Comments, opinions and an occasional ramble
Rule #1 of journalism: Attribute your sources
The Straits Times today published an article titled “Clash of titans over Singapore’s biomed push”. I wondered why it looked so similar to an earlier entry of mine titled “A clash of titans”. Reading further, I saw that a line in that article actually cited something from that entry of mine, but it was attributed to “a blogger”.
I don’t know what the journalist was thinking, but my journalism professor always emphasizes on proper attribution of sources. As far as possible, a journalist must give due credit to the person from which a quote was taken from. If the attribution cannot be properly made, it cannot be used.
In this case, I wonder why the reporter (and the editor of course) elected to refer to me as only “a blogger” when making a direct quote from my blog entry. It is clear that there is a name (not even a pseudonym) to the owner of this blog. I don’t see ST news reports that goes “A passer-by walking along the Orchard Road underpass said….” There is always a name before or after a quote that identifies the originator of the quote.
I don’t know what ST standards are, but it has been drilled into me to at least ask for a name and attribute the quote to the name. And of course, I’m not entirely comfortable with how similar the headline of the ST article is to the title of my entry. It seems that the reporter was too lazy to think of another headline that sounds just as good. I probably won’t be so uncomfortable if the reporter came up with the headline without knowledge of my entry. Sometimes, coincidences do happen. However, I doubt it’s coincidence this time round.
The article gave a pretty good all round summary of the bickering between Mr Philip Yeo and AP Lee Weiling, and it’s so unfortunate that the reporter spoilt the article by not properly attributing the sources. Now I have another reason to not want to intern/work at ST.
Addendum:
The content of this blog is licensed under the Creative Commons Deed (the license can be found in the right sidebar). I’ve made it such that anyone is free to use my work (I believe if someone finds my work useful, that person should have the right to use it) so long as it’s attributed. I almost forgot that I’ve licensed my work under Creative Commons.
| Print article | This entry was posted by Aaron Ng on 11/02/2007 at 2:25 pm, and is filed under Perspective. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
about 5 years ago
No, Aaron, you SHOULD intern in ST. Go and learn about how ST reached its current level of objectivity, as we see it. Harness that knowledge of the system within, look into the hearts of those reporters there and learn how they become “the highly circulated newspaper” in Singapore.
By the way, while you are there, do take care to stay on the bright side.
about 5 years ago
The saying goes that to understand a beast, you have to be one. Many lessons can be learnt and much experience can be gained from said internship.
about 5 years ago
as long as you don’t lose yourself, Aaron…many things which you see may not agree with you, or anyone at all, because essentially, ST IS still a political mouthpiece. See if you can get attached to the foreign desk…i do think the ST is very objective in that area.
Why are you kept anonymous? Maybe because the Internet still has no cred. People are wary of citing sources from the Internet and maybe the journalist was trying to protect you in a sense that he didn’t want to draw excessive attention (spies included) to your website.
After all, the MSM is well-known not to have much to do with the Net…remember the mrbrown issue? They still called him mrbrown and not his real name, which he didn’t hide.
It’ll take long for us to get recognition in the MSM yet.
about 5 years ago
heheh…perhaps its inevitable that we would get the recognition…the manner of recognition however may not be the kind that is advantageous to us…
about 5 years ago
I feel ya.
What’s more, if they did indeed plagiarize you, they are technically in violation of your Creative Commons license on two counts. One is a lack of proper attribution, Two is the commercial use of your content. (After all, the oestensible purpose of publishing the Straits Times is for SPH to make money…)
about 5 years ago
Netlander,
It’s a matter of principle why I don’t want to join the ST. I may be a little stubborn here, but I rather join a small time paper that practises good journalism, rather than to join a rich paper that I think doesn’t practise good journalism.
about 5 years ago
Guojun,
I share your sentiments exactly. I was wondering why did the editor agreed to using a generic term called “blogger” when they could have just used the name or pseudonym. It did feel like some kind of discrimination.
about 5 years ago
Elia,
I’m not very bothered by the second count, although I knew it was violated. It was more of the intent behind the violation of the first count that left a not so good taste. In anycase, I’m not sure if the Creative Commons is enforceable in Singapore anyway.
about 5 years ago
Why don’t you send the reporter an email to ask for an apology?
or do you prefer to email the reporter personally?
about 5 years ago
I’ve not really decided on what to do because I’m wondering whether I should be nice and give the benefit of the doubt. Then again, it wouldn’t be good for the reporter to get away with it. I wouldn’t tolerate my own writers doing that. Hmm.. maybe I’ll find out which editor should I email to.
Aiyah, for all my tough talk, I’m actually quite kind-hearted one. :p
about 5 years ago
Without knowing the details of the story you refer to: Of course it is good journalism to attribute as exactly as possible to sources. It gives an article more credibility and offers the readers better chances to assess the information for themselves.
John
Asia Observer – http://www.asiaobserver.com – a news portal to Asia
about 5 years ago
or put it this way. The journalist could very well have named you, but the editor changed it to ‘a blogger.’
I think that is also a very likely scenario…
about 5 years ago
You are not the first guy they’ve ripped off and neither will you be the last. It happened before – I forgot who. But such are the journalistic standard of ST. Good that you have no intention of whoring yourself to ST.
about 5 years ago
Hmmmm…perhaps ST is trying to practise baey yam keng’s line about the messenger being less impt than the message and thus aaron didnt get attributed?
about 5 years ago
Aaron,
Though it seemed likely that the reporter applied your description to the biomed debate, I think “Clash of Titans” is quite a generic description in the English language. For example, it has recently been used to describe China vs US in foreign policy, or China vs India in economic competition. Don’t feel so hard done by.
about 5 years ago
Bart,
While you are right about the generic nature of the phrase ‘clash of the titans’, if you had bothered to read beyond the second line of Aaron’s post, you might have realized that the ST article also took a direct quote from Aaron’s post but then anonymized him.
Looks like bloggers don’t have to hide behind anonymity or pseudonymity – ST will do it for you.
about 5 years ago
Hi Bart,
I just feel that the reporter could have exercised more discretion about it. I don’t claim ownership over a generic phrase, but it wasn’t a very nice thing to do, especially when the reporter obviously read about the entry and then wrote about it. I honestly felt the reporter was being lazy, but that’s my opinion.
about 5 years ago
Well…i think its a rather interesting trait that is prevalent in the upper echelons….when the internet is being whacked names will be mentioned (during the article on counterinsurgency sammyboy forum was mentioned) yet when it comes to attributing something that makes sense to a normal blogger its alright to forego giving him recognition.
about 5 years ago
Dear Aaron,
I respect your sticking to your principles. Well, you can check up which school the reporter come from. Hope that the reporter is not from your school. Don’t really want this reporter to be any role model in your school. Or maybe, it’s the editor. Hmm, which school of thought he/she is from?
about 5 years ago
Hmmmm…why dun u set up ur own paper in the spirit of “entrepreneurship”? Of course try to steer away from certain topics until the situation in Singapore changes…
about 5 years ago
For whatever reason that the journalist did not stick to standards expected of the profession we cannot know. But you were rightfully acknowledged in Intelligent Singapore. At least one thing went right
about 5 years ago
Stark,
Technically, I did set up a paper. It’s called Campus Observer.
about 5 years ago
*Tsk* Any regular ST reader will tell you that bloggers are simply not credible. That’s why they don’t attribute quotes from Blogosphere. As far as the Establishment (and that includes SPH) is concerned, Blogosphere is just one huge monolithic entity which is full of half-truths and conspiracy theories. =)
about 5 years ago
Hmmm…i was thinking of a more …public kind…the kind that is found in the newspaper stands outside…
about 5 years ago
Aaron,
I was wondering why wouldn’t you email the ST reporter for clarification. And if he did make a reference to a blog (as he did mentioned a blogger), then why haven’t he properly include a source for his references?
And being a CNM student yourself, a good amount of work you deal with in the future will be intellectual property. If you don’t fight for your exclusive rights now as a blogger, then how are you going to defend your exclusive rights in the future?
about 5 years ago
I did email ST. They didn’t bother to reply. It’s fine with me though. It just shows how professional those guys are.
about 1 year ago
I am very thank you to share this article, it’s very good, I hope you can share more, and I will continue to read, thanks!