<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>




































































  <rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
      <title>Comments On: Thank you sir, may I have another?
    
      by Whet Moser</title>
      <link>http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another</link>
      <atom:link href="http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/Rss.xml?oid=975567&amp;id=comments" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />      <description>Comments On: Thank you sir, may I have another?
    
      by Whet Moser</description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <copyright>Copyright 2009 Chicago Reader. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, Chicago Reader readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact Chicago Reader.</copyright>
      <webMaster>wil@desert.net (Chicago Reader Webmaster)</webMaster>
      <pubDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 00:00:01 -0600</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 06:15:00 -0600</lastBuildDate>
      <generator>Foundation</generator>
      <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
      
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Thank you sir, may I have another?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#973719]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#973719]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Brendan]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[skrrr -- I stand corrected.  I only glanced before, and didn't realize that these were wholesale ripoffs.
    
    Forgive my misfire; I've seen too many instances of folks whining about legitimate teaser-sampling, and this touched off a nerve.
    
    I should have given Mr. Moser more credit.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Brendan]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 21 Dec 2008 00:13:51 -0600</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Thank you sir, may I have another?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#952489]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#952489]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Brendan]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Not to take a running jump into a minefield, here, but I'm kind of perplexed, myself, by how "old media" this complaint is.  Frankly, the practice of taking a few sentences out of a larger piece of writing and using it as a teaser, followed directly by a link, is about as commonplace on the web as are LOLcats.  I'm confused as to where the shock is coming from.  Most large blogs do this.  Many aggregators do it.  And, as a blogger (unpaid as I may be), I *would* in fact be thrilled to have a site with HuffPo's traffic link to one of my or my co-bloggers' posts.  When did exposure become a bad thing?
    
    I don't see how it's "ripping off the article" if only a sample of the original content is present, and used specifically for the purpose of directing readers to the site of origin.
    
    Ok, don't throw rocks at me now, please.  :-P
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Brendan]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 21 Dec 2008 00:08:27 -0600</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Thank you sir, may I have another?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#947408]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#947408]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Monica K.]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Thanks, Whet. I do have sympathy for people who are driven into becoming scabs by poverty; a lot of them have no choice.
    
    I REALLY resent someone making me into one without even letting me know.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Monica K.]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Sat, 20 Dec 2008 00:03:31 -0600</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Thank you sir, may I have another?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#958439]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#958439]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Monica K.]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Oh but Jennifer, haven't you heard? Information needs to be "free."
    
    Spiritually free, yes. I do agree with that. I am all in favor of fucking LIBRARIES.
    
    "Free" in the sense that content providers don't have the right to living wages, that we should just all work for the love of it and accept our drafty garretts and let their ad buyers reap all the profits, if any? That appears to be the Huffpo model, which, IMO, utterly discredits them as "progressives."
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Monica K.]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 23:53:43 -0600</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Thank you sir, may I have another?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#968480]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#968480]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[jennifer]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[i can't believe, at this point, that they even bothered to call. i feel we should just lump them into the same category as the new 21st century politician...like say, bush or blago: we're only innocent because we say we are. the evidence says otherwise but who cares about that? this is bullshit, whet. don't let them tell you different.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by jennifer]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 21:32:45 -0600</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Thank you sir, may I have another?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#949018]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#949018]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[whet]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[I noticed that one of your blurbs was swiped; that's what really pushed me over the edge from being in a snit to bright-red livid for the past 36 hours.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by whet]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 21:24:30 -0600</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Thank you sir, may I have another?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#959683]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#959683]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Monica K.]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[And what about upset writers? It was especially charming to learn one of my blurbs was lifted on the very same day I got the news I was laid off.
    
    It's nice to know people like my work enough to steal it, but that doesn't help me pay for the dental work I need or feed my domineering cat.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Monica K.]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 21:12:36 -0600</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Thank you sir, may I have another?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#949972]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#949972]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[whet]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[And not just amount but consistency. They did it regularly for over a month before I threw my temper tantrum. Content's still up, too.
    
    Just got a call from them. Should call back but I'm too angry to talk about it.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by whet]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 19:45:05 -0600</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Thank you sir, may I have another?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#953636]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#953636]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[ejp]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[It must be hard for Peretti to seem *genuinely* perplexed about your reaction when it's very similar to the reactions of other disgruntled editors and writers who have commented on your blog since you discovered this practice.  HuffPo's got a lot of relationship building to do.
    
    And, seriously, the extent to which they were engaging in straight jacking other people's work makes it hard for me to swallow the "mistaken editorial call" argument.  It's more of a mistaken editorial POLICY at this point.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by ejp]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 19:31:16 -0600</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
          <item>
    
    <title><![CDATA[Re: Thank you sir, may I have another?]]></title>
    
    
    <link><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#959886]]></link>
    
    <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.chicagoreader.com/TheBlog/archives/2008/12/19/thank-you-sir-may-i-have-another/#959886]]></guid>
    <author><![CDATA[Dunl]]></author>
    <description>
      
      <![CDATA[Well, sure, publishers would be psyched to have a *link*; but an entire story simply copied in its entirety -- or entirety, except for the byline! -- is another matter.
        
        <br />
        
          Posted by Dunl]]>
    </description>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 19:06:46 -0600</pubDate> 
    <source url="http://www.chicagoreader.com">Chicago Reader</source>
  </item>
        
      
    </channel>
  </rss>




