Twitter and self plagiarism

[MonsterLobster]

Is this any different than if someone posted three blogs on the site throughout the day, compiled them into a notebook and then ran them in print?

Change your question.
How do you feel if someone wrote a blog today and in two weeks put it in print. Because that's what happened.

I'm fine with that. I think it falls under the label lazy, though, not plagiarism.

 

[Alma]

I can hear Dan Dickerson now: "Miggy with another 1-2-3 inning after RT'ing the side on 2 favorites and an MT."

Excellent.

 

[Rhody31]

Had Rhody cited his example and asked if it was lazy, sure, I suppose. It's not plagiarism.

It's not about the downward spiral of journalism ethics. It's about not understanding what a term means.

I still believe I'm right.
However, I'm less inclined to fight for my side because of the respect I have for the people on this board.
I should have focused on the laziness. I wanted to attach a label to it so badly. In hindsight, should have sat on this for a while instead of reacted and published. This is what happens when you're a bored housewife.
The laziness is still ethical. And I'll be honest - if this happens again I'll call out the laziness again. Because it shouldn't happen. My guess is the next time a similar column runs, there will be some notation that these are tweets from the past.
I love this place, I truly do. Only here could I go on a rant, get yelled at for being an idiot, I yell back that the majority of the people here are idiots, then go back and realize maybe I'm the idiot.
God how I miss working in a real newsroom.

 

[JohnnyChan]

I'll say this:

I do a Sunday column where I throw out four one-liners. Pre-twitter, I would just jot them down and save them for Sunday. Lately, I've just thrown them out on twitter as they pop into my head, and if I especially like one or two I'll use them in the paper.

And I'd be lying if I said there weren't times I had a nagging sense of whether I'm entirely comfortable doing it. Not from a plagiarism standpoint but more of a "if this is my A material this week it should hold for the paper -- for which I'm paid -- and not be spent on Twitter, for which I'm not."

This being an instant-gratification time, I generally just tweet it anyway. Sometimes, with guilt.

-- Mike Vaccaro

 

[SnarkShark]

Had Rhody cited his example and asked if it was lazy, sure, I suppose. It's not plagiarism.

It's not about the downward spiral of journalism ethics. It's about not understanding what a term means.

I still believe I'm right.
However, I'm less inclined to fight for my side because of the respect I have for the people on this board.
I should have focused on the laziness. I wanted to attach a label to it so badly. In hindsight, should have sat on this for a while instead of reacted and published. This is what happens when you're a bored housewife.
The laziness is still ethical. And I'll be honest - if this happens again I'll call out the laziness again. Because it shouldn't happen. My guess is the next time a similar column runs, there will be some notation that these are tweets from the past.
I love this place, I truly do. Only here could I go on a rant, get yelled at for being an idiot, I yell back that the majority of the people here are idiots, then go back and realize maybe I'm the idiot.
God how I miss working in a real newsroom.

Let me get this straight. You still "believe [you're] right" about the plagiarism accusation?

 

[JimmyHoward33]

I've used nuggets that I've posted on Twitter as notes in a column as well. Statistical stuff or historical notes, things like that. Sometimes the column has more space to add more context. It's certainly not word for word and not the entire column.

I don't think there's anything wrong with either; Not all my Twitter followers read the paper, and I'm absolutely certain not all the readers are on Twitter or following us.

 

[Rhody31]

The guy who takes a "hard line" towards ethics seriously still has not replied to the copyright infringement accusations.

I take a hard line toward ethics in professional journalism. Your point?

 

[sgreenwell]

The guy who takes a "hard line" towards ethics seriously still has not replied to the copyright infringement accusations.

I take a hard line toward ethics in professional journalism. Your point?

It seems like a pretty clear usage of images without the permission of the entity or photog who originally took them. I think that's what he's getting at.

 

[Rhody31]

The guy who takes a "hard line" towards ethics seriously still has not replied to the copyright infringement accusations.

I take a hard line toward ethics in professional journalism. Your point?

It seems like a pretty clear usage of images without the permission of the entity or photog who originally took them. I think that's what he's getting at.

I was inferring that if I was running a professional journalistic site, I would participate in such ethics. It was an attempt at dry humor that fell flat.
But I will immediately fire my web guy.

 

[schiezainc]

The guy who takes a "hard line" towards ethics seriously still has not replied to the copyright infringement accusations.

I take a hard line toward ethics in professional journalism. Your point?

It seems like a pretty clear usage of images without the permission of the entity or photog who originally took them. I think that's what he's getting at.

I was inferring that if I was running a professional journalistic site, I would participate in such ethics. It was an attempt at dry humor that fell flat.
But I will immediately fire my web guy.

http://explosm.net/comics/3484/

 

[Joe Williams]

I'll say this:

I do a Sunday column where I throw out four one-liners. Pre-twitter, I would just jot them down and save them for Sunday. Lately, I've just thrown them out on twitter as they pop into my head, and if I especially like one or two I'll use them in the paper.

And I'd be lying if I said there weren't times I had a nagging sense of whether I'm entirely comfortable doing it. Not from a plagiarism standpoint but more of a "if this is my A material this week it should hold for the paper -- for which I'm paid -- and not be spent on Twitter, for which I'm not."

This being an instant-gratification time, I generally just tweet it anyway. Sometimes, with guilt.

-- Mike Vaccaro

Drop the guilt, Mike. Twitter is the marketing end of your job. Chances are, you're bringing more new eyeballs to your work in the paper, and thus the paper in general, via Twitter than any word of mouth that goes on over particular columns you write. In other words, you ARE being paid for what you put out on Twitter. I assume you're providing links to your columns but frankly, even if you aren't, some portion of your Twitter followers are clicking on your paper's Web site.

 

[schiezainc]

Twitter is stupid. That's all I have to add to this conversation.