Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

A note on “User Posts”

By

I’ve been looking through the diaries lately, and I’d like to encourage the use of some basic guidelines:

  • One-line user posts are not really very interesting: e.g. “Check out this article!” followed by a link. Please give us some indication what the link refers to, and add your own comments.
  • Please don’t just paste an entire article from some copyrighted source here. You can excerpt it briefly to give us a taste, but that’s it. The newspaper owns that article. Newspaper columnists don’t work for free, and part of their salary is paid by you clicking through to their page and looking at their dancing cowboy mortgage ads. That’s how it works. Viva capitalism.

The point of all this is that you are what makes this site valuable: Your observations, insights, experiences. If an article struck you as interesting, say why. I’m not asking for a dissertation, but one of the purposes of a blog is to talk back to the news, to engage with the information you’re given. It doesn’t have to be genius: Sometimes even mistakes or stupid ideas are useful to air publicly.

Just throw us a bone, huh?

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

    • I haven’t figured out how to edit my own posts.  I have gotten a couple of replies about it, but still have trouble – sigh and read all posts on it too.  It will all sink in in time, I am sure.

  2. You should get the new Harpers magazine, there is a really great essay, or as he calls it, “a plagerism” by Jonathan Lethem called “The Ecstasy of Influence.”  I started reading it in the bookstore, but it was too long so I paid the 7 bucks so I could take it home with me.  One could also read it in the library, but it is not available on line.  A snippet, for irony’s sake:

    <

    p>

    A time is marked not so much by ideas that are argued about as by ideas that are taken for granted.  The character of an era hangs upon what needs no defense.  In this regard, few of us question the contemporary construction of copyright.  It is taken as a law, both in the sense of a universally recognizable moral absolute, like the law against murder, and as naturally inherent in our world, like the law of gravity.  In fact, it is neither.  Rather, copyright is an ongoing social negotiation, tenuously forged, endlessly revised, and imperfect in its every incarnation.

    Thomas Jefferson, for one, considered copyright a necessary evil: he favored providing just enough incentive to create, nothing more, and thereafter allowing ideas to flow freely, as nature intended.  His conception of copyright was enshrined in the Constitution, which gives Congress the authority to “promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries.”  This was a balancing act between creators and society as a whole; second comers might do a much better job than the originator with the original idea.

    But Jefferson’s vision has not fared well, has in fact been steadily eroded by those who view the culture as a market in which everything of value should be owned by someone or other.  the distinctive feature of modern American copyright law is its almost limitless bloating – its expansion in both scope and duration.

    <

    p>
    Hopefully I didn’t mistype anything.

    <

    p>
    Now, with it in mind that we are in an ongoing social negotiation, regarding your guidelines, there is nothing about the copyright law that limits fair use to “giving us a taste”.  It would violate copyright law to copy just a phrase or sentence, if the intent is to make money from it and if it detracts from the value of the orignal work.  But if the intent is educational, you are free to copy the whole thing, like when a teacher copies an essay to hand out to a class.  And if the intent is to comment, it is OK to copy the whole thing so we can comment on the whole thing, and if it is news reporting, it could be poor reporting to not copy the whole thing.  As Sabutai acknowledged somewhere down in this thread, there is an “emerging standard” to only copy a portion of an article, but that standard is not for copyright reasons, it is for readability reasons, just like the emerging standard to put in linebreaks now and then.  Even if a work is not copyrighted, it might read better to excerpt from it rather than include the whole thing.

    <

    p>
    Including a link is good, because it lets us verify that what has been copied is really what was written, if we want.  It is good to be able read something in context, it has greater impact.  But there is no need to force people to go to a site for copyright reasons, and I’d prefer to not have to leave the page I am on and avoid having to see advertisers, assuming, of course, that the intent is educational and so we can comment on it.  If you feel that sites should make money from advertisers, feel free to go, and click on the ads to make them even more money.

    <

    p>
    Don’t anyone tell me I don’t know copyright law, because there is no set “copyright law,” there is only an “ongoing negotiation”, and the blogosphere is a new realm.  Being allowed to copy articles to blogs (even so called for-profit blogs like this one) without worrying about lawyers helps the blogosphere function.  It isn’t stealing anything from the original writer, because with proper attribution (very important) it raises their profile and raises the value of the work.  The thing about “for profit” blogs like this is that they don’t profit from original content, like the way the Boston Globe or the Onion do, they profit by providing a place to comment on the news and read other people’s comments.

    <

    p>
    And that comment I posted in the Tsongas thread with the link saying “This is an interesting article” was a broken link, when you arrived at the Lowell Sun you would first find ads, and then “Thank you for visiting Lowell Sun. We are sorry the article that you requested is no longer available. Please search for this article in our archive search”.  The point I was hoping to humorously make was that sometimes articles get moved or removed, and that’s why a link is not a good substitute for copying the text, especially if the text is important to preserve.

    <

    p>

    • One issue you have touched which also concerns me is that stuff posted on the internet is not necessarily permanent.  So, a link posted now may be non-functional 5 minutes from now.  If the text isn’t captured elsewhere (here, for example), then it may be gone for good.  Now, I’m not saying that this justifies copying as much as a reader wants to from a commercial site (and making blog entries impossibly cumbersome), but I do see it as a legitimate concern to be raised. 

      <

      p>
      What brought this potential problem to my attention is the trend of academic libraries foregoing paper journals for electronic.  THis means that if they don’t have the paper copy on a shelf, and a server somewhere fails or the owner decides to withold the info forever after, well, we all lose access to that info.  I realize this is a different problem than what is being discussed here (after all, we’re lifting mag & newspaper text, which is abundently available in paper form, for now).  But just to give some background to my reason for concern.  As electronic media expands, so also expands the possibility that knowledge bases can be removed from public view with the flick of a switch.

      • YEah, the web gives people the ability to rewrite history, to un-say things they said and even change their words into something opposite.

        <

        p>
        I am usually relieved when a moderator here or elsewhere removes one of my occasional ill-considered late-night posts, because sometimes they reflect very badly on me, people won’t know the humor I somehow saw in it.  (thanks)  But if people can do this with their own posts or articles, they can essentially lie and cheat.  Resposting stories holds people to what they said.  Of course, there is no way to prove that the “repost” is really a repost and not just made up, like that post of yours back in December where you said “You’re right, John” that has been removed.  And I can’t prove that GayCityNews really did write that article that I said they deleted, unless of course they sue me for copyright infringement (so that’s not gonna happen!).  That’s why someone should please do this search on their site and comment here that yes, the article used to exist, John Howard is not just making it up.  (Please Laurel?)

        <

        p>
        While I occasionally edit a blogpost in the first few minutes after posting it, I never go back significantly later and change or remove anything.  Seems to me that’s a serious violation of blogger ethics.  Not so for news sites, apparently.

  3. You, Dave, and Bob, could help by promoting high quality user posts to the front page and not promoting low quality ones, even if they’re about a newsworthy story.

    <

    p>
    Several times over the past year, I’ve written very good posts around some event or commenting on an article… but while I was working on the post, someone else simply slapped up a link and a one sentence question, and because their quick work got there first, you promoted it.  And then, because there was already something on the front page about the topic in question, very few people read my post.

    <

    p>
    Result: I don’t bother anymore.  If there’s a big story or an article we’re all likely to talk about, I figure someone will make slapdash userpost about it and you’ll promote it and it’s not worth my effort to try for quality.  I don’t write those anymore.

    • Sometimes its better with a big news story for the first post to just be more like a place holder, saying essentially “this is the thread to comment on Obama’s announcement” and then letting the comments be where the effort takes pace.

      • What’s clear is that Blue Mass Group’s owners have sent a very strong message that they value timeliness over quality, and participants get the message.  Here’s Charley asking for more quality posts.  Here’s me saying, your (collective) actions have encouraged the opposite from your participants, so if you want what you say in this post, change what you do.

    • This is frustrating thing to happen that you mention.  However, it doesn;t prevent you from placing your write-up in the live thread.  If it is stunning work, people will still use it as a springboard.  I tend to agree with Howard on this – if it is fast-breaking news, how is anyone to know that someone is working on a beautiful post for us to comment from?  We don’t, and so a slap-dash thing goes up, and we all can have our say. 

      • An excellent diary is not the same as an excellent comment.

        <

        p>
        One has more formatting options with a diary and one can get more context out. A good comment is terse and pungent. It snaps the reader into thinking differently. A good diary, though, presents facts, examines multiple interpretation, and provides a framework for thinking about something. Lightning vs. building an electric grid.

        • how do you propose to solve the timeliness problem?  How can we know that someon is working on a well-designed diary?  Should we withold all comments on something we feel is pressing until someone gets around to putting up a better diary?  What is your solution?

          • Write a really good post in advance, leaving blanks to insert the actual news event.

            <

            p>
            Or, just write a really good post really fast, like I do.

          • I already explained it in my comment that started this thread.

            <

            p>
            If the owners of this blog value timeliness over quality, they should promote a post on an article or news event as soon as they see one.

            <

            p>
            If the owners of this blog want to encourage quality posts and value that more than timeliness, they should not promote low quality posts, regardless of topic.  They could either write their own post, or see if someone else posts something good before they get to it.  They should promote only posts of at least reasonable quality.

            <

            p>
            They get to define the threshold & standards for what goes on the front page.  We reader/posters get to follow their lead.

            <

            p>
            Based on the examples I’ve seen, the message I get is that post quality is not important.  But now Charley says it is.  It doesn’t really feel like a mixed message yet – it feels like he is (or the three of them are) unclear on the blog’s editorial priorities.  Actions speak louder than requests.

          • Okay, okay, Laurel, if you want a proposal here it is:

            <

            p>
            This is a Massachusetts blog, so we expect breaking news about our Commonwealth to become prominent quickly. Those are just the rules of Blogostan: one must be timely or fade into obscurity. I see two exceptions to that rule:

            • when the news is of something complicated
            • when the news seems to consist of a big helping of rumor or spin and some progressive sleuthing would be more valuable than immediately front-paging it

            National news, that’s another matter. There are plenty of other blogs that report on that. No one is going to come here for the latest on New Orleans, North Korea, or Rudolph Giuliani. A hesitation to highlight pointer posts would be useful for such things.

    • Not sure if you’re still paying attention to this thread Cos, but maybe you or someone else has an answer to my question …

      <

      p>
      Is it considered bad blogging etiquette to write the type of post you describe? I’m certain that I have done something at least approximating what you’ve described on a couple of occasions. I don’t know that they were influenced by a desire to be frontpaged, but I was trying to get the news into this forum.

      <

      p>
      Should the basic rule be to only post when you have something to add to a story, or is contributing something purely as a conduit to news kosher? I assume it is OK in your book to make a comment like the user post you’re describing. That is to say, if someone asked for a link and I happened to have the info., but not the time to add commentary, I could post the link as a comment without adding anything.

      <

      p>
      Anyways, I am just trying to understand how I as an individual user here could better improve the atmosphere/debate, rather than relying on a change from the top.

      • Should the basic rule be to only post when you have something to add to a story, or is contributing something purely as a conduit to news kosher?

        <

        p>
        I actually appreciate those simple conduits, Daniel.  Because when the original post about something has already tilted the discussion toward that person’s “something to add”, then everything else people want to add is off-topic, and already battle lines are drawn.  But that’s fine too, I’m not gonna complain if the first post contains the poster’s take on the story rather than just the story. 

        <

        p>
        And since this blog uses the “reply to this comment” system, it is possible to make detailed and informative comments that  that are jumping off points for new sub-discussions within the larger context.

      • Each blog has its own etiquette on things like that.

        <

        p>
        However, I wasn’t addressing any “rules” about what to post.  I’m talking about how the BMG editors’ practices on what they frontpage affects what kinds of posts people are likely to write, as it relates to Charlie’s request here that people write a certain kind of post.

        <

        p>
        Perhaps Charlie’s post can be interpreted as requesting that people do less of what you describe, but my comment shouldn’t be interpreted in that way at all.  If anything, I’m saying the opposite: Blue Mass Group consistently frontpages such posts, so clearly, those types of posts are highly encouraged here.

        <

        p>
        However, even if BMG changed editorial practice such that the types of posts Charlie is asking for were encouraged and frontpaged, that wouldn’t make it bad etiquette to write the link-plus-one-line sort of posts you’re asking about.  It would simple relegate them to the “User Posts” section, where only the most active BMG partcipants would notice them.  That could still be useful: Those are the people most likely to see the link and write a high quality post around it.

  4. with something ot, but possibly of interest to some here.
    From allaccess.com:

    <

    p>

    WHMP NEEDS IMPACT PLAYERS

    Are you passionate about news, media and the Western Massachusetts community? Do you have a grasp of today’s issues and a point of you? The Valley’s Voice, WHMP, is looking for some new impact players to add to our staff. If you have energy, passion and a desire to learn radio from the ground up, this is a great place to get started. Experience is preferred, but it’s attitude, enthusiasm, discipline and a desire to win that will get you in the door. If you think you’ve got the stuff to survive and thrive in the wonderful world of progressive talk radio, please send your resume and cover letter to Chris Collins, Director of News and Programming, WHMP Radio, 15 Hampton Avenue, Northampton, Mass. 01060. Saga Communications is an equal opportunity employer.

  5. With all due respect give him a break. He has helped create an excellent Blog for all of us to read and contribute to. I see no problem with his simple and polite request for a little more thought and less cut and paste.

    • With your reasoning, not your point.

      <

      p>
      I don’t necessarily think it’s a good idea to cut people slack because ‘they’ve made a great website.’ That’s not very condusive to making this website’s effectiveness endure – but it is a fantastic way to water it down.

      <

      p>
      Cos has some very good points. Just because something is the first post, doesn’t necessarily mean it should be front-paged. That said, John Howard and Laurel make good points too: sometimes the best post on news basically repeats what happened, points out some good sources of information, and allows for the analysis and exchanges of ideas to take place in the comments. A mix between the two sounds good.

      <

      p>
      Charley clearly wanted something out of this thread – and that would be my suggestion to him. People should try to write good diaries that are relevant, timely and poignant – not just cut and paste and a few sloppy words on the subject.

  6. With all due respect give him a break. He has helped create an excellent Blog for all of us to read and contribute to. I see no problem with his simple and polite request for a little more thought and less cut and paste.

  7. With all due respect give him a break. He has helped create an excellent Blog for all of us to read and contribute to. I see no problem with his simple and polite request for a little more thought and less cut and paste.

  8. talk back to the news

    <

    p>
    Okay, inspired by your request, I wrote one: Boston Bashes 18+ Events (I admit I picked “bashes” for the alliteration đŸ™‚

    <

    p>
    So, your posting here has given me a bit of encouragement that you want to see this kind of post.  In the long term, though, it’ll be you & David & Bob’s frontpaging practices that will win out, and I’ll follow that lead.

    <

    p>
    Remember, even recommended user posts hardly get read.  Don’t be fooled by the number of comments – it’s the active participants who are most likely to read recommended posts.  We have a lot more lurkers than participants here, and based on my web server log experiments, lurkers don’t read user posts, they read only front page posts.  People post here partly for discussion, but partly for an audience.  What you frontpage determines what people think you want to see written.

Archives