Tag Archives: blogging

Always Link to the Source

Posted on by
5

The author deserves it.

The other day, I read an excellent post by journalist Dan Tynan titled “My Job and welcome to it.” If you are a journalist, blogger, or other type of writer — or have dreams of becoming any of these things — I highly recommend that you read this. It might open up your eyes about how a professional writer works and how the decline in print journalism is affecting them. Many thanks to @estherschindler on Twitter for including this link among the dozens she tweets each day.

In it, he laments about the way his work is echoed on the Web:

And, of course, the blogosphere may pick it up. Kind-hearted conscientious bloggers will write a one paragraph summary and link to the story, citing the source where they found it (though not necessarily the original source). Some will add their own commentary or expertise, though this is pretty rare. Others will lift the story wholesale, but retain my byline and some notion of where they originally found the story. And some evil bloggers will lift the content and claim it as their own, the bastards.

From all of this I get exactly bupkis. Oh, there’s added exposure I suppose. I do always put a link to my own blog (Tynan on Tech) in the bio, and sometimes I see a small traffic spike. But really, the benefit to me personally is next to nil.

I added the emphasis in the first paragraph. It’s the point of this post: that too many bloggers and online content creators are linking back to their sources — but not necessarily the original source.

I see this on Twitter all the time. The Huffington Post, which apparently regurgitates top news and opinion items with a blurb and a quote — sometimes quite lengthy, going beyond what’s considered “fair use” — is frequently linked to from Twitter, Digg, and other sites. The only organization that benefits from this is the one that echoes the content — in this case, The Huffington Post — not the author of the original work or the organization that paid for the work to be written. The result of this is a potential loss of credit and advertising revenue for the true source. People read the meat of the content on the aggregating site, and don’t bother to dig deeper at the source. This not only contributes to the problems we’re having in the world of journalism, but it feeds the “think for me” attitude of so many people who are trying to consume the information that’s out there. After all, why should I read an entire article and form my own opinion when an organization like The Huffington Post can deliver the highlights and opinion for me?

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not bashing The Huffington Post. It does serve a purpose. What I am criticizing, however, is the inability of people to recognize the source of someone’s hard work and to share a link to that source rather than to the regurgitated version on another site.

Oddly enough, another link shared on Twitter soon after the link referenced (and properly linked to) above rammed this point home — at least in my mind. It was a link to an article by Mack Collier titled “Five reasons you have a crappy blog.” I read the article, which I found interesting, and was surprised to find a statement buried at the bottom of it that said:

Mack Collier blogs at The Viral Garden. His original post ran here.

I clicked the link on the word “here” and wound up at Mack’s blog, where the exact same post appeared, but with the title “Five reasons why your company blog sucks.” (I guess the word “sucks” was too outrageous for the other site.)

This worried me. Had the other site, the one my Twitter friend linked to, stolen the content from Mack? I went so far as to fire off an e-mail message to him, apologizing for my snoopiness and asking whether he’d given the other site permission. He wrote back promptly, assuring me that he had.

Whew.

Content theft is a major concern of all writers and bloggers. I’ve seen other sites steal content from newspapers and other bloggers and I’m always aware of when it may be happening again.

My point is this: if you’re going to share a link to content with someone, share a link to the original source. (Yes, “original source” is redundant, but I think redundancy is required here.) The same article — or a good portion of its content — might appear multiple times on the Web. The original author deserves to have his work written where it appeared first. This helps him gauge the popularity of a post or topic. It helps concentrate all comments related to the post in one place. If he’s been paid by the source site to write the content, it helps earn him points with the publisher that’ll get him more work in the future or increase his level of compensation. It could also help with advertising revenues if you click an ad on the site.

And you can bet that when I tweeted the link, I used Mack’s site as the source.

Beggar Spam

Posted on by
Comment

A new kind of spam makes me wonder how stupid spammers think we are.

To post a comment on any of my blog-based sites, you need to jump three hurdles:

  1. You need to get past Bad Behavior, a spam prevention solution that can identify bots. If Bad Behavior thinks the a page is being accessed by a spam bot, it simply does not allow that bot to comment. Does this work? Well, during the past 7 days, Bad Behavior has blocked 2,018 access attempts. Does that mean it has stopped all the bots? Sadly, it doesn’t. But it seems to do a pretty good job.
  2. You need to get past Akismet, the WordPress-provided spam filtering tool. Akismet takes the incoming comments that get past Bad Behavior and evaluate them to determine whether they might be spam. If it thinks a comment is spam, it gets put in a spam “bucket” (my term). Does this work? Well, in March it caught 3,830 spam comments, missed only 11 that I flagged as spam, and incorrectly marked only 3 good comments as spam that I rescued. It has caught a total of 54,048 spam comments since October 2008 — that’s just six months.
  3. June 30, 2014 Update
    I’ve finally gotten around to writing up the site comment policy on a regular page (rather than post) on this site. You can find it here: Comment Policy.

    You need to get past me. I read all the comments that Akismet approves and either approve them for posting on the site or mark them as spam that Akismet missed. In certain rare instances, I’ll delete a comment that might not be spam but is, in my opinion, inappropriate for the site. (You can read my comment policy, if you’re interested.) I also briefly review what Akismet has flagged as spam and occasionally rescue a non-spam comment from the spam bucket so it appears on the site.

If you’re not a blogger, you probably don’t realize how big a problem comment spam is. Simply said, if I didn’t have Bad Behavior to block the bots and Akismet to filter out spam comments, this blog would attract anywhere from 10 to 1000 spam comments in a day. Spam comment contents range from links to sites selling drugs or offering online gambling to simple attempts to get some “Google Juice” from links to specific sites. Some of it contains crude and offensive words and ideas. If I let it get by me and allowed it to be posted on my sites, it would likely offend most of my readers.

But lately, I’ve begun getting a new kind of spam: beggar spam. The content of the message goes something like this:

I do not believe I get only one chance in life. I am from Guinea so my English is bad. Please give.

WTF?

Of course, this kind of comment never makes it to my blog. It’s stopped dead by Akismet or me. After a while, Akismet will pick up the pattern that identifies it as spam and properly filter each beggar spam message into the spam bucket.

But the real question is this: do these spammers really expect blog readers — or bloggers, for that matter — to send money to some faceless beggar just because they asked for it? Does anyone actually send them money to give them the idea this ploy works?

Which brings up another thought: The Internet has made it so easy for people to try to suck money out of people that they’ll try anything, no matter how unlikely it is to work. Just get yourself an automated commenting bot, set its options to include the message and link you want, and let it go. Sixty seconds of effort and an Internet connection can flood the world’s blog (and spam filters) with millions of scam attempts. If even one of them is successful, the spammer is ahead of the game.

I wonder how much of the world’s Internet bandwidth is used by but spammers and con artists. I’m not just talking about comment spam here. I’m talking about e-mail from Nigerian princes and widows. I’m talking about responses to For Sale items on online services, where the buyer offers a certified check for more than the purchase amount and asks you to give the difference to his shipping agent. Or the people who e-mail legitimate companies, offering to pay more for services than advertised, with the difference going to a “logistics” agent.

I see how many of these things cross my path in a day or week or month. I’m just one relatively well-connected person. What of the people who are better connected than me? Or the ones that foolishly put their e-mail addresses, unencoded, on a Web site so the spam bots can scrape them up for sale to spammers? Or the ones with blogs at the top of Google’s page rank that get thousands of visitors a day?

How much of the Internet is wasted on fraud and spammy self-promotion?

Anyway, I’d love to get feedback from other bloggers or people experienced with spam. What’s the most ridiculous spam you’ve ever received? The one that made you think the spammer thinks everyone is a gullible fool? Use the Comments link or form for this post.

And don’t try to spam me, please. Your comment will never appear on this site.

When is a Complaint Not a Complaint?

Posted on by
3

When it isn’t a complaint.

Get a grip, readers! Not every negative thing you read in a blog is a complaint. Not every negative thing you read in a blog needs defending by someone who is apparently indignant that a negative comment can appear online.

I’ve been blogging over five years now. This blog is chock full of opinions — both good and bad — about a wide range of things.

It never ceases to amaze me that some commenters find it necessary to get all defensive about any “negative” opinions I have. Sometimes, they even come to the defense of comments that weren’t really negative at all — just an observation they didn’t like.

Case in point, my “Airport Codes: SBP” post. I wrote it last summer after flying from Wickenburg to Seattle by helicopter. One of our refueling stops was San Luis Obispo Airport (SBP). I’d never landed there before and although I had both a chart and a detailed airport diagram, I was not familiar with the local landmarks and landing procedures. So I did what any pilot might do: I said I was “unfamiliar” when I made my initial radio call to the tower. This, in part, triggered a fountain of guidance from the female controller. Way more guidance than I needed or wanted. I commented, in my post, that she was “chatty” because she talked so much it was difficult for other pilots to make their radio calls. More than one commenter on this post took issue with my opinion and came to the woman’s defense.

Give it a rest, guys. It was just an observation and opinion. It wasn’t exactly negative. And did you even bother to watch the video accompanying the post so you could hear her go at it?

And so what if I said she’s chatty? I’m sure plenty of people have used harsher terms about my motormouth sometimes. Do I take offense? Not usually. Everyone is entitled to an opinion.

My point is this: blogs are full of personal opinions. Not all negative opinions are complaints — just as not all positive opinions are praise.

If I mention that the car wash guy did a good job cleaning my car, am I praising him? It’s his job to clean cars. Of course he’s going to do a good job. But if I say he did a kick-butt job cleaning my car and that it looks brand new and that he was smart enough not to put that smelly spray crap in it or leave my steering wheel greasy with Armor All — well, then I’m praising him.

(And no, I didn’t just issue a veiled complaint about Armor All. Stop reading between the f-cking lines when there’s nothing there to read!)

In any case, non-positive opinions are not always complaints. Get a grip — and stop being defensive for no reason.

Embrace the opinions of the bloggers you follow. They open your world to a different point of view.

A Tale of two Copyright Infringements

Posted on by
3

Together, we can stop it.

CopyrightThe other day, while trying in vain to catch up with missed tweets by the people I follow on Twitter, I noticed that two of my Twitter friends were dealing with copyright-related issues. Since then, both issues were resolved. I believe that part of the reason for the speedy resolution of these problems was involvement by the Twitter community.

Content Theft

The first case came to light when one of my Twitter friends, @anntorrence, complained that she had not gotten a response from the blogger who used one of her articles on his site. The link to the article in question told the rest of the story. Ann had written a great tips piece about preparing for a cold-weather photowalk. The article was originally published on Ann’s blog, Pixel Remix: the Ann-alog. Later, it was picked up with her permission on Photowalking Utah. The same article was picked up without her permission by a new photowalking Web site that was obviously anxious to build content and Google juice.

Ann’s article is copyrighted — as is most content on the Web. Her obvious distress over the piece being used without her permission bothered me. After all, I earn my living as a writer and have seen my own content stolen again and again. In my case, it often affects my livelihood by distributing content that I normally receive royalties for. But that doesn’t mean that content theft is any less wrong when it’s from a blog or other free source.

I went to the Web site guilty of the theft and posted a comment there. I also wrote to the owner of the site. I was horrified not only to see the theft, but because that site was one of the few that I actually paid to advertise my helicopter business on. I was not interested in supporting a site that was stealing content. If they stole from Ann, who else had they stolen from? How much of the content was original or reused with permission? (Needless to say, I pulled my ad immediately.)

The owner of the site made the fatal error of replying to me in Twitter. He defended his actions by saying that he “gives credit when due.” He was obviously clueless about copyright law — as most people incapable of creating their own content appear to be. He seemed to think that if it was on the Web, it was free for use anywhere, as long as he put a byline for the original author. He appeared to think he was being generous by including a link back to the article — not the original, but the site he stole it from.

An @reply argument ensued, with me trying to educate him and him responding arrogantly. He tried to continue the argument in e-mail. After I left my computer (and Twitterrific), he was apparently blasted by other Twitter users who got in on the discussion with their own @replies.

Ann has since gotten satisfaction for the situation — her article has been removed. Unfortunately, the owner of the site still doesn’t get it. He has written a post apologizing for not giving proper links back to original articles. He evidently does not understand that he needs permission to reuse copyrighted work.

I wonder what Scott Kelby will say when he sees his work used on the offender’s site. Personally, I hope he sues the site owner’s sorry ass.

I would urge people to boycott the site, but that might send new visitors there just to check it out. Instead, I’ll just urge people not to frequent sites that steal content. If you think a blog’s post contains content used without permission, don’t be afraid to comment about it.

Removing Copyright Notices

The second case was far more blatant. Some idiot had written a blog post about how to remove copyright notices from photos and other images found on the Web. As if that wasn’t bad enough, he used someone else’s copyrighted image for his example. That someone else was @PattyHankins, one of my Twitter friends.

Patty mentioned the problem in Twitter and I went to investigate. The post in question was a typical hacker/pirate post with instructions for removing copyright notices that were part of a photo. Patty’s photo appeared numerous times in the step-by-step instructions. After the first time, the author of the post made a comment like, “I don’t know who Patty Hankins is, but nice picture.” Extremely obnoxious.

I posted a comment to the post. I can’t remember exactly what I said, but it clearly pointed out that the author of the post and site was violating Patty’s copyright. Evidently, many other Twitter users did the same thing. So when Patty sent his ISP a DMCA notice, she got a quick response. The photo was removed within four hours.

Patty referred me to “Using the DMCA Takedown Notice to Battle Copyright Infringement” on NatureScapes.net for what she says is the most effective sample DMCA letter she’s ever used.

Again, I believe that one of the reasons Patty had a relatively easy time of getting the photo off the infringer’s Web site was the outpouring of comments by outraged Twitter users.

For More Information…

If this post interests you, you might be interested in the following links.

And please do use the Comments link or form to add your thoughts about this matter. If you are one of the offending bloggers, however, don’t waste your time. My blog is not your soapbox.

Related Links:

4 Great Articles about WordPress 2.7

Posted on by
Comment

Why reinvent the wheel?

WordPress LogoLast night, the folks at Automattic updated WordPress.com to version 2.7. The self-hosted version of WordPress is still in beta, although Release Candidate 1 (RC1) was released two days ago.

I’ve been working with WordPress 2.7 for about two weeks now (since Beta 2) and am absolutely thrilled with it. The Dashboard and administrator interface has been completely reworked to make it not only more useful, but easier to navigate. Sure, a lot of folks will be grumbling about the change from horizontal-on-top to vertical-on-left navigation, but when you look beyond the obvious, you see a true user interface improvement.

There are plenty of other new features, too. But rather than write my own article about them, here are links to four other articles written by folks who clearly love WordPress as much as I do. Read up, upgrade, and enjoy!

2.7 Gets Here in 2 Days! by Jane Wells on the WordPress.com blog was the first official announcement of 2.7’s upcoming appearance on WordPress.com. Jane helps fuel the excitement with a great description of the new features.

10 Things You Need to Know about WordPress 2.7 by Aaron Brazell on Technosailor states, “This is not your grandma’s WordPress!” (Not sure if I should be offended by this; there’s a chance I might be old enough to be his mother.) He then goes on to describe and state his opinions of the new features.

WordPress 2.7 – 20 Must See Features by Sean P. Aune on Mashable lists the 20 features he finds most notable with a few screen shots.

WordPress 2.7 arrives Thursday night is a shorter and more to-the-point piece by Joshn Lowensohn on cnet news. It links back to the first article here (which I also think is the best) for a full discussion of features.

I’ll be writing a bit about WordPress for Maria’s Guides as I find new tricks and tips to share. I’ll also be revising my Lynda.com training material to cover the new features available on WordPress.com.