Seriously?! The independent is thieving it too?!

[MotherOfBeagles]

So just seen an article in the independent about the thread where a mum wanted to call her daughter iris james!

What the hell?! You expect this theivery crap from the daily sh#* but isn't the independent supposed to be a proper newspaper?

Have they done this before but I was oblivious?

No idea. But they aren't doing anything wrong.

I saw this and eye-rolled massively!

The Indy used to be great - now it's pure click bait. Really disappointing :(

I'm surprised you're surprised.

MN is, like all social media, very public. Anything you post here is available for lazy journalists.

User-generated content is an easy source of stories for anyone.

If you don't want it to be in the papers, don't write it here - or anywhere else that is publicly available.

Exactly what BIWI said.

What's the difference between anyone being able to read it on MN and anyone being able to read it in an online newspaper?

It's already out there for all to see.

It's a public forum

Alas, the Indie is now just BuzzFeed with a history. It's a very pale shadow of its former self, since that Russian chancer made it online only.

National Newspapers generally speaking don't really do any journalism any more - they either get their news from an agency, or lift directly from the internet - even the BBC does it.

It's very sad, and I'm sure the loss of real journalism is bad for us all.

The point the OP was making wasn't whether it's ok or possible to reprint stuff from MN in the papers - it's that, whilst she expected the Daily Mail to use cheap gossipy tabloid journalism, she didn't expect it from The Independent - that they reported real news and were of better quality. YANBU OP I'm surprised too and saddened.

Buzzfeed has a lot of very good pieces - it's not just 10 cats that will totes make you lol.

I saw this yesterday. The places to go for news are not the newspapers these days.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine - It's very sad, and I'm sure the loss of real journalism is bad for us all. - you are right and I think we will see a real deterioration in society as a result.

(The Trump win, the Facebook false news stories, mass hysteria over something tha is not quite true - all very damaging

Our local radio station was discussing a mums net thread last week. I am in Australia. That's when you understand just how public a forum it is.

George Takei shared an American report of the vomited-on £900 bag, amazing how it gets around. :/

On the plus side, it shows how news and advice can be shared more than ever.

Sure, tabloids are more likely to pick up on the gossipy stuff but all threads have a chance of being picked up and going across the world.

It's not so much the 'story stealing' for MN - it just seems it's only from here that's the oddest part. Never see anything from Netmums or Babycentre every other day in the Mail. It's when people come here looking for genuine support in very difficult circumstances, then have their story turn up in a trashy rag like an episode of Jeremy Kyle.

A thread the other week, for example, where a woman was being verbally abused by her husband - the Mail pinched it. What if someone (the husband) had read it (far more likely for them to catch it in the mail over MN) and the situation had escalated? Unlike the posters on here, The Mail do not care about the stories they repeat, or the consequences they could have. It's poor, lazy 'journalism', catering to those who rather read non-stories, over seeing how awful the world stage is at the moment.

I don't get the attitude that it's 'pinching' when it was posted on a public website for all to see anyway.

YY Sparkling.

MN is public. If you don't want threads to end up in the Fail, then don't post here. Or change enough details so that you're not identifiable to anyone.

Yes it's all on the internet whatever site it's on.

The other thing is that when MN threads are shared elsewhere it brings new users to the site which is good from a business point of view re advertising etc. Publicity innit.

Are you really surprised by this? Have you seen the Independent FB page recently? It reads like it is managed by an angry student, its not a respectable paper anymore. It has totally become the left version of the Fail, it is going down in my estimations with each passing day.

'Independent' my arse.

One issue is that newspapers in general are struggling for cash and readers. Sadly, they can't afford to employ lots of investigative journalists and writers to generate original content. I think it's unreasonable to expect high-quality journalism to fill The Independent, which is free to read. For 'proper' journalism you generally have to pay.

It's not so much the 'story stealing' for MN - it just seems it's only from here that's the oddest part. Never see anything from Netmums or Babycentre every other day in the Mail. It's when people come here looking for genuine support in very difficult circumstances, then have their story turn up in a trashy rag like an episode of Jeremy Kyle.

That's because Mumsnetters don't really behave in the way the DM and Matthew Weight etc think 'ladies' should. There is nothing on Netmums etc worth taking, because they toe the lady line with the no swearing thing and not talking too frankly about sex. Mumsnet is an easy target because, you know, misogyny.

I remember reading an article some time ago by a journalist (male, if that's relevant) all about how shocked he was to visit MN and discover it's full of swearing and discussions about poo and weird sex. Made me wonder where he'd been. I think he even used the term "dark underbelly", as if this stuff isn't constantly in the trending topics and completely in your face the first bloody time you visit.

It's not 'thieving' or 'pinching'.

It's reprinting something in the public domain.

As Sparkling said, what's the difference between reading it on Mumsnet or reading it in the papers?

In fact, even MNHQ publish threads elsewhere - like FB and Twitter.

Can you imagine anyone trying to steal stories from baby centre, snurk!

The Independent is massively struggling, isn't it? I think they have given up on the print version and now only exist online. I get all the points about "it's in the public domain", but I don't see how that excuses the fact that it's lazy journalism and it's not news! However, in the case of the Daily Mail I think they do it because they are despicable tittle-tattle merchants whereas the Independent I presume if in fact actually desperate.