I have added three updates, marked in bold, since posting this originally.
Aggregation has become a dirty word in much of journalism today.
Bill Keller, former editor of the New York Times, last year wrote: “There’s often a thin line between aggregation and theft.”
Patrick Pexton, Washington Post ombudsman, in an April 20 column called plagiarism “a perpetual danger in aggregated stories.”
Actually, aggregation has a long, proud and ethical history in journalism. If you’re an old-school journalist, don’t think Huffington Post or Drudge when you think about aggregation; think AP. The Associated Press is primarily largely an aggregation service*, except that it its members pay huge fees for the privilege of being aggregated (and for receiving content aggregated from other members).
The New York Times and Washington Post also have long histories of aggregation. In my years at various Midwestern newspapers, we reported big local and regional stories that attracted the attention of the Times, Post and other national news organizations. Facts we had reported first invariably turned up in the Times and Post stories without attribution or with vague attribution such as “local media reports.” I don’t say that critically. When I was a reporter and editor at various Midwestern newspapers, we did the same thing with facts we aggregated from smaller newspapers as we did regional versions of their local stories.
My point isn’t to criticize these traditional newspapers, just to note that aggregation isn’t a new practice just because it’s a fairly new journalism term. It’s one of many areas where journalism practices and standards are evolving, and I believe standards are actually improving in most cases.
After the Washington Post case, Elana Zak asked me and others if journalists needed to develop guidelines for aggregation.
It’s time for newsrooms to start creating guidelines for aggregation. If we have them for social media, why not for aggregating news?
— Elana Zak (@elanazak) April 21, 2012
.@SteveButtry @jenconnic @margafret Would anyone like to start a project with me to crowdsource guidelines for news aggregation?
— Elana Zak (@elanazak) April 22, 2012
I’m happy to contribute to that conversation with some thoughts about aggregation. I’ll start with discussing what I mean by aggregation (and its cousin or sibling, curation):
Aggregation and curation are techniques of using content from other sources to provide content for your audience. They occupy overlapping spaces on a spectrum with original reporting at one end and mechanical aggregation at the other.
Totally original reporting, where a reporter gathers every bit of content directly, observing events and interviewing firsthand sources, is probably a minority of content, even in traditional news organizations. Most stories, I think, draw on archives or on previous reporting from other sources. At the other end of the spectrum are Google News, Trendsmap and other mechanical aggregation, providing increasingly relevant content guided by your search terms and/or by popularity.
Curation lies somewhere in between, with journalists using judgment to compile content from other sources, sometimes blended with original content. Curation nearly always adds value through context, relationships, background or impact.
If that sounds a lot like traditional journalism, I agree. As NPR’s master curator Andy Carvin told The Atlantic: “I think curation has always been a part of journalism; we just didn’t call it that.”
Other spots on the spectrum are plentiful and reflect a mix of traditional and new practices: original reporting supplemented by curation of some background content from your own archives; aggregation of data from public records, with value added by your original analysis and/or reporting; mechanical aggregation supplemented by geocoding, tagging and other efforts to target content to specific audiences; an aggregation/curation blend that adds some value to aggregated content by adding hand-curated links or supplemental content; automated curation efforts to provide content that’s related to an original or aggregated piece through semantic data mining.
So here are my aggregation suggestions:
Ethical matters
Link. Always link to source material. Whether you are a reporter working on a story that’s mostly original or an aggregator whose job is to collect content from various sources, linking has become a fundamental principle of journalism ethics. I can’t think of a reason not to link in digital content.
Attribute. When you use content originally reported by someone else, you should attribute when you know you weren’t first. Period. Neither paraphrasing nor doing additional reporting excuses failure to attribute. This is not simply a matter of professional courtesy; it provides clarity and understanding for readers/viewers who increasingly use multiple sources of information. Attribution helps consumers evaluate the reliability of information. It helps the consumer who follows multiple sources of information determine what is new and track content from multiple sources.
Attribute and quote before pasting. Copying-and-pasting sometimes gets a bad rap as a lazy journalism practice (it’s sometimes cited as an excuse by plagiarists, and was cited in the Post situation Pexton was writing about). Copying-and-pasting is actually an excellent practice to ensure that you quote accurately. You don’t inadvertently drop a “not” in typing the quote or change a “not” to “now” or a “murder trial” to a “murder trail.” But this needs to be a three-step process: copy-attribute-paste, in that order. Before you paste a quoted passage of even a few words into your story, blog post or video script, write the attribution and place the quotation marks (or open a block quote). That’s what I did above with the Keller and Pexton quotes: I wrote the attribution and added the links and quotation marks, then pasted the quotes right into the quotation marks. When you copy-attribute-paste, you can’t forget to add the attribution later and you can’t get confused about what to attribute to whom or what came from your notes and what came from sources.
Make an attribution check. Craig Silverman recommends use of an accuracy checklist (embedded below) that includes checking attribution before you turn a story in or publish it (I developed my own checklist at Craig’s suggestion). This may be the most critical check you make before publication. An error in fact, serious as that is, results in a correction and perhaps a rebuke from your editor and some tarnish on your reputation. But a single error in fact generally won’t cost you your job or wreck your career. One instance of plagiarism can get you fired and wreck your career. No one will believe your excuse about being lazy or rushed or distracted or confused or sloppy. Plagiarism is one of journalism’s capital crimes, so you should always double check all your material to be sure that it’s attributed before hitting “publish.”
Adding value
Aggregation and curation work best when they add value to other material. You can add value in a variety of ways:
Original reporting. Those occasions when the New York Times swooped into Iowa to report a story the Des Moines Register had already reported (or the Register swooped into an Iowa town on a story already reported locally), the second news organization does its own reporting. It may talk to some of the same sources as the first organization or it may find new sources. The story may be heavily original reporting, but use some previous stories (from other news organizations or your archives) to provide background and context.
Data analysis. Much computer-assisted reporting is a form of aggregation. It’s often an aggregation of public records rather than news reports. But it’s generally content someone other than the reporter gathered. The reporter adds value by analyzing the data and/or by presenting it in a form where people find answers to their own questions.
Commentary/analysis. An important form of aggregation is when you use the curated content as the starting point for a commentary, as I did in my reaction to the faulty (but widely quoted) 2010 study of Baltimore’s news ecosystem by the Project for Excellence in Journalism. Or you can aggregate various related pieces of content and provide your own analysis and commentary, as I did last week in explaining how journalists and newsrooms can use Pinterest.
Find and filter. When we launched TBD in 2010, we had an aggregation team whose job was to find the best content about the Washington metro area and tag it for our audience. The aggregators didn’t actually create stories on our website, summarizing or quoting their content. We would have a directory (and home-page widget) for each ZIP code in the metro area, with links to all the stories that might interest you if you care about that ZIP code. Except for featured stories on the home page, which got a blurb, the headlines and links were the only content from those stories on our site. For instance, in a particular day, my Herndon, Va., ZIP code might have links to content from the Washington Post, Herndon Connection, Herndon Patch, some blog posts relating to Herndon and Fairfax County press releases. The value we provided was to gather all the Herndon content in one place.
Supplement. The TBD aggregation approach changed several months after launch. Instead of pulling in as many headlines and links, which all led away from our site, we began aggregating fewer stories but supplementing them. We might have a paragraph or two summarizing or quoting from the story we were aggregating. Then we’d add value by linking to earlier stories on the same topic or embedding related tweets, videos or maps.
Related stories. If multiple news organizations are covering the same story, you can provide aggregation value by pulling them together and noting the different or similar approaches.
Roundup. Storify has given us an excellent tool for roundups of various related content, such as tweets, Facebook updates, photos, videos, news reports, blog posts and background material. The organization adds value. pulling related things together from many sources and organizing them by topic, chronology or some other way. A roundup’s content can be loosely related, such as my post this morning on three work examples by my Digital First Media colleagues.
Verification
Update, May 19: This section appeared originally in a blog post expanding on the points I made here. I add it here for archival purposes, to put all my aggregation advice in a single post:
I don’t think an aggregator needs to verify every point from a source you aggregate from. For instance, in yesterday’s post, which aggregated several links, I did not verify that Media General sold 63 newspapers to Warren Buffett. I had seen the number in several other pieces I had read and I used it in my aggregation of Dan Conover’s blog post about the purchase without verifying the number from the Media General announcement or the Media General website. I also didn’t check Dan’s math on the average cost for each of the newspapers, though it looked right using round numbers in my head.
I do think aggregation requires some assessment of the trustworthiness of the sources you’re aggregating from. If you trust the sources, attribute to them and link to them, I think that should suffice. Taking the time to independently verify every fact from sources you attribute to would limit how much you can aggregate. Just as aggregation has value, I believe trust has value and the work of other journalists and news sources has value. If you’ve attributed to a trustworthy source, I think you can aggregate without independent verification.
For instance, most daily newspapers aggregate their daily wire report from the Associated Press and other wire services without independent verification because we trust the AP.
If you have doubts about information you are aggregating, you should verify those facts or express your doubts. Andy Carvin’s techniques of crowdsourcing verification should certainly be part of the aggregator’s toolbox.
When you are aggregating tweets from the scene of a breaking news event, you should note where appropriate what you have verified and what you haven’t.
A broader view of aggregation
I preceded my guidelines by noting the aggregation practices of traditional news organizations. But let’s take a broader view:
The Bible might be our best-known work of aggregation: a collection of books and letters from multiple sources.
Public libraries are longtime aggregators. They aggregate a wide range of books that might interest people in their communities (or universities, schools, newsrooms or law firms) and then multiple people can borrow the books without actually paying anything to the authors and publishers.
Looked at narrowly from the sense of whether a library patron is paying the author and publisher for the content she is reading, that’s a systematic ripoff of publishers and authors. But publishers and authors have benefited greatly for generations from the existence of libraries. A new author hopes desperately that thousands of libraries will be buying her book. Some people who borrowed one of an author’s books from the library will become faithful buyers of subsequent books. Someone who borrows the book from a library might suggest it for a monthly reading by a book club, spurring several sales for the author. Generally speaking, libraries boost book sales and digital news aggregators boost traffic to content-generating sites.
Society benefits from the existence of libraries, which boost reading and literacy. An author or publisher whining about the freeloaders who use libraries would appear selfish and narrow-sighted, just as journalists whining about aggregators are selfish and myopic.
The people who are critical or dismissive of aggregation and curation fail (or refuse) to understand the value that aggregation and curation have in themselves. Pointing out things that people may be interested in has value. It’s a great function of Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest, Google+ and other social media, which together drive huge traffic for news organizations.
And, as with the journalism examples I cited, social aggregation and curation has a long history, too. For decades, every letter from my mother included news clippings that she thought might interest me: commentaries or news stories on political, media or religious issues, embarrassing typos, comic strips. In a lot of ways, it was like Facebook, except that I didn’t have a “like” button.
As Alzheimer’s disease sapped Mom’s memory, she continued aggregating, even if she couldn’t remember to send things to me. When I would visit and sort through the stacks of stuff on her desk, I would find clippings with sticky notes labeled “Steve.”
In every case, the originating news outlet got no direct economic value from Mom’s persistent aggregation for me. (But the joy she got sharing with family and friends added value to Mom’s subscriptions, and perhaps her sharing had some brand-building value for the publications.) There was no economic loss to the publications, as I couldn’t run out and buy the Chicago Tribune or Kansas City Star when Mom lived in those cities and I didn’t. And I wouldn’t have been likely to pick up a Time magazine just because Mom recommended a story.
Even as her memory faded, Mom was meticulous about giving credit. If the clipping didn’t show the name and date of the publication, Mom added it in her perfect cursive script. She wasn’t a journalist, but she understood that aggregation and attribution go together.
*Yes, I know that AP produces original content. So does Huffington Post. In fact, both won Pulitzer Prizes this year. But both also heavily aggregate as well. If the analogy isn’t perfect, at least it’s fair.
Update, May 18: I was challenged by Erik Wemple in an email and on Twitter on the statement that AP is “primarily” and aggregation service.
Do people out there agree with @stevebuttry that @AP is “primarily” an aggregation service? bit.ly/LjDfCK
— ErikWemple (@ErikWemple) May 18, 2012
Part of my reply to Erik:
I noted that the AP also produces original Pulitzer Prize-winning content. But I have been an editor and reporter using the AP’s service in five different states, and I feel very confident in saying that a huge amount of AP content (increasingly so as it has cut its state staffs) comes from its members. I know the state report is heavily aggregation and many of the national stories are state stories of national interest. Obviously the world report is heavily, if not entirely, original, but the importance of the world report to members is diminishing. I also have observed that national stories produced by AP staffers draw heavily on members’ coverage.
I believe if someone analyzed AP content, especially weighted toward the members’ use of the content, my statement that AP is “primarily” an aggregation service would stand up. Since I haven’t done and don’t plan to do that research, I decided to soften to “largely.”
I’ll end with this point: I don’t think that’s a bad thing. A main point of this post is to honor aggregation as a valuable service.
Updated again, May 18: Erik has posted on his Washington Post blog about this post and AP’s disagreement with it (no one from AP has responded to me directly, and I don’t know if the person responding read the full blog post or just the passage Erik sent).
Figuring that this assessment of the Associated Press has to be infuriating the Associated Press, I contacted the Associated Press, whose spokesman gave me this repudiation: “This claim is ridiculous. Of the 3,700 staffers of the AP posted around the world, two-thirds are gathering news for all formats.”
(In an earlier version of this blog post, I included that quote because Erik had emailed it to me. I mistakenly said I got it from the AP, rather than Erik. I removed it as soon as Erik pointed out the error to me.)
After noting that I had changed “primarily” to “largely,” Erik got a further response from the unidentified AP spokesperson (why unidentified, Erik?):
As a cooperative owned by its roughly 1,500 member papers, the AP picks up a number of member stories each day and shares them on our state news wires while noting the stories’ origins. A tiny percentage of these (less than 2 percent), typically exclusives and also credited to the originating papers, end up among an entirely separate selection of international, national, business, entertainment and other stories that AP licenses to commercial customers such as Google News and Yahoo News and thousands of other websites.
What’s more, AP offers ways for its member papers to share their stories with one another.
Erik’s conclusion underscores the point in my lead, that aggregation has become a dirty word in journalism:
If there’s any salience to the Buttry-AP thing, it’s that aggregation — at least as it’s known in Internet journalism — hasn’t yet matured into a respected enterprise. Saying that a news organization does a lot of it remains an accusation to be refuted.
I wish AP and/or Erik would have acknowledged that I discussed a wide range of aggregation practices, including original reporting that builds on your own archives or earlier reporting by other organizations. I am certain that a large amount of the reporting by AP or any other news organization falls in that category. The point of my post was not to “accuse” AP of aggregating, but to note that a lot of good journalism by AP and a lot of other organizations includes aggregation. That’s a fact, not an accusation.
The AP spokesperson’s reference to licensing to other websites indicates that Erik and the spokesperson were thinking of the sinister depiction of aggregation that I was trying to debunk, rather than reacting to anything more than a single sentence of my blog post (and the elaboration on the asterisk). The service that AP performs to its members, who get those state news stories that the spokesperson acknowledges, is aggregation. That’s exactly what I was talking about.
AP’s aggregation practices have changed in recent years (member organizations didn’t used to get credit), but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t do heavy aggregation. It does, and for the large membership fees it charges, it better keep doing so.
Thank you, Steve, for starting this conversation. It’s so important that journalists have an open dialogue around aggregation and guidelines. I appreciated that you mention the ethical matters relating to aggregation high up in the post. That seems to be a gray line for so many and I think where news organizations get in trouble when they aggregate. I hope this is the start of a long and ongoing discussion.
LikeLike
Thanks, Elana, but you started it.
LikeLike
What makes aggregation kosher is attribution. The rest is commentary.
LikeLike
[…] PARA LER – Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value. […]
LikeLike
[…] PARA LER – Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value. […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value – Steve Buttry pulls together some standards journalists should bear in mind when aggregating news […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value – Steve Buttry pulls together some standards journalists should bear in mind when aggregating news […]
LikeLike
[…] del giornalismo digitale, ha pubblicato un elenco di suggerimenti per gestire in modo etico i testi che nascono per il web, tra link e contenuti […]
LikeLike
Good post. I’d add one other suggestion (one I made last week on my own blog): attribute in context, not with a tiny link at the end of the story.
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value by Steve Buttry – a definitive guide. […]
LikeLike
[…] “Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value“ por Steve Buttry. Un buen post que recuerda, por si hace falta, que la agregación de contenidos […]
LikeLike
[…] off again: Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value (@stevebuttry / The Buttry Diary) stevebuttry.wordpress.com/2012/05/16/agg… […]
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Things I grab, motley collection .
LikeLike
A very thorough and thoughtful unpicking of what could become a minefield of unattributed posting of others’ work. I like the focus on ethics, existing situation, and the increasing reality that many of us value immensely people who aggregate/curate content around areas of interest, and add value by their perspective and analysis.
Marianne Doczi
LikeLike
[…] Full article: https://stevebuttry.wordpress.com/2012/05/16/aggregation-guidelines-link-attribute-add-value/&nbs…; […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value What is content curation and why is it so important for the future of web content publishers? The content curator is the next emerging disruptive role in the content creation and distribution chain. In a world submerged by a flood of information, content curators may provide in the coming months and years a new, tremendously valuable service to anyone looking for quality information online: a personalized, qualified selection of the best and most relevant content and resources on a very specific topic or theme. […]
LikeLike
[…] aggregation skills. Back in my days on the copy desk in Des Moines, I often spent most of the evening compiling […]
LikeLike
[…] media should aggregate and curate content from blogs by non-journalism […]
LikeLike
[…] Read the full post. […]
LikeLike
[…] Read the full post. […]
LikeLike
[…] already noted that my post about aggregation guidelines didn’t do as well as I expected in its first day, but it had some staying power and topped […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value (The Buttry Diary via Journalism.co.uk) – Advice for reports who aggregation – combining and referring to online reports and posts – to improve their stories. […]
LikeLike
[…] a post on aggregation attribution, Steve Buttry notes that aggregation and curation occupy overlapping spaces on a spectrum from original reporting […]
LikeLike
Thanks for the credit you give to libraries as long-time aggregators. You are correct that authors derive benefit through exposure to their work. This past weekend, I heard from a person who has chosen to purchase a book that she was first exposed to through a church lending library.
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value […]
LikeLike
[…] it in a different way. Steve Buttry writes on his website “The Buttry Diary,” about aggregation guidelines and the opinions on why it’s considered wrong, according to people like Bill Keller and […]
LikeLike
[…] Steve Buttry points out, aggregation has been around for a long time. He uses the example of the Associated Press to […]
LikeLike
[…] I would tend to think along the same lines as NPR’s master curator Andy Carvin who told The Atlantic: “I think curation has always been a part of journalism; we just didn’t call it that.” […]
LikeLike
[…] context, relationships, background or impact,” says Steve Buttry of Digital First Media in this article. While aggregation does not typically refer to a means of enriching the acquired content, the […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link attribute, add value […]
LikeLike
[…] Robin Good: Steve Buttry has published a good article on his blog providing very specific suggestions and tips to those needing to aggregate, republish and curate news content for their organization. Key topics covered: -> Linking -> Attributing-> Quoting -> Attribution checks -> Adding value -> Original reporting -> Data analysis -> Commentary -> Filtering -> Supplementing -> Adding related stories -> Rounding up Valuable advice. 8/10 Full article: https://stevebuttry.wordpress.com/2012/05/16/aggregation-guidelines-link-attribute-add-value/ ; […]
LikeLike
[…] I would tend to think along the same lines as NPR’s master curator Andy Carvin who told The Atlantic: “I think curation has always been a part of journalism; we just didn’t call it that.” […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value […]
LikeLike
A great discussion with lots of suggestions I’ll ponder everything and then make sure that I practice what I ponder. The checklist is a great tool for keeping attribution clear. I expect this high level of resource from your blog. What sets your writing apart is that you share a story about your mother and the topic becomes deeply relevant and heartfelt. Thank you for your always thoughtful and compelling work.
LikeLike
[…] on aggregating? The best guidelines I could find were posted earlier this year by Steve Buttry — Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value. Here’s part of his take on […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value […]
LikeLike
[…] the community: Who is blogging about pets or family or faith or business in your community? Can you aggregate or curate their content? Do you need to aggregate or curate community content in your topic area […]
LikeLike
[…] tips on curation also got more than 3,000 views and aggregation tips got over 1,500. Several other posts advising journalists on dealing with changes in […]
LikeLike
[…] will draw heavily on points from my earlier blog posts on aggregation and curation. Here are my slides for the […]
LikeLike
[…] Glad you came back. As I’ve noted before, an aggregator should add value. […]
LikeLike
[…] journalism to a group of journalists (mostly editors) in Vietnam. I found most of my material in this blog post by Steve Buttry — and in fact, much of what you need to know is in his headline: Link, […]
LikeLike
[…] The post cites (and praises — thanks, Mindy!) my blog post last year on aggregation guidelines. […]
LikeLike
[…] I have added three updates, marked in bold, since posting this originally. Aggregation has become a dirty word in much of journalism today. Bill Keller, former editor of the New York Times, last ye… […]
LikeLike
[…] Recomendamos leer este post sobre el tema en The Buttry Diary, blog del Steve […]
LikeLike
[…] https://stevebuttry.wordpress.com/2012/05/16/aggregation-guidelines-link-attribute-add-value/ […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value By Steve Buttry, The Buttry Diary, May 16, 2012 […]
LikeLike
[…] At the same time the lack of clear attribution to these companies is disconcerting, given the Daily’s claim to be a “best” source. As prominent US digital media advisor Steve Buttry notes, best practice aggregation – and good online journalism – is all about effective attribution and linking. […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value […]
LikeLike
[…] Steve Buttry says in this post on Aggregation (Thursday’s class reading), aggregation doesn’t need to be a dirty word. It has a […]
LikeLike
[…] Buttry Diary quotes Andy Carvin, who says that journalism has always been about curation, even before it was […]
LikeLike
[…] to use other people’s original work for profit. In an article written by Craig Silverman (https://stevebuttry.wordpress.com/2012/05/16/aggregation-guidelines-link-attribute-add-value/ ) he recommends the use of an accuracy checklist that includes checking attribution before you turn […]
LikeLike
[…] Steve Buttry is an Editor at Digital First Media, who, besides making an interesting point that news aggregation isn’t a new practice, has written comprehensive guidelines for aggregators in this blog post. […]
LikeLike
[…] however there are a key set of ethical considerations outlined by many, including those stated by Steve Buttry involving the incorporation of linking back to the source, attributing and adding […]
LikeLike
[…] Steven Buttry noted that they are not a new concept. In a recent article he explained that “aggregation has a long, proud and ethical history in journalism… The Associated Press i… Why then, is there a school of thought that suggests news aggregators are the reason for the […]
LikeLike
[…] Link, attribute, add value – the three concepts we need to understand about aggregation, a growing trend amongst modern journalism. Put simply, aggregation is the gathering of information from different sources and putting all these ideas into the one place. So is aggregation an ethical practice or is it all apart of the digital development of journalism. Better yet, can we even call aggregation journalism? […]
LikeLike
[…] is being written. This “fast and true” journalism has resulted in the current trend of aggregated and annotated news stories, whereby the writer “links, attributes, and adds value” – thus finishing with an […]
LikeLike
[…] 2012 Steve Buttry pointed out that aggregation “isn’t a new practice just because it’s a fairly new journalism […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value, Steve Buttry […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value […]
LikeLike
[…] la valeur ajouté du journaliste était la publication de nouveautés. Maintenant, il peuvent aussi servir les utilisateurs en repêchant dans le flux quotidien de contenus bas de gammes les meilleures choses et les […]
LikeLike
You think the AP doesn’t aggregate internationally? au contraire… a sizeable amount of the copy from overseas points is picked up from local media overseas….
LikeLike
I was quoting an AP spokesperson and Erik Wemple on that point. In my commentary after that, I made the point that much of the “original” work done by AP (and most journalism organizations) also involves some level of aggregation.
LikeLike
[…] Vom Mangel zum Überfluss. Üblicherweise haben Journalisten Mehrwert geschaffen, indem sie Nachrichtenmaterial veröffentlicht haben. Jetzt können sie ihren Usern nützlich sein, indem sie die besten […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation is not new to new media. It has a firm tradition in print media, where newspapers often took facts compiled by local smaller newspapers and ran those facts in their own stories and vice versa. The Associated Press is also arguably an aggregation service, and nearly every print news publication uses this service (they just pay for it), according to media professor Steve Buttry. […]
LikeLike
[…] à abundância. Os jornalistas costumavam agregar valor publicando novidades. Agora eles podem servir aos usuários resgatando e organizando o melhor material a partir de um fluxo diário de conteúdo […]
LikeLike
[…] à abundância. Os jornalistas costumavam agregar valor publicando novidades. Agora eles podem servir aos usuários resgatando e organizando o melhor material a partir de um fluxo diário de conteúdo […]
LikeLike
[…] aggregation guidelines from earlier in 2012 also discuss the importance of adding value to aggregated content, citing […]
LikeLike
[…] Buttry wrote this story in which he suggests the ‘link, attribute, add value’ method. This method entails […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value […]
LikeLike
[…] Aggregation guidelines: Link, attribute, add value […]
LikeLike
[…] Steve Buttry mencionaba en su texto que la agregación y la curación son técnicas de uso de contenido de otras fuentes para proveer contenido a la audiencia. Se trata, según él, de la superposición de espacios en un espectro, con reportaje original de un lado, y agregación mecánica del otro. En Colombia, Pulzo es el portal pionero en esta técnica de curación y agregación de contenidos. La en […]
LikeLike
[…] pero para que esto suceda se deben reforzar todos los consejos éticos y prácticos planteados por Steve Buttry en su “Guía de agregación”. De lo contrario no encontraremos más allá que un resumen de un solo texto, sin si quiera un […]
LikeLike