When old news becomes new news after new cycle of spins

10 thoughts on “When old news becomes new news after new cycle of spins”

  1. Sid,

    The desire to retweet (er, rewrite) others’ information for publication, as if it originated out of thin air in the particular publication, is deceptive.

    Your clear attribution made it easy for others to pick and redo the “news” for themselves. Bit lazy though.

    At least, it’s obvious that you (as well as La Nacion, Major Nargolkar, etc) are being read daily.


    1. Melissa, since I had the story on Dec. 22 from the source, La Nacion, why would I attribute El Caballista on Jan. 18? And speaking of attribution, I never see any for the stories that you use (and are welcome too) from this blog.

  2. Sid – you need to check the website – your byline is on every piece from your blog. If you prefer it attributed differently, please let me know….no, I just find it interesting that Turf Diario had the story after El Caballista, yet you attribute it (and TB Times, etc.).
    No worries, in the information age – once it’s posted, it’s old news – update, update, update.

    1. The attribution is to the original source, which in this case was La Nacion. After that, I just listed several publications — and there were others, too — that wrote about Asiatic Boy’s retirement as if, as Frank above noted, it was new news that dropped out of the sky.

      As far as El Caballista is concerened, yes, I’m aware that you credit my byline, but you don’t attribute this blog; therefore, it appears that i’ve written original material for El Caballista.

      The bottom line with all this — and I just find it amusing; nothing more — is that publications want to make it appear that they have collected the news from original sources. Sometimes, they’ll credit a “friendly” publication when they cannot get the info somewhere else; other times, they’ll just re-write another publication’s story as their own. Recently, for example, I tweeted original source material from India that G1 winner Dancing Forever had been sold there. The Blood-Horse repackaged that info and published it, without anything “extra” in the piece. Perhaps a call to the Phippses or Claiborne for aditional comments would have been nice.

  3. The ultimate in lazy is taking a press release, slightly rewording it and listing “[Publication Name Here] Staff” in the byline.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s