A Question Of Ethics In Blogging
I recently responded to an article published by The New York Times, written by David Cay Johnston, a reporter for the NYT. It appears Mr. Johnston has taken issue with my quoting of his writing and the NYT materials without specifically giving him a byline in the quoted material.
In a comment left on my blog (which I did not publish but chose to respond to here instead), Mr Johnston stated:
In fact, these are issues I concern myself with in some detail. But as Mr. Johnston noted, there is a link at the very top of my blog post in question which is a hyperlink to the original post on The New York Times and his byline. In my effort to deal with copyright and academic citation properly in a blog, I have instituted several conventions that I use consistently when I post on this and other blogs. The very first thing is that I observe the practice of citing the article or resource to which I am responding or referencing. The vast majority of times this citation is in the form of a hyperlink that is in standard use in the blogosphere and is usually located at the very beginning of my post or entry. Since that hyperlink is, for all intents and purposes, the same as a footnote or endnote in an academic paper, and it includes the original source and author of the material I am quoting or referencing, it is entirely within the realm of ethical use of the quoted material.
The second thing I do is to highlight materials that I quote directly or verbatim in italics and in an indented format. This procedure is also used in academic publications and is in keeping with the APA citation manual.
The third thing I deliberately do is add my own commentary to the posted quoted material. Sometimes I post my commentary as an introduction to the original material and sometimes I intersperse my commentary to specific paragraphs or sections of the original material. I use this original material under the "fair use doctrine" that is built into the copyright laws and stems from the copyright clause of the US Constitution that makes the case that all published and produced material is for the public good.
Indeed, the very provisions of copyright law take into consideration the purpose, intent and the end result of how original material is used under the fair use doctrine. Since my usage arguably could increase the number of people referred to the NYT web site, the original article and the author's work, it meets one of the key elements of the fair use doctrine.
Additionally, I do not use my blog for anything but not-for-profit educational use. I do not advertise or raise revenues from my blog or my blogging activity. I do not distribute or re-distribute my posts or the original materials in any profit-generating approach. Therefore, I meet yet another tenet of the the fair use doctrine.
Since the articles and materials I quote or reference are used in an attempt to educate the public about events and issues of public importance, and I add my own commentary and/or criticism to those materials, and I am not publishing the original work as if it were my own, I meet yet another tenet of the fair use doctrine.
Since I use these materials and references in a timely manner--within days of original publication--and do not infringe upon the rights of the original publisher or author to claim credit or revenues for the original work, and these matters are a product of news reporting, I meet yet another tenet of the fair use doctrine.
So, to answer Mr. Johnston's question (Do you think that is fair or ethical?), my answer is that I absolutely think that my use of these materials is within the acceptable use standards of the law and of academic standards of ethics.
In response to Mr. Johnston's request (I hope you wil[l] revise your post to give proper credit.), I see no need to add to my post or revise it in any way as I have already provided a perfectly acceptable form and manner of citation.
I appreciate Mr. Johnston taking the time to read my comments, leave a comment and express his concerns, but I believe I have fulfilled my obligations as an academic, a commentator and as a person with a valid sense of ethics. I also believe that my efforts on this blog do not detract from or infringe upon the rights of anyone else in these matters, especially given the rapid pulse of the information highway we deal with as bloggers.
Thanks for your time and attention to these matters.
In a comment left on my blog (which I did not publish but chose to respond to here instead), Mr Johnston stated:
You reprinted a significant portion of my work without credit to me or my newspaper. Only by knowing that the headline is a link and going there would anyoine know the true source of the information.
Do you think that is fair or ethical? I hope you wil revise your post to give proper credit.
In fact, these are issues I concern myself with in some detail. But as Mr. Johnston noted, there is a link at the very top of my blog post in question which is a hyperlink to the original post on The New York Times and his byline. In my effort to deal with copyright and academic citation properly in a blog, I have instituted several conventions that I use consistently when I post on this and other blogs. The very first thing is that I observe the practice of citing the article or resource to which I am responding or referencing. The vast majority of times this citation is in the form of a hyperlink that is in standard use in the blogosphere and is usually located at the very beginning of my post or entry. Since that hyperlink is, for all intents and purposes, the same as a footnote or endnote in an academic paper, and it includes the original source and author of the material I am quoting or referencing, it is entirely within the realm of ethical use of the quoted material.
The second thing I do is to highlight materials that I quote directly or verbatim in italics and in an indented format. This procedure is also used in academic publications and is in keeping with the APA citation manual.
The third thing I deliberately do is add my own commentary to the posted quoted material. Sometimes I post my commentary as an introduction to the original material and sometimes I intersperse my commentary to specific paragraphs or sections of the original material. I use this original material under the "fair use doctrine" that is built into the copyright laws and stems from the copyright clause of the US Constitution that makes the case that all published and produced material is for the public good.
Indeed, the very provisions of copyright law take into consideration the purpose, intent and the end result of how original material is used under the fair use doctrine. Since my usage arguably could increase the number of people referred to the NYT web site, the original article and the author's work, it meets one of the key elements of the fair use doctrine.
Additionally, I do not use my blog for anything but not-for-profit educational use. I do not advertise or raise revenues from my blog or my blogging activity. I do not distribute or re-distribute my posts or the original materials in any profit-generating approach. Therefore, I meet yet another tenet of the the fair use doctrine.
Since the articles and materials I quote or reference are used in an attempt to educate the public about events and issues of public importance, and I add my own commentary and/or criticism to those materials, and I am not publishing the original work as if it were my own, I meet yet another tenet of the fair use doctrine.
Since I use these materials and references in a timely manner--within days of original publication--and do not infringe upon the rights of the original publisher or author to claim credit or revenues for the original work, and these matters are a product of news reporting, I meet yet another tenet of the fair use doctrine.
So, to answer Mr. Johnston's question (Do you think that is fair or ethical?), my answer is that I absolutely think that my use of these materials is within the acceptable use standards of the law and of academic standards of ethics.
In response to Mr. Johnston's request (I hope you wil[l] revise your post to give proper credit.), I see no need to add to my post or revise it in any way as I have already provided a perfectly acceptable form and manner of citation.
I appreciate Mr. Johnston taking the time to read my comments, leave a comment and express his concerns, but I believe I have fulfilled my obligations as an academic, a commentator and as a person with a valid sense of ethics. I also believe that my efforts on this blog do not detract from or infringe upon the rights of anyone else in these matters, especially given the rapid pulse of the information highway we deal with as bloggers.
Thanks for your time and attention to these matters.
posted by Jim Downey at 11:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home