"on mumsnet this week" in the Mail. Is this a new thing

[jujumaman]

Came across this this morning when I should have been working

Is this a new weekly rip-off by the Mail? Or has it been going on for months and I'm behind the times as usual

I'm not quite as virulently anti the Mail as mnetters, find it silly rather than the end of civilisation as we know it. But still ...

LG - doesn't the copyright help?

The MN terms say that OPs assign copyright to MN even though no express consent is given - 'I accept' button or similar. This could be challenged. Also copyright now includes moral right not to have material used/reproduced in derogatory manner. Fair use is another issue of course and probably is applicable in this case - but this article has a large amount of 'lifted material' in proportion to the size of the article not really the same as an academic footnote.

I don't know why she didn't ask. Maybe she did ask and we're not hearing the full story.

Could think of a number of reasons why she didn't ask but they would all be mere speculation on my part

quite frankly, would rather hear what something like NaturistsNet or PeopleWhoTrainSpotNet was thinking about as it would be more interesting.

A bunch of mums, nah

Actually I think the BIGGEST Annoying Thing is that now someone can't write an 'official' This Week On Mumsnet column for a nice paper, checking that it isn't going to cause any trouble, and making it really good PR for MN that we all approve of and leaves everybody happy

BAHHHH humbug

back to reality is a possibility, Leningrad.

MP - completely agree - and I know exactly who would be the right person to do it

Well EXACTLY

another plan for world domination bites the dust

I must say though, I don't think there is any point asking for Aloha to come here and justify herself - if it is legal, then it is legal. If her editor wants her to do it, and it pays her for a few hours work, then fair enough. If she refuses, then someone else will do it.

The only issue for me is whether it is legally permissible, which I find baffling.

Thanks winehouse

MP why not?

I think that if mumsnet is going to be a place where people never post anything personal and where everyone name changes once a week it will become incredibly dull.

I do wonder where people will go, I "chat" to a core of mumsnetters on facebook, know a few in real life. Not the same, the moldies had it right all along eh!

MP - maybe for a change this week, you could do a DM round-up instead. Then they could re-quote you next week and everyone would be confused

I agree with whoever said that the best chance of getting it stopped would be an article in another newspaper about the Death of Responsible Reporting or similar, pegged on this debacle and discussing the death of proper investigative reporting and the rise of journos plundering websites like MN and Facebook for "facts" with which to pad out their pieces, and the potential affect on the innocent members of the public suddenly outed without their consent.

If Thunderduck and Sweetness would be prepared to give an anonymous comment about the invasion of privacy and the effect of seeing this unexpectedly in print then that woudl probably help.

Come on journo MNers, surely there's someone out there who could do with a few quid?

i agree. MP could do a Daily Mail round-up.

A laugh a minute for us and outraging the DM readership simultaneously.

Maybe its worth emailing the Guardian's Media Monkey Column? I'm sure they'd find it interesting

www.guardian.co.uk/media/mediamonkeyblog

Maybe daftpunk and the Mail could do an Offend off.

oopsagain;

i'm sorry, but i am finding it really difficult to understand what point you're trying to make.?

what you post on here can be read by millions of people all over the world...the DM isn't read by millions of people all over the world.....mumsnet is not MI5...we are not having secret talks about world security.....we talk about boring stuff that very few people are interested in.

That is the mistake you are making daftpunk, ( I have stopped abbreviating your name as you are not my partner and I dont think you are up for a lesbian relationship ) you may be dull, we are all fascinating.

DP - how could you possibly think that people wouldnt be interested to read about the thread we were on the other day (which is still going)....it was the definition of 'interesting'!!

lol...love your name...nah, i'm only a lesbian when i apply for jobs.

hi K999

God. Have just spent the last 3 hours reading this thread (was intettupted a few times by child wanting breakfast etc).

I read the DM every morning on-line. Not living in the UK I enjoy reading a UK paper. I consider myself to be savvy enough to 'get' the general 'DM-ness' and agree or disagree with what I read.

I must say that I HATE the DM using MN in this way. I am totally shocked at the bare-faced cheek of both the DM and Leah Hardy/Aloha to do so without approaching MN for permission. Esp as Aloha left MN on a point of principle at one time! She knows damn well that MNers would be be in favour of this.

I have tended to be quite open on here and would be fairly identifiable but but tbh it has never bothered me as nobody I know uses MN. However lots of people I know would read the DM and it would be easy to find me on here esp if I were to be mentioned by username in a DM article. I am not worried about being stalked/bullied or murdered but I still do not want people being able to find me on here in such a fashion.

I think this smacks of totally lazy journalism. It is one thing to be commissioned to write a piece on the trials and tribulations of being PG and trying to work in a non-friendly environment and sitting down and doing the research but working out that this subject has probably been covered on parenting sites and spending a few hours reading various sites and getting your info together and sitting down and writing an article. But just cutting and pasting in this manner is just lazy and shoddy. My view at this point would be that said journalist is having to do this not just because of the current economic climate but because she is not a very good journalist in the first place. And I am not nor never have been anti-journalist. Nor even anti-DM.

Justine - I understand that this came as a surprise and at a time when lots of people are on holiday but I hope that you will take on board that lots of MNers are really unhappy about this and do NOT want to be associated with a weekly column in the DM. I understand that you may feel that any publicity is good publicity etc but given that the majority of MNers are fairly anti the DM I would suspect that getting new members through the DM link may lead to tears!

I feel a name change coming on so am off to think of something. And, yes - I now totally get the whole Moldies thing.

i have name changed to protect my identity.

Aargh - para 3 should read that "she knows full well that Mners would NOT be in favour of this"!!!!!

i need to spell my name right aswell.