no AP material longer than four words was excerpted in the above.

Bloggers: you can also watch this video by DigitalJournal.com for advice from Harvard Citizen Media Law Project Director David Ardia.



Source: Buzzmachine (here and here) - Techcrunch (here and here) - Associated Press - New York Times - New York Times Bits blog - Mediabloggers.org - The Moderate Voice - paidcontent.org

On his web site, Howard Owens published an article giving valuable tips on moderating your own web site for those who are new to community management.

The list of tips includes:

-Make checking comments a habit and participate in conversations that feature incorrect information, as this will give you credibility.

-Make sure your site has an "enforceable terms of service and guidelines or rules."

-Require registration.

-Take ownership of sections to show "that you pay attention and you care", i.e. sports editors in charge of sports on the web.

-Ban users or remove comments because they violate rules, not because you don't like them and do not get into arguments with people who know how to "push your buttons."

-"Reward your frequent contributors" because it fosters a relationship and encourages them to continue.

See also:

US: How Philly.com solved its user comment problems
Creating guidelines for user comments
Solutions to manage bad behaviour on the comment board
The Fray:Setting the standard for online forums

Source: howardowens.com through IFRA Exeecutive News Service

Now German speakers don't need a computer to look up something on Wikipedia. Major German publisher Bertelsmann, whose divisions include Random House Inc. and Sony BMG, is publishing "The One-Volume Wikipedia Encyclopedia," a collection of the most popular German language Wikipedia entries.

The project is not meant to be a re-creation of the site in book form, but rather "as an attempt to harness the collective wisdom of Wikipedia's users," according to Bertelsmann.

"We think of it as an encyclopedic yearbook," Dr. Beate Varnhorn, the editor in charge of Bertelsmann's reference works said. "A yearbook really can be a documentation of the zeitgeist."

There are more restrictions in a printed version: Wikipedia online features hyperlinks that takes a user from topic to topic, but a reader of the printed version will have to manually get to different entries. Whereas the German version of the website has more than 750,000 different articles, the 992 paged printed version will have 25,000 articles with about 1,000 photographs.

On the other hand, a staff of 10 condensed and verified the online material, so that the printed version will be an accurate, credible source.

Varnhorn is optimistic because of Germany's "strong encyclopedic culture." She hopes to especially target a younger audience.

There will be entries on French first lady Carla Bruni, Nintendo Wii, and German writers and musicians.

"The approach of 'Wikipedia in One Volume' is to give the people the information they are looking for," Arne Klempert, the group's executive director said, contrasting that approach to "the process of publishing a traditional encyclopedia put together by a select group of people behind closed doors."

"This is the most important difference from traditional encyclopedias," he said. "It's also an important thing in that the sense of the Wikipedia spirit will go into this printed volume."

If the 2008 version is successful, there is a possibility of other editions. The printed Wikipedia will go on sale in September for €19.95, or $31.80. Bertelsmann will pay €1 per copy sold for use of the Wikipedia name, which will support the site's operations, according to Klempert.

Source: New York Times, Yahoo News

Free newspaper group Metro International is planning on building "an interactive capability" for all of its newspapers to target young professionals, with Metro France as the pilot launch, according to Brand Republic.

Each city based website will hopefully become, as Brand Republic describes, an "indispensable source of news and information", with a network of blogs on relevant themes and local perspectives.

Tom Symonds, Managing Director of Metro Interactive, said: "With this investment Metro will define its own space, where we not only draw on our users' appetite for relevant news and information but provide a space that is completely focused on urban living and increases the users' influence."

Vice-president of Corporate Development Christian Toksvig, who was hired earlier this month, is in charge of launching free Metro titles in new markets. Currently, Metro publishes 84 editions.

Eventually Metro wants a website for all the 23 countries it operates in.

The blog network can distinguish Metro sites from other local news sites for users. Instead of just browsing through news, users can browse through opinions or other relevant information on local news.

Source: Brand Republic

Microsoft is building BLEWS, a political blog aggregator that will arrange posts by their reception in the liberal and conservative blogospheres instead of categorizing blog posts by topic.

The news site will also indicate the level of emotional charge in the discussion in both political parties and compare views from different sides of the political spectrum on the same story.

BLEWS analyzes a real-time feed of political-blog posts provided by the Live Labs Social Media platform by adding a link and text analysis of the posts.

Source: Cyber journalist.net, Microsoft (picture)

In an increasingly web-based culture of knowledge, it’s perhaps no surprise that websites like Wikipedia.org are now being consulted by credible news sources. Since it’s launch in 2001, Wikipedia has gained notoriety from its entirely user-contributed and edited online encyclopedia.

The Wall Street Journal, for example, has referenced Wikipedia on a piece it featured discussing “turducken” (a bizarre concoction in which a chicken is stuffed into a duck that is stuffed into a turkey). While some critics have judged this sort of Wikipedia usage as un-journalistic, others note, where else would you get information on a turducken? Certainly not from your standard encyclopedia.

However, as a result of its user-generated articles, many news and scholarly organizations immediately write the site off as “false” and “unverifiable.” For example, Mike Leary, managing editor of the Philadelphia Inquirer, recently sent an e-mail to staffers forbidding the use of Wikipedia to “verify facts or augment a story.”

Even the French Agence France Presse banned its reporters from using Facebook and Wikipedia as sources, reported a previous Weblog posting.

Wikipedia’s leadership appears more than aware of the site’s strengths and potential shortcomings. The site features numerous disclaimers, one of which reminds users that "anyone with an Internet connection" can alter the content and cautions, "please be advised that nothing found here has necessarily been reviewed by people with the expertise required to provide you with complete, accurate or reliable information."

Jimmy Wales, co-founder of Wikipedia, suggested that despite these warnings, more journalists are daring to test out the site.

"I think that people are sort of slowly learning how to use Wikipedia, and learning its strengths and its weaknesses," he said. "Of course, any reasonable person has to be up front that there are weaknesses... On the other hand, there are lots of sources that have weaknesses."

Wales thinks the encyclopedia's best journalistic use is for background research rather than as a source to be quoted, the American Journalism Review reported.

The Los Angeles Times has adopted a relatively open stance on the usage of Wikipedia sources. Melissa McCoy, the Times’ deputy managing editor in charge of copy desks, explained that the paper occasionally allows Wikipedia references.

"We're certainly not going to use Wikipedia as a stand-alone news source, but we're not going to exclude it if it takes us somewhere," she said. "If a reporters spots something in there and it makes them do an extra phone call, it's silly not to use it,” McCoy suggested.

With opinions on Wikipedia usage in newsrooms remaining mixed—with most opting to steer clear of the site—papers like The Wall Street Journal and the
are demonstrating that some journalists are discovering the value of the site as a roadmap for further research.


Source: ajr.org through cyberjournalist.net

A few news tidbits from our partner site, the SFN Blog: following managerial turmoil at Le Monde at the end of 2007, editor Eric Fottorino has stated he wants to be a “man of an historical compromise” between journalists and shareholders. In the US, AT&T has partnered the NY Times to allow wireless users to access the newspaper’s site at no extra charge.

For the French weekly Le Nouvel Observateur, it’s been a year since they have walked the walk by building an in-house studio. Video has simply become essential. “We can’t do without it anymore,” said Malika Elkord, deputy editor of the Nouvel Observateur. Will video ever be dominant in the publication though? Not to be considered yet. “Video is only a plus, but it is still essential,” she said.

Recently more and more print journalists are attracted to online journalism. However, the companies who decide to launch online sites face financial problems. Some chose to use an online paid-for model which usually has only a small group of subscribers from which they make a profit. Others offer the readers a free of charge content financed by advertisers.

Economically, print publishing is very different today than it used to be. There is massive amounts of free content on the Web, content that hasn’t really changed that much in general, or in value. It’s the value of the distribution of that content that has changed.

News of the World has launched a dedicated mobile WAP site. The approach echoes that of News Group national title The Sun. The news of both titles can now be accessed through the mobile Internet site, a downloadable Java application or through a text alert service.

Facebook.com has launched their new ad sales that display profile pictures next to commercial messages shown to friends about items that a user has purchased or wants to share with friends.