Back to article
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. You should sign your comments by adding ~~~~ to the end of your message. Please remain on topic. Though there are very few rules governing what can be said here, civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Quick hints for new commentators:
- Use colons to indent a response to someone else's remarks
- Always sign your comments by putting --~~~~ at the end
- You can edit a section by using the edit link to the right of the section heading
How unfortunate. In an age where news from common media is increasingly referred to as 'opinion journalism' and 'editorial stories' and open-source news is increasingly doing quality investigative work, the AP decides to make itself look like the RIAA. Smart move...
I hope they demonstrate good intelligence when they issue these 'guidelines'... and how else should we view these 'guidelines' other than a statement on how to fairly use AP material? Isn't the purpose of these guidelines to spell out acceptable application of fair use?
AP to internets: "Hello! We are outdated irrelevant suckfail! Proceed to ignore us now!" Message received and understood. --on WP as User:Kasreyn 220.127.116.11 14:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- You do know you can use SUL to reserve user Kasreyn across all wikis and you will be logged into them all when you log into the first or second one.
- How do I do that again? The last time someone told me this, I asked them to post an explanation on my wp user talk page, but they never did. --on WP as User:Kasreyn 18.104.22.168 12:02, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
- Anyway, the reality is, that a blogger or Wikinewsie in Seattle can't cover a story in Zimbabwe or South Africa without taking details "off the wire". AP, AFP, and Reuters aren't going away anytime soon; you also must remember that a lot of their income is from selling financial information, the 'global news' side of the business is a source to merge into this financial service; their reportage on unrest in Thailand feeds through to their analysts and on to traders and can impact a whole raft of things, like exchange rates. News for public consumption generally goes through another publisher who has, say, an AP subscription and license for reuse. This is something Wikinews has to be careful with. If AP gets it wrong the story can be carried by 20 or more sources and, voila!, you've tripled the number of elephants in Africa. --Brian McNeil / talk 18:08, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
- You have a good point, but this problem will ease as we get more Wikinews members in places like Zimbabwe and S. Africa - the ideal situation would be, Wikinewsies would report on events in their area. (Of course, it's difficult to achieve this ideal). If other major news agencies decide to be dicks like AP, then it may wind up being the only way forward for Wikinews. --on WP as User:Kasreyn 22.214.171.124 12:04, 30 June 2008 (UTC)