Argh - I'M in the news - the Daily Mail Online!!!

(76 Posts)
DillyTante Fri 28-Dec-12 10:41:42

So, a couple of months ago I did a short phone interview on Radio 4, about my yarn bombing.

I didn't realise until today that the Daily Mail Online have basically cribbed the interview and made it seem like I spoke to them!!! Ok, so they've linked to my blog so I should be grateful, but doesn't this seem like cheap journalism? Plus, I don't endorse the Daily Mail at all.

I want to show you all but don't want to link. Isn't there a way that you can link to a site without it showing on their stats?

cornystollenslave Fri 28-Dec-12 10:45:56

yarn bombing ?

Hassled Fri 28-Dec-12 10:48:03

You could give us a google search phrase guaranteed to get the link.

I've scrolled down but I can't find it! Bit cheeky of them, good publicity though I suppose!

DillyTante Fri 28-Dec-12 10:49:32

The article is called 'gripping yarn'

upinthehills Fri 28-Dec-12 10:51:46

Searching for "What a stitch up" should take you there - if that is the correct article - I could be wrong!

cornystollenslave Fri 28-Dec-12 10:53:44

is it the article with the cocacola can?

lemonmuffin Fri 28-Dec-12 10:55:50

I read that article! so you're the yarn bomber then?

Brilliant, how do you do it all without being seen?

cornystollenslave Fri 28-Dec-12 10:57:29

have searched for what a stitch up grin that's brilliant

DillyTante Fri 28-Dec-12 10:58:06

Nonono! I didn't do the Olympic one - I'm not THAT talented. But I do do it in my area.

Nancy66 Fri 28-Dec-12 11:12:48

here it is. It's from You magazine last Sunday. It's a very sweet feature and, as you say, your blog is credited.

www.dailymail.co.uk/home/you/article-2248233/Gripping-yarn-What-stitch-up.html

BitofSparklingPerry Fri 28-Dec-12 11:14:10

Nancy - she said she didn't want to link

Nancy66 Fri 28-Dec-12 11:17:57

I know.

DillyTante Fri 28-Dec-12 11:20:16

Yes but Nancy the point is I didn't speak to them, there was no journalism involved unless you call copying down what I said on the radio journalism. And while they credited me they didn't credit the BBC show i came from. Just seems a bit cheap and dishonest to me.

ssd Fri 28-Dec-12 11:27:05

" subverting a normally feminine medium,’

eh?

hmm

so you knit things and tie them to lamp posts, hardly subversive dilly

Nancy66 Fri 28-Dec-12 11:27:08

you're only mentioned in one par at the end! You make it sound like the whole feature is about you. It's not.

they only use about 30 words from you.

KaraStarbuckThrace Fri 28-Dec-12 11:28:37

Yes I can see why you might be narked!
BTW saw your work on the pier last time we were in Saltburn. You rock grin

mellen Fri 28-Dec-12 11:31:45

Its pretty common for news articles to be made up from twitter or facebook posts. For a small paragraph at the end of an article why not spend 30s copying something from your blog, rather than however long it would have taken to actually track down someone willing to speak to them.

And you did get free publicity out of it.

raininginsuburbia Fri 28-Dec-12 11:39:07

"there was no journalism involved"

I think you've just summed up the Daily Mail's editorial policy.

Back2Two Fri 28-Dec-12 11:39:29

I think nancy66 works for the DM. Or wants to.

ssd Fri 28-Dec-12 11:41:08

I dont think dilly did saltburn, doesnt she do the yarning in cheltenham....or am I wrong altogether?

claig Fri 28-Dec-12 13:29:44

'knitty gritty', 'knitwits'
and people say there was no journalism involved!

This is in the Mail on Sunday, the paper that many regard as Britain's leading Sunday paper, often referred to as the people's paper. This will get much more publicity than an item on BBC Radio 4. The Mail's online website gets the largest audience for a newspaper site in the world.

This is the Mail, this is huge, this is journalism at its finest!

MrsJREwing Fri 28-Dec-12 13:39:22

Love your work.

DillyTante Fri 28-Dec-12 13:49:37

No, I had NOTHING to do with Saltburn! I do indeed live in Gloucestershire which is where I do it.

claig Fri 28-Dec-12 13:53:14

' I had NOTHING to do with Saltburn'

Me thinks thou dost protest too much. The capital letters are a giveaway!

ouryve Fri 28-Dec-12 13:58:34

I think the Saltburn yarn bombers are still a secret aren't they?

The Northern Echo would be all over it if they thought it was you, Dilly, even if you are at the opposite corner of the country!

trumpalot Fri 28-Dec-12 14:00:01

its all bonkers !"!

juniperdewdrop Fri 28-Dec-12 14:01:59

Saltburn's been going on for ages. I don't live far and have yet to go and see it.

ssd Fri 28-Dec-12 23:03:56

I love saltburn

Ponders Fri 28-Dec-12 23:07:12

The DM nicks articles from other media all the time

lazy bastards journalists

they do usually give some kind of credit somewhere in very small letters

ivykaty44 Sat 29-Dec-12 16:33:40

Op where I work had a similar thing recently with the DM - they stole the photographs from our work website and wrote what they wanted just cribbing agian from the website - it wasn't a bad piece - but the fact was they never asked permission or contact my place of work and there isn't a thing really that can be done, unless you want to spend a large amount of money.

beaver33 Sat 29-Dec-12 16:57:59

hmmm, well, as a journo myself I'm not sure you can call what You magazine - not, incidentally, the DM as they're run entirely separately - bad journalism.

I'm afraid once you put yourself into the public domain what you say in that domain becomes public....IYSWIM....so as long as what you're credited as saying is accurate then it's entirely fair to use.

It's good practice to contact the person concerned and say we'd like to talk to you about 'X' after your Radio 4 interview blah blah, but if you said no, your original comments are still in the public domain and can be used.

You may not like that, but it's not illegal or unethical. And I presume if the same comments had appeared, say, in the Guardian you wouldn't be upset, or be describing it as 'bad journalism'. You just don't like it....and that's different.....

beaver33 Sat 29-Dec-12 17:06:15

I'd add that your situation, ivykaty44 IS bad journalism because your workplace has copyright (presumably) over the pics and words on your website.

And in my book I'd always contact a company and, out of courtesy, mention that I'm referring to them and ask permission to use any web material. Most organisations are delighted to help if it's a bit of free publicity, so it's an incredibly easy and non-time consuming thing to do.

ivykaty44 Sat 29-Dec-12 19:31:08

yes it was a copyright issue, but not a straight forward one for us and caused a lot of problems. We gained publicity but it cost us more than it was worth....

Nancy66 Sat 29-Dec-12 20:30:54

i doubt the quotes came from Radio 4 - more likely from a quick Google - as there seems to be plenty out there.

JessBrodysTits Sun 30-Dec-12 18:16:11

You are clever! I love the idea of it grin

<wishes AGAIN that I knew how to knit>

NuclearStandoff Sun 30-Dec-12 21:20:40

I'm also a journalist and think that is it is poor journalism.

Quotes should be correctly attributed - and you should not imply someone has spoken directly to you if they have not (unless you are quoting direct from a press release). You can always say "... as XX says on their blog" or " ... as YY said in a recent interview on Radio 4."

lalalonglegs Sun 30-Dec-12 21:23:49

Hmm, I'm an (ex) journalist and I do think that it is wrong to try to pass off comments that have been made in another article/an entirely unconnected programme as your own. The standard form is at least to allude to the fact that you are quoting from a different source, eg, "Dilly has previously said,'We are mums of young children...' " After all, Johann Hari caused a scandal when it was revealed that he was copying quotes culled from other articles in his interviews and passing them off as ones that had been given direct to him by the interviewee.

Btw, I love yarn-bombing, Dilly, I'm going to start following your blog (unable even to knit a row in once colour myself).

lalalonglegs Sun 30-Dec-12 21:24:31

x-post nuclear.

Trills Sun 30-Dec-12 21:26:57

A yarnbomber called Dilly has broken cover to reveal that she and two friends are responsible for brightening up bollards, trees, patches of wasteland and benches in their home town of Cheltenham. ‘We are mums of young children; people with an interest in craft, taking it to the next level, being a little bit renegade and subverting a normally feminine medium,’ she says. They gave a horse statue in the town rainbow legwarmers, and attached a knitted heart with a chalkboard to a tree for Valentine’s Day, so people could write messages to loved ones. The Cheltenham yarnbombers no longer operate under cover of darkness, but in broad daylight. ‘We don’t look anyone in the eye and pretend that we are just supposed to be there,’ says Dilly. See her blog at dillytante.wordpress.com.

Trills Sun 30-Dec-12 21:28:11

They haven't said that you told them, they've just said that you've "broken cover" - did they tell you that they were quoting you (maybe get in contact via your blog) or did you find out some other way?

Xenia Tue 01-Jan-13 10:22:56

Isn't it litter though? If you drop an apple core the police fine you. Why is a knitted doll any less an offence?

Pinot Tue 01-Jan-13 10:52:12

Yawn, Xenia.

NuclearStandoff Tue 01-Jan-13 11:19:37

I see they do credit the blog in the piece, so not as bad.
Still, it's lazy journalism.

Pantomimedam Tue 01-Jan-13 11:29:06

That's partly why it's subversive, Xenia.

Johann Hari was of a completely different order - he pretended he had done 1-1 interviews that he wrote as lengthy profiles, with all sorts of made-up details about what had happened.

But it is Not Good Form to lift quotes without attribution. One of my mates went to work at the Mail. He described Sunday shifts (for Monday's paper) as 'copying out of the Sunday papers'.

Nancy66 Tue 01-Jan-13 11:32:04

'lazy journalism' MN favourite phrase.

It's very clear that it's not part of the main feature and they do not pass Dilly's one, singular quote off as part of the interview.

Pantomimedam Tue 01-Jan-13 11:34:32

It's not lazy, exactly, the writer of the Mail article will have been hard at work but doing what their news editor told them.

Nancy66 Tue 01-Jan-13 11:35:22

All newspapers look at stories in their rivals and decide whether to lift them, ignore them, follow them up.

Snorbs Tue 01-Jan-13 12:07:41

It is lazy journalism. I used to be a journalist (albeit not for a newspaper) and I'd have been shot if I'd lifted quotes from other sources rather than contacting the person I was quoting. And when I rose to the position of editor I'd have had serious talks with any of my staff who did the same.

It's also risky. If the "quote" you lifted turns out to be false then you have potentially repeated a libel which puts you in a dangerous position. I know that the Mail is rarely bothered about printing lies but more reputable publications do worry about that kind of thing.

Nancy66 Tue 01-Jan-13 12:18:17

Named sources yes. This is a quote from an, effectively, anonymous source.

We're talking about people who cover railings in crochet here - not the Middle East peace talks.

claig Tue 01-Jan-13 12:19:06

'I know that the Mail is rarely bothered about printing lies'

Could that possibly be because there are so few to be found within its pages?

claig Tue 01-Jan-13 12:34:52

Which is undoubtedly not the case for some other unmentionable "newspapers" which incomprehensibly receive such blind support, devotion and adulation from certain pseudo-intellectuals, chatterati, litterati etc.etc.

claig Tue 01-Jan-13 12:53:54

I am certainly no anti-intellectual, which is why I carefully study Daily Mail articles by Peter Hitchens, Melanie Phillips and Richard Littlejohn.

I'm just not too keen on journalism of the '50 days to save the planet' ilk. There are 50 tried and tested ways to fool the public, but not one of them will be found in the pages of the Daily Mail.

www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2012/sep/30/50-months-climate-change

50 easy ways to save the planet

And if the public grows weary of the good old 50, then increase it to 100

'We have only 100 months to avoid disaster.'

www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/aug/01/climatechange.carbonemissions

The yarnbombers story was a good light piece to bring a bit of cheer, so let's not jeer and let's not create fear with the old 50 days lie that the world is going to die.

claig Tue 01-Jan-13 13:02:59

It starts with 50, then it's 100. It seems like the old game of double or bust, and like a reckless gambler's desperate wagers, the whole story will inevitably crumble to dust. So don't up the ante, don't to the Mail be anti and all praise to the illustrious yarnbomber, DillyTante!

claig Tue 01-Jan-13 13:19:35

It is a new year in the season of cheer, so banish all your fear and pack up your Guardians in your old kit bag, don't allow your spirits to sag, hoist up a new flag and set sail and above all let your compass be the Daily Mail.

TheMonster Tue 01-Jan-13 13:26:01

What happens when the woolly stuff gets all soggy and dirty? And do people steal it?
I've been thinking about this too much.

SDTGisAChristmassyWolefGenius Tue 01-Jan-13 13:59:29

I have never yarn bombed, but maybe I should try it this year.....

Snorbs Tue 01-Jan-13 20:50:14

Aargh, claig, you got me and you got me good! For ages I thought you really were a serious Daily Mail fan. It's only now that you've implied you regard Richard "Worthless Reactionary Columnist For People Who Find Jeremy Clarkson Too Difficult" Littlejohn as an intellectual that I twigged that you're being satirical.

Top marks for keeping this finely crafted bit of subterfuge going for so long, but I think you pushed it with the Littlejohn thing and made it far too obvious. Nevertheless, bravo!

claig Wed 02-Jan-13 00:01:09

grin There is no more serious Daily Mail fan than myself. I regard it as an oracle. But I do like to have a bit of a laugh about it.

Littlejohn may not be an intellectual, but he is a very clever man capable of writing very funny pieces. He has a very rare gift of seeing through pomposity and hypocrisy and expressing it in down-to-earth, amusing language. His analysis of the New Labour years has gone down in history as a classic and a must-read for all serious commentators, and I read somewhere that Dacre pays him about £1 million per year to keep it coming.

Even if you don't agree with his views, there is no doubt that he is a very funny writer. Jeremy Clarkson is a mere child compared to a real master like Littlejohn.

claig Wed 02-Jan-13 00:10:10

There was a time when Julie Burchill also wrote for the Mail. I don't agree with lots of her views, but I do agree with her on the greens and other issues, but there is no doubt that she is an outstanding writer - a rare talent. She was worth every penny they paid her, just as Littlejohn is too. Writers like those two only appear rarely in a generation. Clarkson is not in the same league.

ChippingInLovesChristmasLights Wed 02-Jan-13 00:11:36

It's the Daily Mail... hardly their worst crime!

Well done you for yarn bombing though - lovely to cheer the place up a bit smile

I am such a sentimental tit I couldn't bear to tie to them to a lampost and leave them there! blush

funnyperson Wed 02-Jan-13 09:06:39

Love the knitting. Whoever does it is really talented and imaginative.

CaptainNancy Wed 02-Jan-13 09:31:13

yay! Now I realise who you are Dilly smile we have met, quite a while ago now... yarn bombing is a great thing to do! My colleague admitted his SIL does it, and he was v impressed I knew what it was (I think she was also featured in the R4 programme).

Another MNer (not I, really) featured in an article in her local paper, that she specified was for that publication only, only to find it lifted wholesale into the mail, who completely fabricated quotes from her (I read both articles) and in fact they changed her name half way through to that of an extremely well known actress, albeit with the same forename confused such are the high standards in writing and editing at the mail!

FirstPersonPlural Wed 02-Jan-13 09:49:15

I didn't realise yarn-bombing was such a new phenomenon in the UK. It's been going on for several decades in the US. There have been some really lovely pieces created. And some truly controversial ones, too. Real feminist radicalism, not just cutesy fun pieces.

That said, I would like to walk by a horse statue wearing rainbow legwarmers...it would absolutely put a smile on my face!

Delalakis Thu 03-Jan-13 18:46:44

Claig, are you talking about the Littlejohn who wrote, in relation to the prostitutes murdered in Ipswich: "in the scheme of things the deaths of these five women is no great loss"? And "Does anyone really give a monkey’s about what happens in Rwanda? If the Mbongo tribe wants to wipe out the Mbingo tribe then as far as I am concerned that is entirely a matter for them." And, in relation to the Chilean miners, "I don’t know any of these people. Nor does anyone else in Britain. So why invest so much time and emotional energy in the fate of total strangers?"

None of that strikes me as the mark of either a clever or a funny writer. Except when his notorious total absence of research skills leads to magnificent bloopers like the time he took at face value a birth announcement for quins which everyone but him knew related to five puppies.

The man's been past it for years. All he does is churn out the same tired articles over and over again. He needs to be put out to grass.

claig Thu 03-Jan-13 19:14:22

Delalakis, some good points there. I agree those things you quoted were not funny, and I didn't know about them.

However, I have read some of his pieces and even where I didn't agree with all of them, I did think he was very funny - so he has written some perceptive and amusing things.

You may be right that he is now repetitive - I don't read him regularly so can't comment on that.

I forgot to mention another writer who is very funny and uniquely perceptive and that is Mark Steel. He is excellent too.

Ponders Thu 03-Jan-13 22:28:50

Mark Steel is indeed a gem.

I wasn't aware that he writes for the Mail though hmm

funnyperson Thu 03-Jan-13 22:48:51
claig Thu 03-Jan-13 22:52:42

Not every talent writes for the Mail, but every Mail writer is a talent.

Mark Steel is brilliant. I remember reading one of his articles many years ago. He wrote a few lines that were so funny and so perceptive, and a few days later the paper sacked him, if I remember rightly. I think his words had the power to change the course of events and that is why he was removed. I don't know if that is the case, but it seemed like the only reason for sacking such a great talent. It shows the power of words and the power of a great mind that can see the crap and cant and hypocrisy, and of course, needless to say, this was in the time of New Labour.

I've just looked through a few of Littlejohn's recent articles and while they are not as rip-roaringly funny as when he single-handedly took New Labour hypocrisy apart, when the New Labour elite used to fear receiving their copy of the Daily Mail on the days that Littlejohn was published, he still has some great turns of phrase that the Daily Mail reader recognises and concurs with.

His use of the term 'Minister for Windmills' says it all. The Daily Mail reader appreciates someone, just one single person, who cuts through the media spin and sanctimonious proclamations of too many politicians to give voice to what the people really think.

funnyperson Thu 03-Jan-13 22:55:15

I would love to walk past some railing or other and see a funny knitted thingy even if rainsoggy. The nearest I have got is a) wool wound round trees in Oxfords Botanic garden done by students of Ruskin College and b) ordering in enough wool from Sirri yarn company in the Faroe Islands to make a Sara Lund jumper.
I can't knit. I can't write. I am not funny or witty. My mumsnet name is only wishful thinking. I have not been in the Daily Mail. I. Am. A. Failure.

edam Thu 03-Jan-13 22:57:07

Claig, have you noticed that the Mail website is a. very different to the paper - striking contrast to the moral stance of the printed Mail and b. guilty of lifting material without credit? Have a look around TV and books, large sections lifted from the Beeb. Beeb bashing is practically a religion in the print Mail but online they can't resist nicking huge chunks of content...

funnyperson Thu 03-Jan-13 22:57:36

claig do you write for the Daily Mail?

claig Thu 03-Jan-13 23:00:10

funnyperson, I like your posts. What you write makes sense which is much more than can be said of the majority of New Labour politicians. You are no failure, but they certainly were and that is why the public rejoiced when they kicked them out.

claig Thu 03-Jan-13 23:04:55

'claig do you write for the Daily Mail?'

I am not worthy of such an honour. Many are called, but few are chosen. We are talking about the pinnacle of British journalism, we are talking about erudition and education of the highest degreee. We are talking about minds that shape a generation, stars that shine and light the path that the entire nation follows - we are talking Richard Littlejohn, Melanie Philips, Peter Hitchens - thinkers that dare to think!

ChristmasIsForPlutocrats Thu 03-Jan-13 23:05:16

Contact Radio 4 marketing to get them to demand attribution? Spam the comments board of the DM article, pointing out you never spoke to them and don't endorse them the cheap bastards ?

claig Thu 03-Jan-13 23:10:21

edam, I agree that the Mail is not perfect, but it is the voice of the people, it says what millions really think of the cant, hypocrisy and lies that we are fed by the powerful elites in their ivory towers. It pricks their bubble and makes teh public laugh. That's why Littlejohn is reputedly paid about £1 million per year, because he is capable of giving voice to what the people really think on the gritty ground below, way beneath the gleaming ivory towers paid for by the people.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now