I hear today that History Channel's UFO Files will be doing a special on the Collins and Doty book, Exempt from Disclosure. No firm air date yet, but it is expected to be sometime in mid to late October. I know there was suppose to be a Canadian TV special on the same topic and I am not sure whether this is the same show or not.
I am happy to see that Peter Levenda is the guest on this weeks Dreamland. He will be talking about book 3 of Sinister Forces. I haven't even made it to two yet, but did read one and enjoyed it. I should be starting his Unholy Alliance next week, as it is next on my reading pile.
Now I am going to take a moment to mention one of my pet peeves - blogging other people's articles. I blog the links to articles, but I don't consider it my right to post an article without the permission of the person who wrote it. You would think at the very least that if you are posting someone else's article, without permission, you would put a link to the site where it came from. However, most do not even do that. If you want to post someone else's article, this is what I think is the best way to do it, truncate it. Blog enough to get someone interested in it and then stop and insert a link of where they can go to read the rest. That way you have still drawn visitors to your blog by having the article, but yet haven't stole away anyone who is truly interested from the original author's site. I am not really talking about news articles, I am talking about things that indivduals write in order to draw people to their website or blog. News sites, such as CNN, I don't think really care about such things since they have plenty of visitors and make plenty of money off their website. So if you really have respect for the person who wrote the article you are posting, please be polite and at least put a link to their site.
6 comments:
Well said Lesley. Some years ago we were all new to this and feeling our way but now we've settled on some protocol that we should follow.
The thing that plagiarists and insensitive bloggers are going to have to live with is the permanent record of their transgressions, so it really doesn't pay in the long run.
The truncated copy/paste with link is a win/win/win - we get to blog interesting stuff, we send traffic and the reader gets some material that interests them. What could be better?
In a perfect world everyone would truncate and link, but some just don't care. Some are only doing it to draw people to their blog and they could care less about the person who wrote it. Blogging is just like the real world, the good and the bad. Still, there are those who just maybe never thought about it that way and they are the ones I wrote that for because they will listen.
Agreed. I've often come across my own articles, posted in full, with no link, and/or no credit to me; just maybe the name of the orignal site (like, American Chronicle, or something.) The most blatant offender (he since removed it after I complained all over the place) was something I wrote, but he had inserted it in such a way it looked like it was his own stuff! No link or name at all.
Most people try, and care, but there are those who don't. It's a good reminder to us all to give credit and links, as well as just a blurb, not the full article. (Unless you're responding or critiquing, etc.)
Your suggestion that the motive for one blogger to copy another's work as being motivated by a need for hits on her/his site should be considered from the point of view of putting up "links" on one site for other sites. I "mirror" other sites to ensure there survival. I will do the links or give the author's complete i.d. with an article if that person posts this info but my intent is to ensure that sensitive information is not lost. My experience with the internet actually goes back to the very late 70's. I know, you prolly don't think that is possible but it was and it cost money to log on and money to view any particular page. You had to pay the long distance charges and it took hours to retrieve what was mostly commercial material by mags like "Byte". A download was almost unthinkable. "Mirroring" a site ensures it's survival. Copyright or copyleft. You be the judge.
Eric, you do link to the original article and I am sure if someone didn't want it on your site you would remove it. I know your intent is not to steal hits from the writers site, but rather to get out information.
Lesley sometimes the links are so wack that I'm embarassed to put the link up but at the same time, my mind is changing, evolving and enlightning but not quite ready for the full nine yards that a site has to offer. Anyway, thanks for clarifying. Even when the article I post says it is copyright I post that along with the piece and a link. My logic is that it is "fair use". If and when I start doing my own writing, it will prolly be too little and too late.
Post a Comment