I've found it interesting over the past few days to see how carefully Iowa Media has treated "crediting" Chad Leistikow for breaking the story. The "official" media is careful to give him credit, even though it had basically been broken by fans on social media prior. I find the whole "I was first" thing fairly strange. I like Chad's work and will look at it regardless of who was first, I also like Morehouse's and Dochterman's, and will look at just about any of the others on occasion as well, however...
If you get news, sit on it for 5 days to protect your source, then release it at virtually the same time as the university while still protecting your source, did you really break anything? Didn't the random guy on twitter who also had "a source" scoop you? Anyone else find this thing strange? Side note, serial thief HawkeyeHeaven (Levi) stole a picture from the Register for their own oliver martin write-up, which it has since removed after being called out.
I do get it. With so many "fan sites" and average individuals having access to information and social media to voice it to the world, the traditional media is at risk in the category of "news," since their opportunities to break news are fleeting.
Thoughts?
If you get news, sit on it for 5 days to protect your source, then release it at virtually the same time as the university while still protecting your source, did you really break anything? Didn't the random guy on twitter who also had "a source" scoop you? Anyone else find this thing strange? Side note, serial thief HawkeyeHeaven (Levi) stole a picture from the Register for their own oliver martin write-up, which it has since removed after being called out.
I do get it. With so many "fan sites" and average individuals having access to information and social media to voice it to the world, the traditional media is at risk in the category of "news," since their opportunities to break news are fleeting.
Thoughts?