I continue to wonder what NPs policy is on content republishing. Fair Use does allow the partial reproduction of materials, but I would hesitate to say that it allows me to copy an entire article from the NYT and publish it to NP.  The Times invested money and resources in that article and surely they have a reasonable expectation to recoup those expenses.

I'm no lawyer, butit would seem to me that NP needs to have a policy stating that such reproduction is not ok unless the hilighter in question owns the material.  I think this is a social problem and requires a social, rather than technological, solution - which is why I'm pushing for a policy rather than a feature in Highlight.  Even so, I'm certainly interested in other's thoughts.

Maybe if there is no additional reporting/comment etc from the contributor from a higlight, then the post cannot be made. I know its a little forceful, but lets be frank, the technology and publishing processes in place have created this situation.

Maybe go back a few yards and  revisit how people can contribute, otherwise I can have myblog posts auto published...which is the same situation again.

This is a great discussion. Another thought that occurs to me is that we email members who do quoting without content encouraging them to do that . Do we need another category in the editorial bubble for this? Inauthentic and incomplete have meanings other than the ones I think we might wish to convey.. something like "Great story but ..."?

Another thought that occurs to me that admin could send out periodic reminders about not using Np as simple republishing tool.  I think ANG's "Add your stuff to the quote idea" is a good one, but don't think the quote should be hidden. Perhaps there is another technical solution, as occurs when one fails to specify the channel. The box just keeps popping up with "you need to add a channel" message- all of which is an endorsement of matte's post.

But that's why we are here. To remind and teach users to only give a tease of the story with an interesting quote that makes the reader want more, leading them back to the original story. I learned this after reading one of Victoria Revay's posts.

Also, i look at NP as an e-newspaper that doesn't have an evil editor upstairs saying "nope! That storie's not getting published......." The more info a reader has the better decisions a person can make for themselves, assuming the info is accurate. The mainstream no doubt is swaying public opinion with only a small piece of the PUZZLE. Look at your local newspaper and you see a mix of original and repubs....But for sure it's mostly stories from AP, REUTERS,........and so on. It's being able to post the hidden stories from these same news orgs as well as the option to write my own thoughts on a subject that make this (NP) revolutionary,  giving people more puzzle pieces they otherwise don't get.

Example: Would you have voted for George Bush if Dan Rather reported that his granfather Prescott Bush funded Adolph..............You get my point. 

But you peeps have to know that the original material, when good stuff, is very time consuming  and is naturally going to be the minority you see on NP as in your local newspaper.

Besides there is already a perfect spot for your original thoughts on a hot story and that's the...................................comment box, you guessed it.

They say this about playing a guitar solo as well as other things and I think it applies here. Don't fret because "less is more." 

Question.......Is it ok to put your own original headline on a republished story. I see it all the time where you have the same content but another publication will have a different headline.

That's a generally accepted practice on social news sites, so I'd guess "yes."  If NP wants to have a different policy they need to articulate it clearly because otherwise people will change the headline as they see fit.

Look......This is fine. If you are a person who has a lot of time to write a lot of your own material, there is nothing wrong with that. If I was sitting here all day and getting paid I'd be glad to give you my researched story on what I think of Prescott Bush being tagged for funding Adolph Hitler. But I Deliver concrete on sometimes very long days and on the side I want people to see the NEWS that Shawn Hannity will never show them. Digging up gold is what trips my trigger. After all, this is a News site and the sweetness of it is I get to bring puzzle pieces to people that the the "bigs" wouldn't dare show them. So what's that say about there journalistic ethics. I dare you to google it! Here google "man picks butt while waiting for bus"....It's all out there ...........DIG DIG DIG!!!! "Project Northwoods" "9/11 inside job" Google it! Trust me, NP is no place for the same ol' same ol'.

"Perhaps there is another technical solution, as occurs when one fails to specify the channel."

That would work. 

Another suggestion (totally unrelated) for the highlight tool:  add a preview button.

That is a good point from Dig (2.4/07) and I agree that a critical function of NP is highlight articles and link to those not emphasized (never mind mentioned) in other media. However, the republishing issue is , apart from anything else, a potential legal headache for NP. I have no particular expertise in that. And there are many-probably a large majority- of NP users and readers who have similar time constraints to Dig and similar motivations to provide Web gold without time consuming original commentary. As a  pass at both encouraging people who might want to elaborate on their stories and also making NP a receptive place for Dig's way of working the stories, how about this?

1. The Np highlighter tool could have another drop down menu that specifies the type of content- "original writing included" or  " main story only" and those two designations could then be visible with the story when it appears in the NP menu. The other drop down menu would appear on the highlighter with the channel menu. That is a little extra trouble for the user (one click) but not overburdensome. It is more trouble for the Np highlighter programmers and designers, but I am completly lacking in expertise on this.

2. Alternatively, the "original writing included" and "main story only" designations could appear in the editorial bubble as designations. Thus one of the functions of the newsifiers would be to make those designations, which would then appear as labels on the stories. 

3, This would not affect the categories for "good stuff" and so on that we now have in the Guide.

4. It does not address the republishing issue, when something is highlighted in its entirety.

5. It does accommodate both types of work on NP, recognizes both, and would clearly label both.

I am not wedded to this idea- there may be sound reasons (technical or otherwise) for discarding it altogether, and obviously the suggested labels are entirely lacking in pizazz- I am just thinking out loud on how to recognize and incorporate these two kinds of contributions. 

To encourage writers to add their own content to stories they highlight, don't make them put the ones they do add to into the "Opinions" category, where it gets lost.

A strictly opinion piece is different. IMO.

Why should readers look further into this story if the reporter can't tell them what he/she thinks is important about it to the public? 

I got into NowPublic because I got the impression that that was what was happening here: reporters highlighting news, but also telling why readers should look at the issue differently. 

Hey, how do you do a 'shout-out'? 

 I'd also like a way to add to my stories, such as: "Look, here's what other NowPublic reporters have found on this subject!", both pro and con. without having to go looking for it and copy and pasting their story links, tedious process and counter-productive.

 Don't make this a competition. Front Page? Nothing stays there long enough to really make a difference, IMHO.

well rene' - this stuff has had HOURS of discussion (by email, on the phone, in skype meetings) by the original group of what were then 'editors'.

 Yes all very valid and would be great to see finally resolved.

Shout-outs - are snipts from comments I belive

Interesting view on the front page aspect...nice to appeal to people's competitive spirit, but yes it is problmatic how to best display stuff.

René, good points, nay, excellent. Shout-outs are the most recent non-flag comments, by the way. You're right about the framing: it's an important part of what makes us us.

Thanks for bringing this up. Don't let my thoughts discourage you...this topic can always use a good discussion. There is so much to say, and so much that has been said on this subject I almost don't know what to say -but for me not talk in circles....would be a miracle.

I am happy to say that I see *better* use of the highlight tool now, than I did a few months ago; that's a huge positive. That being said, I have also been more interested in highlighting and commenting on stories that have been highlighted...but only if there is some newsworthy merit or a good intro. Outside of that, eh, I'm hesitant to encourage headline scraping with little other than a quote here or there -because I loath the thought of NP being another Digg/Reddi...which is what that is when people do that.

To encourage people to freely distribute their words for the greater good of humankind isn't easy. Most people have a blog where they are testing their writing skills and trying to create a following. They'll use ads to try and generate some funding...why would they post to NP? To build a reputation. Many will post to NP and their blog hoping to drive traffic to their blog so they can get paid.

I think the best way to try and encourage people to write their own stuff is to encourage those that write well on highlights to write an occasional column compiling their thoughts. Those people might be able to find time for that and hopefully be on the lookout locally for breaking news.  Getting NP members to write original content in addition to their daily lives will be tough, and I am wiling to wager we'll get a lot of people burned out.

I use the concept of a "college newspaper" all the time when talking to Mark and others. We have the fuel, the talent, the resources and the passion to create an amazing independent news source. We also have a hodgepodge of direction and lack of time on our writers part, so we're at the mercy of our contributors time and skills.

So I said a whole lot...and I didn't make a point. Welcome to the team! :) 

Dear Actual News Guy and NP Reporters, I would appreciate your comments on the following “Getting reporters to write their own take on news stories”. Perhaps I am out to lunch on this. I too sort of have an issue of just cutting and pasting someone else's article, though I understand to post news from around the world even if it is someone else story. If someone from NP has expertise and personal experience on world events why not make it a News Story (after a NP editor has reviewed and approved). News is what you make it, so I apologise if this topic has already been covered previously. Being new to this site I have not had the chance or time to go through all our posts. I like commenting on news articles and provide my own realistic spin on it. Granted it may not be agreeable to some, but I feel it important to ask those tough questions "Paid Journalists" can't or won't for fear of losing future access. This is most likely true of politicians. I feel by doing this it is even better if you inform interspersed with humour as well as serious thought providing a brief respite from daily diatribes bombarding us in the world. I think if you are qualified through personal experience or an authourity on the subject, your opinion should matter as much as the paid reporter who printed it, remembering that this paid reporter may not have the technical knowledge and background what the person they are interviewing is saying to them. Case in point "To just print what the interviewee is saying and taking it at face value to me is ludicrous". That is like Diane Francis interviewing a CEO on finance who babbles on about the economy, and Diane knows through her years of expertise on finance that this CEO is an idiot and know not what he is talking about. I know Diane and she doesn’t do idiocy well.
I just feel some Paid Journalists should all have some investigative "cajones" and not just let someone talk into a tape recorder or write their words on paper without questioning why? After all they are doing what we are doing reporting on someone thoughts. I am not a big fan of titillating news for news sake, I like facts. So I like to fill in that gap and post my comments on the subject as well.

Two Examples;
Dr. David Suzuki
The article on Suzuki long ago when he was driving town to town across Canada on a tour bus criticizing townsfolk and Governments on the environment, you would have thought the reporter would have asked the tough question to Suzuki "Why are telling these people to be environmental conscious when you are driving a diesel Tour Bus when clearly there are alternative and smaller vehicles out there? Why not a Bio-diesel or a much smaller Van?" Suzuki like the rest of us enjoys comfort, so his decision to tour around in a heavy nitrogen oxide spewing Carbon Footprint of a tour bus that seats 40 plus people may make sense to him, but then he shouldn’t criticise others especially farmers, especially when his tour group is less than a dozen people for a vehicle that seat over 40 people. So the reporter never asked that hard hitting question, so it is up to us NP reporters to ask questions and publish it as news. NP allowing the readers to judge our posts is nice where everyone has the right to comment, contrary to news media’s selective Op/Eds.
Mayor of Vancouver
Sam Sullivan’s comments to the Van Sun, that in a few years (if his plan goes through) Parents will not worry about sending their children on the city bus alone for piano lessons to Vancouver’s East Side. "Holy Tap Dancing Christ”. Obviously the reporter knew Sammy Boy had lost his mind, and the reporter most likely went skipping and hopping gleefully to the Sun to get it in print. So that is newsworthy and my comments on the story I would hope would be as newsworthy and included and not placed in the Op/Ed.
Conclusion
Why do readers have to take things at face value? Some of the articles written by the Vangroovy Sun "Ridiculously Left Coast" pretty much make them fair game for controversy from people like others and myself. I had written an article or two on NP, only to have it requested by an NP editor "Needs Work" and requested to have it regaled to the OP/Ed section. I am certainly not above criticism of my peers with way more experience, but feel if it is newsworthy, it should be treated as news and not sent to OP/Ed Limbo. After all isn't this is what NP is all about News?
Thanks for reading, comments are most certainly welcome, please feel free to send them to the Op/Ed section. Hahaha.

Barry,

I think we've discussed this in our email exchanges - and it was been widely discussed before. This is a constant complaint from some of our wranglers - who want to make sure all articles are of high quality and believe the way to do this is by setting hard rules and high standards.

I would encourage you to connect with Matte - who has been one of our more tireless wranglers (and an implacable foe of plagiarism, inauthenticity, inaccuracy, etc).  

I've often wondered as I travel NP, how NP doesn't get sued time and time again for encouraging and printing plagiarised news stories.  Of course NP is really only guilty of the latter.

Most of the articles here would definitely be fodder for plagiarism class action law suits by other newspapers and news services.

NP is treading on dangerous ground here. 

Reporting both here and elsewhere, I spend a lot of time researching an article and I also put a lot of myself into each report.  Purely synthesized news doesn't appeal to me.

I suggest that for the time being, we bring the better written articles to the top, to demonstrate to others what the expectations are for writing and in presenting an article.

And/or, NP could highlight one entire great post a day (for the entire day) on the front page - but someone needs to explain why it was chosen to give newbies some kind of guidelines.

The wranglers/editors comments could be more constructive too.  Actually commenting on these kinds of issues, can only serve to help our reporters create better posts.

I've seen some of the worst cutting and pasting too.  Sometimes only one or two words will appear on a line, for several lines with no editing applied whatsoever.

Often this makes NP look like a tin-pot web site. 

You could also make newbies posts subject to editorial review, (before being published,) until they've been here a month or so.  That way, whichever wrangler or editor is assigned to the newbie gets to work with him/her personally as a mentor.

This way we'd be able to guarantee the quality of articles presented on NP.

It would mean a little more work for all of us, but would also give NP more credibility in the news world, than simply being looked at as another news aggregator. 

That's my 2c worth!
          ~ Swan

I've identified the cutting and pasting issue that many people seem to be having on NP.  They are creating their stories on software which has preset margins.  These margin settings are what's screwing up the cutting and pasting and leaving hanging words on one line etc.

The publishing tool needs to be able to erase these margin settings by converting the text into one long line of text without any wordwrapping.  Then you get perfect cut`n`paste into Now Public.

I tested this with wordpad and turned off all word wrapping - and it finally behaved perfectly.
       ~ Swan

Exactly.

Here's an example of a copy and paste that is on the site right now without using highlight or crediting the source, I wonder how the India times would feel about their material being used to advertise a cricket site.

http://www.nowpublic.com/sports/review-day-1-india-vs-australia-3rd-test-match-perth

http://cricket.indiatimes.com/Perth_Test_India_2976_at_stumps_on_Day_1/articleshow/2705033.cms