Loadedog versus the Canberra Times

johnboy 13 February 2007 38

[First filed: February 08, 2007 @ 17:53]

You may remember we mentioned in passing Loadedog’s story about a marijuana drought gripping the ACT.

A lot of other news outlets followed up the story. Loadedog and his correspondent were briefly concerned the notoriety would lead to unwanted attention, but soon the storm passed.

Until this Monday when the Canberra Times’ Public Sector Informant grabbed a chunk of the text from the story and (as is too often the case) decided that “local website” was sufficient attribution, rather than actually mentioning the name of the site (as even ratbag bloggers would have the decency to do).

This sort of thing happens to us a lot (although thankfully it has been getting better). Loadedog, however, has more time on his hands and a more finely developed sense of injustice, so he’s off to Media Watch and the Press Council to get their thoughts on the practice. You can read all the details over on his remodeled site.

We await the outcome with interest.

UPDATED: Loadedog has more on the story with the Press Council ruling that journalist’s standards of attribution can be lower than high school students or ratbag bloggers. We await Media Watch’s approach to the issue

What's Your Opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
38 Responses to Loadedog versus the Canberra Times
Hasdrubahl Hasdrubahl 8:54 pm 13 Feb 07

Do we “own our own comments” on a blog? I doubt it. Mind you, Rupe can have mine, for a fee….

J Dawg J Dawg 8:50 pm 13 Feb 07

With regards to newspapers/magazines only referring to the source as “another magazine/newspaper”, wouldn’t that be a bit different because they are quoting a person who works for, and represents that “other” magazine/newspaper. In this case, a person is expressing their personal views on a blog, where they own their own comments, unless we all receive a cheque in the mail from JB at the start of each month…

West_Kambah_4eva West_Kambah_4eva 5:56 pm 13 Feb 07

Whatever, I say blow up the canberra times building and in it’s place put a 300ft solid gold statue of Gary Humphries.

Hasdrubahl Hasdrubahl 4:31 pm 13 Feb 07

The blogmeister of the third-best Canberra blog had this to say on the matter:
“One thing to mention the story had broken “in another newspaper” (albeit ungracious and rude), It seems another to quote without attribution.”

seepi seepi 3:40 pm 13 Feb 07

Gossip mags often use ‘an australian magazine says’ etc. Vague attribution is not unique to the web.

johnboy johnboy 3:20 pm 13 Feb 07

One thing to mention the story had broken “in another newspaper” (albeit ungracious and rude), It seems another to quote without attribution.

Hasdrubahl Hasdrubahl 3:03 pm 13 Feb 07

The response from the PC seems reasonable enough to me.

Attribution would have been good, but as the PC says:

‘In the past, newspaper columns have quoted from “another newspaper” or “another magazine” without naming competitors or providing their contact address.’

Ralph Ralph 3:01 pm 13 Feb 07

That letter from the Press Council just sounds like their standard ‘piss off’ form of words.

Thumper Thumper 3:51 pm 09 Feb 07

And an email campaign is petty and certainly not warranted.

terubo terubo 3:35 pm 09 Feb 07

Hear hear! I mean, would the CT publish CrazyChester’s rantings? No.

bonfire bonfire 3:08 pm 09 Feb 07

i get better local coverage from ra than the ct.

enough said.

ozmreeee ozmreeee 2:44 pm 09 Feb 07

As a former CT journo friend of mine once quipped, “… the CT hasn’t broken a story in the last 10 years and they only print a story once it’s appeared somewhere else!”

loadedog loadedog 2:18 pm 09 Feb 07

As much as every word I’ve said about this matter is true, I would encourage everyone here not to engage in cyber-harassment on the basis of an unsubstantiated blog post.

While the evidence of unattributed quotation is incontestable, my remarks about her behaviour on the phone fall into the category of ‘her word against mine’ (I wonder if she wonders whether I recorded the conversation?). If she stands by her words at some stage, then I’d probably support the campaign (my respect for her might creep up a notch or two also), but until that time, I have to say I think you guys are nuts just accepting my word.

For the record, I have never asserted this was a case of plagiarism. It clearly isn’t.

Al Al 1:06 pm 09 Feb 07

I’m sure Ms Metherell (who’s probably gonna have to get herself a new email address now – snicker) would be of the opinion that journalistic ethics for giving credit to other journalists does not apply to you bloggers – after all you’re not REAL journos are you?
Just like:
REAL cricket can’t be played in one day.
The net will never replace REAL newspapers.
And my personal favourite:
Windows will NEVER replace MS-DOS.

terubo terubo 12:53 pm 09 Feb 07

This isn’t a case of plagiarism, so much as lack of attribution. The “local website” should’ve been named.

seepi seepi 12:43 pm 09 Feb 07

is it really plagiarism if it is in quote marks?

West_Kambah_4eva West_Kambah_4eva 12:04 pm 09 Feb 07


Everyone should email her as I have to express their disgust at her plagiarism and laziness.

I’m not sure who she thinks she is, to say ‘I can do what I want’. After all, she works the the *snicker* Canberra Times, not exactly an internationally known rag…or nationally for that matter.

Thumper Thumper 8:07 am 09 Feb 07

Go the Drovers Dogs….

vg vg 7:11 am 09 Feb 07

Canberra print media. Where kids try and learn how to be journalists….but fail

Hasdrubahl Hasdrubahl 10:39 pm 08 Feb 07

Reminds me of an item on WIN News tonight: structured around a new micro-doc series on the “Hidden Treasures” of the NGA.

The series, said WIN, will be shown on “free to air television” – which is as close as they would come to identifying that the free to air station will in fact be the ABC.

Oh, and it doesn’t help that the series presenter was said (by Jessica Good) to be “Betty Church”…

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Region Group Pty Ltd

Search across the site