> In a 2016 Slack message that was quoted in the BuzzFeed article, Mr. Mikkelson explicitly outlined this strategy. “Usually when a hot real news story breaks (such as a celebrity death), I just find a wire service or other news story about it and publish it on the site verbatim to quickly get a page up,” he wrote. “Once that’s done, then I quickly start editing the page to reword it and add material from other sources to make it not plagiarized.”
Interesting article, I'm not sure I feel the above approach to be that egregious
Find a common article about a major news event, copy some of the text out and search it on Google, it'l more than likely lead you back to AP or sites that rewrite AP's content verbatim.
> This is what the vast majority of news sites do.
This is not even remotely true.
> AP or sites that rewrite AP's content verbatim.
This is not what Snopes is accused of. To use all or part of an AP story's text alone or within another story is completely normal, it's what AP licensees pay for. "Rewriting" news stories entirely to avoid the need to credit the author and pay them is probably not uncommon among bloggers or something, but any news outlet will just license AP content, which is designed to be affordable. Posting unlicensed content copied verbatim in order to initially get higher SEO rankings and then changing (or failing to change) the text later on is what Snopes is accused of. It's remarkable that it took them so long to get caught, and it would be interesting to know about anyone else doing this.
Egregious? It is possible to write a short summary article at the beginning and give perfectly acceptable credit to the original reporters. It's not that hard. If anything, it takes almost the same amount of work.
In one place, he's claiming that he was inexperienced and it was all a beginner's mistake. But here, he's pretty much saying "plagiarism" from the beginning. He knew what he was up to.
>She was an active member of revolutionary left-wing movements whose illegal activities included bombing U.S. government buildings
>it is a matter of subjective determination as to whether the actions for which Rosenberg was convicted [...] should be described as acts of "domestic terrorism."
>Rating: Mixture
Bombing government buildings is too subjective to be labeled "terrorism".
snopes has sucked for a long time. can’t get political if you’re supposed to be calling balls snd strikes. snopes definitely did to the point where it’s no longer a trusted resource.
12 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 40.4 ms ] threadInteresting article, I'm not sure I feel the above approach to be that egregious
Find a common article about a major news event, copy some of the text out and search it on Google, it'l more than likely lead you back to AP or sites that rewrite AP's content verbatim.
AP and Reuters are news articles as a services for newspapers.
This is not even remotely true.
> AP or sites that rewrite AP's content verbatim.
This is not what Snopes is accused of. To use all or part of an AP story's text alone or within another story is completely normal, it's what AP licensees pay for. "Rewriting" news stories entirely to avoid the need to credit the author and pay them is probably not uncommon among bloggers or something, but any news outlet will just license AP content, which is designed to be affordable. Posting unlicensed content copied verbatim in order to initially get higher SEO rankings and then changing (or failing to change) the text later on is what Snopes is accused of. It's remarkable that it took them so long to get caught, and it would be interesting to know about anyone else doing this.
In one place, he's claiming that he was inexperienced and it was all a beginner's mistake. But here, he's pretty much saying "plagiarism" from the beginning. He knew what he was up to.
See, for example, thehill.com. Although they do some of their own reporting, summarizing other articles and linking to them is their bread and butter.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/blm-terrorist-rosenberg/
>She was an active member of revolutionary left-wing movements whose illegal activities included bombing U.S. government buildings
>it is a matter of subjective determination as to whether the actions for which Rosenberg was convicted [...] should be described as acts of "domestic terrorism."
>Rating: Mixture
Bombing government buildings is too subjective to be labeled "terrorism".