Comments on: Teaching A Lesson To The News Media – AP As The Sacrificial Lamb

By: Frogg

Frogg — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 04:20:28 +0000

Mac Ranger, Macsmind Blog, had some thoughts (too, too funny):
——————

Fine, Iâ€™m no longer using AP cited stories any way. But I have found ten instances in the past where they excerpted my blog posts for one of their news stories. I have therefore prepared an invoice based on my scale of $100 per word which multiplied by the total words that were excerpted 63, which comes to $6,300.00.

I sent the invoice them today.

If payment is not received within 30 days according to my invoicing terms I will turn it over to a collection agency.

http://www.macsmind.com/wordpress/2008/06/17/macsmind-billing-the-ap/

By: crosspatch

crosspatch — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 03:07:28 +0000

Ace is saying that their “fair use” clause also says they reserve the right to have you remove any reference to their stuff if you are going to criticize it.

Now stuff on the wire that comes from other papers is one thing, those papers can be criticized directly, but content that comes from APs own people not affiliated with any of their member papers MUST be held up to scrutiny. The AP bureau and their stringers in Baghdad has pretty much been a propaganda operation for the enemy.

By: ivehadit

ivehadit — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:44:58 +0000

Here, here, AJ! I am sick of the corrupt press.

And I tell you this, this is just one more thing in a long line of liberal actions this week/month that have me so ticked off I could spit….and everyone I know is feeling the same way…

So, I will tell the Bob Beckell’s of the world this: WE ARE MAD AS HELL AND WE AREN’T GONNA TAKE IT ANYMORE…we just won’t tell your pollsters this when they call now. They will find out at the ballot box in November.

Seething….

By: VA Voter

VA Voter — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 21:01:12 +0000

If the AP attempts to limit their ‘Fair Use’ and linking definition on Bloggers only they leave themselfs open to the ‘selective enforcement’ defense. They cannot limit boggers without limiting any and all online sites.

By: crosspatch

crosspatch — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 17:48:08 +0000

Buried deep in this post at Gateway Pundit is the interesting comment where AP says coverage of Iraq has declined by 92% since the news turned good. I can only interpret that to mean that bad news has declined by 92% and most of what news remains doesn’t meet their propaganda agenda.

But most importantly the AP blames THE PUBLIC for it! WHAT???? Since when did I have an opportunity to lobby AP and tell them what I find interesting? AP says the public isn’t interested in good news from Iraq. How in the world would they know that? They don’t take comments.

Oh, and also in the same posting at GP is the word that 30,000 US troops will be coming home from Iraq in July. I don’t see it on any major news headline today. Sad.

Our news media are a sham.

By: AJStrata

AJStrata — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 17:38:37 +0000

Garretc,

No matter which ‘newspaper’ posts the AP story it shows an AP by-line. So it is actually easy to boycott the whole endeavor. It doesn’t matter what internet site hosts the AP story, it will not show up here.

AJStrata

By: garrettc

garrettc — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 17:22:48 +0000

Unfortunately, the main service of AP is supplying content to a huge number of papers for reprinting. It absolves the newspapers of having to hunt up enough reporting to fill their silly rags. Until you make a dent in that, AP lives on.

By: MerlinOS2

MerlinOS2 — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 16:04:04 +0000

A related issue for me is when news portals carry hundreds of links to the same news wire story and the only difference is the mast head on the newspaper carrying it. Otherwise it is the exact same feed story word for word.

I can’t believe places like google news don’t pay the fee for a full feed and then link that directly and forget about the thousands of dupe links, except for the fact that they probably sell ads at all those alternate destinations.