Multiple deaths, including children, at Connecticut school shooting

[deskslave]

Had to to create context.

For whom?

It was clearly an excerpt. Anyone who wanted to read more, only needed to click the link I provided.

If you thought my excerpt implied some message that was contradicted by the story in whole, you could have said that, and even posted a different excerpt to back up your point. If you thought the lede was necessary to provide "context" you could have posted the lede.

But, for whatever reason, you posted the whole article. That could be seen as disrespectful, and if done en masse, would be illegal.

How is it *clearly* an excerpt? There's no indication from anything in your post of how long that article is.

And 93D doesn't make a regular habit of scouring newspaper websites and posting stuff here.

I've no objection to posting excerpts. I have objections to posting extensive portions of copyrighted material, as YF does multiple times a day. Not to mention that whole "don't just post a link without any comment" rule. And "more details emerge" doesn't really qualify, IMHO.

But maybe it's something that bothers me more than most. Consequence, perhaps, of now working in an environment where intellectual property is fiercely guarded.

 

[YankeeFan]

How is it *clearly* an excerpt? There's no indication from anything in your post of how long that article is.

And 93D doesn't make a regular habit of scouring newspaper websites and posting stuff here.

I've no objection to posting excerpts. I have objections to posting extensive portions of copyrighted material, as YF does multiple times a day. Not to mention that whole "don't just post a link without any comment" rule. And "more details emerge" doesn't really qualify, IMHO.

But maybe it's something that bothers me more than most. Consequence, perhaps, of now working in an environment where intellectual property is fiercely guarded.

How was it no clearly an excerpt? Did it read like a complete article?

And, if you were unsure, you could just click on the provided link.

As for my "comment", what more needed to be said? New details, in a closely watched case, emerged. I thought people my be interested in them.

And, let's be clear, while it might bother you, there is nothing wrong with what I did. This stuff has been litigated. The law is on my side.

I'm not posting whole articles. I'm not passing it off as my own. I'm providing a link to the full story. I'm not doing it for commercial purposes.

Personally, I find it bothersome when Azrael posts only a link, with no excerpt. I'd like for him to wet my whistle a little bit with an excerpt. But, I'm not going to say he's wrong to do it.

 

[deskslave]

It does bother me, and IMHO, it should bother other professional journalists. Failing to properly value our intellectual property is a part of why journalism is in the mess that it's in.

 

[YankeeFan]

It does bother me, and IMHO, it should bother other professional journalists. Failing to properly value our intellectual property is a part of why journalism is in the mess that it's in.

So, it "bothers" you. Big deal.

That doesn't make it wrong. The law is on my side. And you are dead wrong when you equate it to plagiarism.

 

[deskslave]

Yeah, well, I long ago gave up on the notion of your having any respect for the journalists, current and former, who populate this board.

 

[YankeeFan]

Yeah, well, I long ago gave up on the notion of your having any respect for the journalists, current and former, who populate this board.

Well, my respect for one particular journalist on this board may be waning, but that's not the case with the membership here on whole.

I'd say my respect for the denizens of this board is as high as it is for just about any collective of people.

 

[deskslave]

Yeah, that's the impression I get from your constant need to lecture us on how journalism should be done. Your posts on the Jobs board in particular are a real market of respect. Until you came around, we had no idea journalism was underpaid.

And assuming you're referring to me, I can assure you I'm crushed.

 

[YankeeFan]

Yeah, that's the impression I get from your constant need to lecture us on how journalism should be done. Your posts on the Jobs board in particular are a real market of respect. Until you came around, we had no idea journalism was underpaid.

And assuming you're referring to me, I can assure you I'm crushed.

Well, this really is a thread jack now, isn't it.

Apologies to others, I wish we were discussing this somewhere else.

But, what posts on the jobs board, or anywhere else, would give you the impression I don't respect journalists, or journalism?

I appreciate good journalism, and dislike seeing it performed poorly. Surely you understand, and appreciate that. And, my having an opinion on journalism is no different than you having an opinion on soccer, or Baron commenting on Yahoo's management?

Are there subjects that should be off limits to some of us? Is there a list?

My comments on compensation, and other truisms of business are not limited to journalism. Some folks get offended, because they think journalism is somehow "different" than other industries. But, it isn't really.

Supply & demand rule the world. Ignore it at your own peril.

When I tell someone that they're worth more than $10.50 an hour, that's not an insult, it's a compliment.

When you see desirable jobs going to people with similar resumes, and internships, it's not hard to see that certain folks are unlikely to "work their way up" to those jobs, or similar ones.

Is that limited to journalism?

Bain is only going to hire certain folks. You'll never "work your way up" to a job their, without the right resume. Same goes for Goldman Sachs, a Federal Judge clerkship, and deck's law firm.

So, it it wrong, or offensive to point out that the path to a D1 or pro beat is unlikely to pass through Paris, TX or Elizabethtown, KY?

 

[deskslave]

It's less wrong than to say the path to the CEO's office is unlikely to begin in the mailroom, but that doesn't stop people touting those sorts of stories as legitimate possibilities. Yes, the reality is there's a finite number of these beats, and yes, that number continues to dwindle. My point is merely that we know that.

But by way of answering that point: Mike Lupica started in Pottstown, Pennsylvania. Bill Simmons answered phones at the Boston Herald before* becoming an insufferable asshole. Woody Paige started his career with something called the Whitehaven Press. Jemele Hill was a GA reporter in Raleigh. (And they all now have Wikipedia pages. Or so I hear.)

Plenty of guys at the paper in Athens, Ga., worked their way up through high school sports to cover UGA beats. There's a rather successful, if snakebit, writer who used to hang around these parts who's been covering an MLB beat for quite a few years having started that way.

But yeah. This threadjack has probably gone on long enough. Time to return the good people to their regularly scheduled discussion of gun control, and how it's either the greatest evil or the greatest necessity mankind has ever known. I, meanwhile, will have another drink.

*-It's possible he was an insufferable asshole then. But no one knew who he was.

 

[Starman]

Another chilling tale. Teen shoots woman's baby on the street.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/de-marquis-elkins-17-and-unidentified-teen-charged-in-brunswick-ga-baby-s-shooting-death-1.4867592

this makes me rethink my anti death penalty stance. The father and mother of the killers should be executed for raising monsters.

This is inconceivably sad, to watch you baby murdered before your eyes.

When a biscuit does that in clear sight, there should be no trial. Grab him and hang him right there.

Nah, have the trial -- and the appeal.

And then, execute, execute, execute.

Not only do we need the death penalty, we need a lot more of it.

 

[Riptide]

Another chilling tale. Teen shoots woman's baby on the street.

http://www.newsday.com/news/nation/de-marquis-elkins-17-and-unidentified-teen-charged-in-brunswick-ga-baby-s-shooting-death-1.4867592

this makes me rethink my anti death penalty stance. The father and mother of the killers should be executed for raising monsters.

This is inconceivably sad, to watch you baby murdered before your eyes.

When a biscuit does that in clear sight, there should be no trial. Grab him and hang him right there.

Nah, have the trial -- and the appeal.

And then, execute, execute, execute.

Not only do we need the death penalty, we need a lot more of it.

Hey, we could televise it! Pity Richard Dawson's dead ...

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xStvfbIddM0

 

[BDC99]

Good grief, YF didn't do anything wrong. He posted the part he found interesting from the article. We've all done that. And if you're going to bust his balls for posting too much of the article, then my man 93D committed a worse sin by posting the whole damn thing.

This.

Agreed. If anything, YF posting the link and a partial excerpt here would bring MORE eyeballs to the site, in theory. Posting the entire story is pushing it, but I doubt this is going to make a dent in the site's page views either way.