To be shocked at the Daily Mail getting stories from mumsnet

(72 Posts)
shatteredmama Tue 29-Mar-16 10:33:44

Well, I'm not that shocked at all really, but this level of lazy journalism is something else. I remember the featured thread on here well, and was going to comment at the time, this'll make me think twice about commenting on threads in the future...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3512349/Mothers-reveal-eye-watering-comments-midwives-childbirth.html

WhoTheFuckIsSimon Tue 29-Mar-16 11:05:45

They've done it before.

Penis beaker? Ddnt that hit the DM?

Guess at least they're upfront about it this time. I suspect there's threads started here by journalists purporting to be normal people in a crisis (Shona Shibley im looking at you) and then weeks later there's an identical article in the DM.

BarbaraofSeville Tue 29-Mar-16 11:06:06

Surely they would need permission from MNHQ to publish screenshots and direct quotes from here?

And if they did ask for permission, I am surprised that they would be given it?

DM: Hi MNHQ - can we blatently copy bits of your site for an article?
MNHQ: Er, no - go do your own research and write your own story hmm.

{grin] that they have blanked out the 'naughty words'.

VertigoNun Tue 29-Mar-16 11:08:26

There have been a few stories. <Goes to dm online>

catsinthecraddle Tue 29-Mar-16 11:12:16

You shouldn't be shocked, they do that all the time, you can recognise stories at least once a week, but they're less obvious. At least, this is a recent one, DM is famous for writing articles about nonsense that had been around the internet months or even years ago. They use reddit a lot too.

( obviously spending far too much time on the internet myself, but it's partly for work )

StarlingMurmuration Tue 29-Mar-16 11:12:22

I think quotes might come under "fair use".

StillStayingClassySanDiego Tue 29-Mar-16 11:13:31

I've been quoted in the Mail and Telegraph after a funny thread about Jeremy Corbyn.

I was even approached by pm ( by HQ) by the BBC for a piece on women's views on our politics, I declined smile.

wasonthelist Tue 29-Mar-16 11:15:01

There is no excuse for the DM (or DM online which is an entirely separate piece of nastiness) in a modern day civilised society.

PerfidiousPanda Tue 29-Mar-16 11:15:36

It's all public arena isn't it?

There are so many hacks on here and it's easy material. However, what is a bit more worrying is the FB links with real identities that can be accessed/stalked.

Also, a couple of FB groups that have started from here have DM journalists on them - of course they might just be there as themselves but it's a bit too tempting I'd imagine . . .

StitchesInTime Tue 29-Mar-16 11:18:19

I can't say I'm shocked.

I was on there earlier today, and they'd got a story about baby names going extinct from a different parenting forum, on a thread with more than 100 replies. Cast iron proof there.

(I bet most of the names about to go "extinct" will surge in popularity in 50-100 years time, when their grandchildren or great-grandchildren are thinking about naming babies. We're talking names like Barbara and Peter here, not Dick and Fanny)

MattDillonsPants Tue 29-Mar-16 11:31:49

YABU. I was on a thread where Mathew Wright just robbed the thread and discussed it on the show that day.

AugustaFinkNottle Tue 29-Mar-16 11:34:34

They constantly do this. Look at the times they make up publish a story about some massive controversy about, say, a TV programme (usually BBC!) and when it comes down to it all they quote in support of the story is a couple of tweets. It really must be a doddle being a Mail journalist if all you have to do is spend your day trawling social media and YouTube.

Owllady Tue 29-Mar-16 11:36:51

Yes, the Wright stuff are always doing it

feellikeahugefailure Tue 29-Mar-16 11:41:45

YABU. MN is a business not a charity.

The poo emoji was in the sun and clearly said copyright mumsnet.

AlpacaLypse Tue 29-Mar-16 11:42:47

I've been pm-d by a journalist after commenting on a thread, she said she was freelance. To be fair, she offered cash for an interview, but if I wanted to talk about my child birth experiences under my own name I'd do so on FB, not on here and it wasn't nearly enough money

StillStayingClassySanDiego Tue 29-Mar-16 11:42:51

What poo emoji is mn copyright?

OrlandaFuriosa Tue 29-Mar-16 11:45:08

Well, if they start calling themselves the Daily Fail, we shall know that Mumsnettery is taking over the world...

I agree lazy, but actually I support anything that improves the labour experience.

MartinaJ Tue 29-Mar-16 11:48:04

Being shocked at anything in Daily Mail means you live a very sheltered life. If I wanted to torture someone with an IQ over 50 and political opinions left from the memorable AH, I'd lock them in a room with articles from Daily Mail played on loudspeaker.

feellikeahugefailure Tue 29-Mar-16 11:55:06

The poo emoji is copyright mumsnet - www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/features/7032063/You-cant-take-a-st-in-a-box-to-church-can-you-Mum-horrified-after-daughter-makes-poo-emoji-for-Easter-church-contest.html

EmpressOfTheSevenOceans Tue 29-Mar-16 12:00:59

There was a big row about it a few years ago, I remember a spate of anti-Fail usernames meant to both express views and be less likely to get quoted.

VenusRising Tue 29-Mar-16 12:20:33

This isn't the first time this kind of thing has happened unfortunately, and I remember the outrage here when MN used quotes from posters for their books for profit, without asking permission before publishing. Cue a lot of name changes.

In fact and in effect as far as I remember the outcome of those previous cases was that MN own all your posts, and they can do with them what they like, also the press can quote bits and bobs for fair use.

It really is a low blow though when people are posting their heartfelt and truthful memories and emotions and be exposed to comment and ridicule and abused in this way.

I think MN leaves posters feeling like they've been betrayed and are left flapping in the wind TBH. I think they could arrange with media to send a pre publication courtesy post to say that the article will be used in mainstream media before it is printed so a choice can be made to delete your posts.

I do hope that MN delete posts as requested, or indeed the whole thread, but I doubt they'd want to kill the publicity as they seem to court it for traffic.

I'd like to see ownership of posts returned to posters, with copyright reassigned and ownership extended as a moral right to the posters, and permissions having to be sought for use of those posts by all media, but I doubt that will happen if there's a buck to be made. <rather cynical this morning>

The only time IME MN actually disassociate ownership of posts is to allow a libel action to be taken against you!! Then they deny all ownership.. <very cynical indeed> indeed we saw this when she who may not be named flexed her muscles against those who voiced their personal opinions against the method she advised.

It's a little bit disingenuous of them and the media I feel. But why have ethics and qualms when there's money to be made selling stuff that you didn't create yourself?

I don't have much respect for journalists, so this wholesale lifting of personal quotes doesn't surprise me. In my opinion they really are getting lazier and lazier. They probably think that sourcing and stealing other people's work is "doing research".

Of course some say that the posts aren't ascribed to a recognisable person per se so posters aren't personally recognisable in real life, but as a pp said the worry is the link with FB where people could potentially be exposed to being personally stalked and targeted.

Also this ignores the fact that people do have an MN identity, they have a recognisable username that potentially they are using for many years and which can identify them throughout their posting history, all of which is available with an advanced search.

My feeling is that MN could up their game a bit and protect the people it makes money from.

Maybe there should be an opt out setting, where quoting posts is strictly forbidden across all media. Or indeed an opt in setting where mn share any profits they make with the quoted posters, i.e. those actually "doing the work".
You could call it a Fair trade forum .
Now there's a radical, empowering idea... I wonder will it catch on?

SymphonyofShadows Tue 29-Mar-16 12:22:44

There was a well known MNer on here for years who was a DM journalist but I haven't seen her around for ages. We either don't go on the same threads or, like me, she has NC'd. I never did find out her real
Identity but I have my suspicions

ThenLaterWhenItGotDark Tue 29-Mar-16 12:23:14

HQ will be enjoying every second. Like they always do when a thread hits the Fail.

It's da clicks innit.

wasonthelist Tue 29-Mar-16 12:24:49

Not defending the DM which is despicable IMHO, but I have friends with long journalistic careers who trained properly. It's really hard to get paid work at all at present. Papers routinely fire all the experienced (expensive) staff and give all the work to trainees and interns.

ThenLaterWhenItGotDark Tue 29-Mar-16 12:24:50

Tbh, anyone who thinks MN HQ owes them anything at all, wrt privacy or protecting their posts from being lifted elsewhere needs their internet privileges revoked.

You don't want to appear in the Mail and lose your privacy? Then don't put identifying stuff out there in the first place. It's not difficult.

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