FYI, some Motherboard reporters are currently up in arms on Twitter about this story making use of some of the same sources as their one, which was published in August, without crediting them:...
Agreed, it seems like a strange complaint to me. They're upset that... someone previously leaked the same documents to them and they wrote about them too? I don't really see why the NYT should...
Agreed, it seems like a strange complaint to me. They're upset that... someone previously leaked the same documents to them and they wrote about them too? I don't really see why the NYT should need to credit them for that. If you interview someone for an article, you're not compelled to list every other previous interview they've done about a similar subject.
I think the issue the Motherboard reporters are having is more that throughout the extensive reporting on Facebook in this year, these two stories are reporting on extremely similar sources, with...
I think the issue the Motherboard reporters are having is more that throughout the extensive reporting on Facebook in this year, these two stories are reporting on extremely similar sources, with the NYT story coming later. So it's more of an issue of "you're just rewriting the same story from the same parts of the same source" than "you're also working on the same source we worked on". I'm really more on the NYT side as well here, but the author definitely seems to have been aware of how similar the Motherboard piece was and a bit of credit would probably have been good form. All in all, it's probably a bit of not being nice on the NYT side and a bit of not being nice about that from the Motherboard side. But at least we got two good articles out of it, eh?
FYI, some Motherboard reporters are currently up in arms on Twitter about this story making use of some of the same sources as their one, which was published in August, without crediting them: https://twitter.com/josephfcox/status/1078443875784683521
Agreed, it seems like a strange complaint to me. They're upset that... someone previously leaked the same documents to them and they wrote about them too? I don't really see why the NYT should need to credit them for that. If you interview someone for an article, you're not compelled to list every other previous interview they've done about a similar subject.
I think the issue the Motherboard reporters are having is more that throughout the extensive reporting on Facebook in this year, these two stories are reporting on extremely similar sources, with the NYT story coming later. So it's more of an issue of "you're just rewriting the same story from the same parts of the same source" than "you're also working on the same source we worked on". I'm really more on the NYT side as well here, but the author definitely seems to have been aware of how similar the Motherboard piece was and a bit of credit would probably have been good form. All in all, it's probably a bit of not being nice on the NYT side and a bit of not being nice about that from the Motherboard side. But at least we got two good articles out of it, eh?