Splice URLs

March 16, 2010 4:23 PM

I'm curious as to whether MetaFilter is related in any way to SpliceToday. Are there MeFites contributing, is it a project?

The reason I ask is because over at SpliceToday -- "a web magazine featuring idiosyncratic writing and visual presentation on topics of interest and concern to an audience that values perspective over popularity. We depend on contributors who aren't getting their voices heard anywhere else. Our emphasis is weighted toward the arts — music, film and books—but also includes essays and interviews about politics, sports and the nuances of today's popular culture" -- it seems like >75% of the content is available first on the blue. There is some original content, but aside from that it seems a bit, um, wrong to build a site that is largely fed by a different site unless there is some relationship or you're obviously an aggregator and liberal with your "vias".

posted by chavenet to MetaFilter-Related at 4:23 PM (83 comments total)

To be fair, only two thirds of the site seem to be from a metafilter feed. That's a good 33.333% of original content . . .
posted by Think_Long at 4:29 PM on March 16, 2010

Oh, and the discussion thread after each article is on the right side instead of the bottom. That was confusing.

I dunno though, I kind of dig sites like this as far as their original content is concerned.
posted by Think_Long at 4:32 PM on March 16, 2010

Wow, the about Slice section reads as nothing like what the actual front page of the site, which is, as noted, really familiar to me.
posted by Bookhouse at 4:33 PM on March 16, 2010

I knew that name sounded familiar. Fuck those guys.
posted by cortex (staff) at 4:35 PM on March 16, 2010 [24 favorites]

I must say, it's a pretty User Friendly site.
posted by gman at 4:35 PM on March 16, 2010 [7 favorites]

I am confused. WTF?
posted by Lutoslawski at 4:36 PM on March 16, 2010

I knew that name sounded familiar. Fuck those guys.

Oh no he didn't. FUCK THAT GUY. Seriously. motherfucker.
posted by Lutoslawski at 4:36 PM on March 16, 2010

Quick, someone post a "fuck Splice Magazine" on the front page. We'll see how long it takes to show up.
posted by Think_Long at 4:40 PM on March 16, 2010 [3 favorites]

Better post titles.
posted by gman at 4:48 PM on March 16, 2010

There was a time when it was pretty obvious to me that one of Keith Olbermann's producers read MeFi when there was the subject of about one post a day on the show.
posted by l33tpolicywonk at 4:53 PM on March 16, 2010

Looks like they've upset other bloggers.
posted by donnagirl at 4:54 PM on March 16, 2010

Holy shit that Andrew guy on staff is such a d bag.
posted by Think_Long at 4:59 PM on March 16, 2010

Okay, so we're all in agreement about registering and then shitting all over this travesty in the comments section?
posted by lattiboy at 5:03 PM on March 16, 2010

You get the pitchforks, I'll make the popcorn.
posted by tula at 5:06 PM on March 16, 2010

I see my recent post to the blue on there... and see how it has been adapted for their front page...

And I cry salty, bitter tears.

TASTE THESE TEARS, SPLICETODAY! TASTE THEM!
posted by Askiba at 5:06 PM on March 16, 2010

Someone should submit the MeFi logo for their "draw our logo" contest.
posted by equalpants at 5:07 PM on March 16, 2010 [9 favorites]

Okay, so we're all in agreement about registering and then shitting all over this travesty in the comments section?

No, we're not. Often in situations like this cortex has been the well-reasoned ambassador for Mefi, and his job is a lot easier if it isn't following up a swarming from the goon squad.
posted by Bookhouse at 5:09 PM on March 16, 2010 [10 favorites]

Holy shit that Andrew guy on staff is such a d bag.

You forgot a few words.
posted by gman at 5:12 PM on March 16, 2010

No, we're not. Often in situations like this cortex has been the well-reasoned ambassador for Mefi, and his job is a lot easier if it isn't following up a swarming from the goon squad.

The individual copyright for each post is held by the user who made the post, so I DO think it's reasonable for the individual copyright holders to lay the smackadown.
posted by muddgirl at 5:33 PM on March 16, 2010

Well, it looks like they're not stealing the wording of posts, just the links themselves.

This SEO-type crap really is the worst of the internet. I still vote International Mefi Pitchfork Brigade.
posted by muddgirl at 5:34 PM on March 16, 2010

Hey cool, they stole my Van Gogh post! As far as I'm concerned, I'm just going to mentally count that as an extra favorite.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 5:37 PM on March 16, 2010 [1 favorite]

Often in situations like this cortex has been the well-reasoned ambassador for Mefi
posted by DU at 5:43 PM on March 16, 2010 [3 favorites]

'Fav.' would have been a nice compromise back in November.
posted by gman at 5:53 PM on March 16, 2010

Wow, I followed the link, thought "This site looks interesting, but let me read the MeTa before I explore." I then got four comments in to the MeTa, paused, removed the site from my bookmarks, and continued reading the MeTa.
posted by bunnycup at 6:04 PM on March 16, 2010 [1 favorite]

It does have a nice professional white background, though.
posted by idiomatika at 6:14 PM on March 16, 2010 [2 favorites]

It's like a bizzaro Metafilter, where complex design is more important than people.
posted by Toekneesan at 6:18 PM on March 16, 2010 [2 favorites]

Okay, so we're all in agreement about registering and then shitting all over this travesty in the comments section?

I can't tell you what to do with your time not spent on mefi, but I'd really prefer it if you didn't. There are a million skeezy motherfuckers out on the web, merrily shitting up the place, and trying to go after them in the name of Metafilter (a) doesn't scale and (b) just makes mefi look bad.

I'm not overjoyed to see these guys' name show up again, but it's enough for me as far as Metafilter goes that they're banned from mefi.

That they may be rather lazily scamming inspiration for content off of Mefi seems to be just of a piece with their whole content model; it's frustrating as a phenomenon, but so are a lot of other crappy things that people do on the web in lieu of actually contributing anything of worth to the aggregate. If individual posters here want to approach these guy(s) about particularly liberal appropriation of their own post content, that's up to them, but I frankly doubt the effort would be rewarded in any satisfying way.

Often in situations like this cortex has been the well-reasoned ambassador for Mefi

As much for the quoting of my own first comment here: as much as anything I regret leaving that comment just before getting on a plane where I couldn't follow up for an hour.

Where we sometimes need to go out and interface with other communities, it's really helpful to not have to try and do repair work from other folks here letting their fondness for and defensiveness of mefi get ahead of their sense of diplomacy and civility, and I do really like that in general folks here don't get all flashmob on other sites even when things get weird and frictional in an inter-community sense.

This doesn't seem to me like something that has any good reason to even go beyond a simple "fuck those guys" in Metatalk, though. There's no hope for something good here, no misunderstanding marring an otherwise potentially positive interaction or whatever. They're skeezy web jerks. Meh. Leave it alone.
posted by cortex (staff) at 6:46 PM on March 16, 2010 [7 favorites]

Okay, so we're all in agreement about registering and then shitting all over this travesty in the comments section?

Someone should submit the MeFi logo for their "draw our logo" contest.

Yeah, option No. 1 seems a bit 4chan-y to me, and MeFi is above that. However, it would be a sort of clever trick if many people registered and all submitted the MeFi logo for the 'design our logo' thing, and then said nothing more about it. Sort of has the intelligent with subtle smugness I like about MetaFilter.
posted by Lutoslawski at 6:47 PM on March 16, 2010 [1 favorite]

*posted before Cortex's very reasonable comment.

Being a good MeFite means sometimes knowing when to walk away.
posted by Lutoslawski at 6:49 PM on March 16, 2010

I'm going to boil up some tar, just in case.
posted by rtha at 6:55 PM on March 16, 2010 [5 favorites]

I'm amused to note that none of my recent posts made the Splice cut. Does this mean I'm doing something right, or wrong? :D

Cortex, will take your advice to FEAMO. (Forget 'em and Move On.)
posted by zarq at 6:58 PM on March 16, 2010

Maybe Cortex might consider removing the link to this bag of shit as well? Or is it time to talk about how splice supports pedophilia?
posted by nevercalm at 7:00 PM on March 16, 2010 [1 favorite]

Can somesome point me to the stolen bits on this piece of shit cause I need an excuse to vent some well-made handcrafted 100% organic bile at someone who deserves it.
posted by The Whelk at 7:05 PM on March 16, 2010

okay I didn't read cortex being all ADULT AND REASONABLE ..I just gotta go ..scream into a pillow or something. Long day.
posted by The Whelk at 7:06 PM on March 16, 2010

Nearly every damned link on the site, going back several months, can be traced to a MeFi FPP on the same topic, in the same time frame.
posted by zarq at 7:10 PM on March 16, 2010

What a jackass. I mean come on.
posted by cashman at 7:14 PM on March 16, 2010

Can somesome point me to the stolen bits on this piece of shit cause I need an excuse to vent some well-made handcrafted 100% organic bile at someone who deserves it.

okay I didn't read cortex being all ADULT AND REASONABLE ..I just gotta go ..scream into a pillow or something. Long day.

Could you maybe do it on behalf of DVDbeaver instead of MetaFilter?
http://www.splicetoday.com/moving-pictures/great-30s-movies-on-dvd
posted by carsonb at 7:20 PM on March 16, 2010

Hey, I recognize this guy. I use Digg (guilty pleasure, I know), and there are certain people who almost always get their content to the front page. It's hard to prove, but it seems like a combination of roping in a couple dozen sycophants who blindly vote up each other's content -- hundreds of stories per day -- and then paying users from India a pittance to push them over the edge.

Russ Smith is one of these people. As others have said, he runs SpliceToday, and submits stories from there on a daily basis without disclosing his connection to the site. He also submits a lot of op-eds from places like the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post. It's probably just filler to mask his own self-promotion from the site's algorithms, but I wouldn't be surprised if he was being payed to promote these articles.

He's always struck me as an SEO sleazebag, and his consistent manipulation of what's supposed to be a democratic user-driven site has always been annoying. But if he's stealing FPPs from Mefi? Now it's personal.
posted by Rhaomi at 7:31 PM on March 16, 2010 [2 favorites]

we already work for them.
posted by gman at 7:34 PM on March 16, 2010 [1 favorite]

Everyone swipes links from everyone. That's the nature of the worldwide web, and blogging in particular. If we were coming up with original content, and they were stealing it, then I could understand people getting pissed. As it is, most of our links are swiped from boingboing or kottke or any number of other sites. It's not like we own any of it. Or am I missing some finer point?
posted by crunchland at 7:47 PM on March 16, 2010

crunchland: Apparently there's some semi-automated process by which this site skims content directly from the Mefi front page. It's not really about the links themselves at that point - it's an automated way to fill up your site with cool content and look like you have something going on when you don't.
posted by odinsdream at 8:03 PM on March 16, 2010

crunchland, most of the stuff at Metafilter isn't swiped from *one* site in particular. Not to mention, we've got the courtesy to add a 'via' most of the time (whether it's done by the original poster or someone else). Different ethos, for sure.
posted by librarylis at 8:06 PM on March 16, 2010 [1 favorite]

Crunchland, in your profile you've got a great detailed, like 30-paragraph piece about making an FPP. Let me recreate that for this site.

"The SpliceToday Method - or How to Make a Better Front Page Post. Take almost all ideas from Metafilter. Clip a paragraph. Make a new headline. Done."
posted by cashman at 8:28 PM on March 16, 2010

it seems like >75% of the content is available first on the blue.

Really? Because about 68.4% of FPPs on the blue, I've run across on other sites first*. Sure, sites like Fark and Reddit aren't as eloquent in the post composition department, but the links are out there before they show up here. I'm not suggesting posters here repackage links from elsewhere, and then Splice Today snakes it from here. Before the people get out the pitchforks, this site may not be stealing content from Metafilter.


*see, I can make up statistics too!
posted by birdherder at 9:00 PM on March 16, 2010

On reflection,

KILL IT WITH FIRE
posted by killdevil at 9:18 PM on March 16, 2010

They didn't steal any of my solid gold link round-ups, have they?

Or is it time to talk about how splice supports pedophilia?

I think giving Noah Berlatsky yet another venue through which to peddle his prattle is the greater sin.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:12 PM on March 16, 2010

Solid Gold. Awww yeah.
Thank you, Alvy
posted by heyho at 10:20 PM on March 16, 2010

Thank you, Alvy

Well, I didn't mean that kind of Solid Gold Link Round-Up. Though if that's your bag, not_on_display has got you covered, and then some.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:34 PM on March 16, 2010

nevercalm: “Or is it time to talk about how splice supports pedophilia?”

Whee! We're on the internet! Libel is fun!
posted by koeselitz at 10:58 PM on March 16, 2010

Wow. How on earth did I miss all the Solid Gold goodness? Oh, wow.
posted by heyho at 11:01 PM on March 16, 2010

I think you meant Solid Goldness, amirite?

Sorry to derail the anger about the shitheels, everyone.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 11:19 PM on March 16, 2010

most of the stuff at Metafilter isn't swiped from *one* site in particular

I don't know. There are days the entire New York Times appears on MeFi's front page, article by article.

That said, fuck them.
posted by fourcheesemac at 12:16 AM on March 17, 2010

DESTROY DESTROY DESTROY.
posted by vrakatar at 2:17 AM on March 17, 2010

Are they human?

I hereby call on the human flesh search engine!

no not really let's all be mellow
posted by Meatbomb at 2:46 AM on March 17, 2010

Weiner dog
posted by Joseph Gurl at 5:49 AM on March 17, 2010

Where we sometimes need to go out and interface with other communities, it's really helpful to not have to try and do repair work from other folks here letting their fondness for and defensiveness of mefi get ahead of their sense of diplomacy and civility

don't hate me, cortex
posted by Justinian at 6:14 AM on March 17, 2010

Are you guys going to tell these idiots to cease and desist? I don't think it's kosher just because they didn't cut and paste all the text.
posted by Justinian at 6:38 AM on March 17, 2010

Previously, on the Mefi plagiarism variety show.
posted by cashman at 7:17 AM on March 17, 2010

And when you looked back on the beach there was a point where two sets of footprints changed to just one and a big messed up pile of sand. That was where I turned and held you back from going ape-shit while you struggled. - St. Cortex the Civil.
posted by Babblesort at 7:29 AM on March 17, 2010 [7 favorites]

Are you guys going to tell these idiots to cease and desist? I don't think it's kosher just because they didn't cut and paste all the text.

IANAL, but I wouldn't think there's any real legal claim here. It's not infringement to take someone else's idea for a post, even if you get all your ideas from one source. That doesn't change the fact that they're lazy, plagiarizing assholes.
posted by Horace Rumpole at 7:45 AM on March 17, 2010

I look forward to seeing them set up a section where they deal with reader questions and always know the best answer beforehand.

They'll look like geniuses.
posted by quin at 8:16 AM on March 17, 2010 [1 favorite]

I've had posts on my blog scraped wholesale and republished on sites intent on SEO tomfoolery. I've had graphics I've made used in a TED talk without my permission. I've had pictures I posted to Flickr end up on stock photo sites that I didn't know existed, and I've seen Amazon reviews I've written show up on websites selling the same products that I've never visited before.

I know a guy who makes a couple thousand a month scraping ebay auctions for Apple products and accessories. He puts them up in a form that can be easily read on an iTouch or iPhone, and then gets a commission for every person that clicks on those links. Frankly, I'm baffled that he's as successful at it as he is, but there you go.

Site scraping and repackaging content is just something we're all going to have to get used to. This guy isn't the first and he won't be the last. Piracy and plagiarism is a scourge that won't go away and will probably get much worse, and smart capitalists will always be willing to make a buck off people who have more talent and work longer and harder than they do.
posted by crunchland at 8:51 AM on March 17, 2010

Russ Smith raped and murdered a DELICIOUS HAM SANDWICH in 1990
posted by Damn That Television at 9:11 AM on March 17, 2010 [2 favorites]

You wouldn't be annoyed in the least if it was one single guy who published the SEO site with your blog posts, used your graphics, took your Flickr pics, duplicated your reviews, and was basically just waiting for you to produce more content to take that too?
posted by cashman at 9:11 AM on March 17, 2010

More recently, Russ Smith drew cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad as a stray dog.
posted by gman at 9:18 AM on March 17, 2010

Of course I am annoyed. Of course I've contacted them and sent take-down notices. Of course I've asked for compensation and recognition for what they took that was mine. Sometimes I got somewhere. Most times, though, it was an exercise in futility. (US copyright laws don't have surprisingly little sway against Tiawanese SEO bloggers and Russian stock photography webmasters.)

I guess my point is is that what has happened to me is even more personal than someone swiping a link from a 20 word metafilter post that I made, which I found on someone else's blog, who found it on someone else's blog, who found it on someone else's blog. That he is pulling a lot of his content from here is annoying, but what are you going to do about it? It's all part of the "magic" of cut-and-paste.
posted by crunchland at 9:21 AM on March 17, 2010

"Obscure metaphysical explanation to cover a phenomena. Reasons dredged out of the shadows to explain away that which cannot be explained."

Comes with the territory I guess. fiamo, fiamo.
posted by cashman at 9:28 AM on March 17, 2010

most of the stuff at Metafilter isn't swiped from *one* site in particular

I don't know. There are days the entire New York Times appears on MeFi's front page, article by article.

fourcheesemac, I was going to say Slate or the Guardian, but yeah NYT gets a lot of play, too. Then again, the fact that we can name a good couple different sites implies to me that while we joke about it, Metafilter doesn't really have a problem with it. You could call it The Onion solution; if the blue gets overrun with one particular site, Metatalk exists so that the community can discuss it.

And I totally disagree, crunchland, that the solution is to throw up your hands and say, 'blogs these days.' I respect your past experiences and hear you when you say that some people just aren't interested in cooperating. When it's something like this, I think the path should be that either Matt et al and/or the posters who've been scraped to speak up and discuss (if not confront) the situation with the person responsible. Once that happens, either it will go well (as it has in the past, with other scrapers), or other solutions should be sought. I get that it's not that easy, but I really think you have to go down the path anyway.
posted by librarylis at 9:32 AM on March 17, 2010

At first I felt bad that the wacky googlebombing might unintentionally make things difficult for this guy, but then I realized I don't care much for him either.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 9:37 AM on March 17, 2010

A couple comments removed. Please not so much with the wacky googlebombing just in general.
posted by cortex (staff) at 1:52 PM on March 17, 2010 [1 favorite]

Here's my take on this:

You as a mefi user own the copyright to your post. Hence it is not up to metafilter, but rather up to you, to defend the copyright. (If you were writing for metafilter and the copyright belonged to metafilter, they would have to decide whether to defend it.)

If you write a post and care about correct attribution, you would google occasionally to check for other sites plagiarizing your post. If the infringing site allows user comments, you should politely state in the comment section that the post was copied from elsewhere, and provide a source to your original post. If it doesn't, then you're limited to sending a DCMA or somesuch, on a post-by-post basis of course.

Whether that's of any use is kind of moot, because short of going through a legal system (and, which one? where?), there's not much in terms of credible threat for them. Ultimately these guys depend on traffic to survive, and they will get less of it if readers note frequent occasions of copyright violations by reading the comment sections of the articles on the infringing site.

All of the above applies only to when you write an original post, much like one you would publish in a newspaper or magazine. If you write a less-original post with just a collection of links to, say, the NYT, then realize that unless someone is copying you verbatim, there's not much there in terms of copyrightable content worth protecting in the first place.

But I wholeheartedly agree: these kind of sites and people are detrimental to the internet; they unnecessarily decrease the signal to noise.
posted by spherical_perceptions at 2:22 PM on March 17, 2010

I have a side story for those thinking about going the legal route.

This boxing website was notorious for ripping off articles and videos from other sites. I'm not sure if they still do that, but years ago it caused ripples in the on-line boxing community. One well-established site sued them in a U.K. court and won a small settlement. I don't think they ever saw the money, and the site is still up.

And remember, this was a site that copied and pasted articles from other sites and passed them off as their own. A much more serious copyright violation than we're talking about here (though no less galling, I understand). The point is that it doesn't seem to have done any good, despite the legal fees that were surely paid to get the suit done up.
posted by hiteleven at 8:25 PM on March 17, 2010

They stole my Gardner museum heist post too. How's that for irony?
posted by Horace Rumpole at 11:45 AM on March 18, 2010

Follow-up:

I called out SpliceToday's Mefi-pilfering ways on a story Smith submitted to Digg a few days ago. He later contacted me to say that he took note of my comments; he also half-justified the whole thing by saying the site was still in the early stages of growth. (He also invited me to write for them, go figure).

I responded by explaining why the situation was so irritating to Mefites -- adding that pissing off such a large and well-connected community might not be good for someone trying to build a social site of their own -- and requested that he stop the practice. I also invited him to register here and apologize, explaining how when Illiad did that after the UserFriendly flare-up it helped cool things.

He didn't agree to that, but he did say he'd "address this internally." So I'm guessing the poaching of content will stop. And if it doesn't, hey, I promised I'd make a note of that on any future stories from the site he tried to promote on Digg. Something tells me that plagiarism doesn't make for very good PR.
posted by Rhaomi at 4:47 PM on March 21, 2010 [1 favorite]

Another follow-up:

I also got contacted by the "extremely banned" Mr. Kaufmann referenced here. He invited me to re-post what he said; his message follows with minimal editing (turning plain URLs into links and skipping over some stuff about Digg, which is irrelevant here):

My name's Zach Kaufmann -- I'm the associate editor at Splice Today and the one responsible for all the Metafilter content that has been posted. Ah, where to start: first, I should say, I'm sorry, you're right, there are days when I no doubt rely too heavily on Metafilter, and provide absolutely no credit for having found the link on Metafilter.

A little bit of broader context: Splice is a very, very small operation (in house staff includes myself, the main editor, and the girl who manages all of the billing and what not). As associate editor, I am solely responsible for what gets posted in the feed and multimedia: about 5 or 6 posts in each, every day. Not that many I guess. I generally check out Metafilter as well as Digg and Reddit and a couple of other aggregator sites on www.theweblist.net.

I usually go to Metafilter first because, well, you guys are the best. You're the easiest to navigate, you find pretty interesting things, you generally just do it better than most of the others. I freakin' love Metafilter is what I'm saying, so I'm sorry if I've upset the community.

Now, all that being said, here's why I don't think what I do is any kind of problem 90%+ of the time: most of the links that get posted (as some of your own users pointed out in the discussion) are not-exactly flying under the radar: The New Yorker, The Guardian, The New York Times, various other very well known newspapers, magazines, blogs etc etc. I could no doubt find almost all of the stuff that gets posted on Metafilter on Reddit, Digg, and so on. There's only so much credit any site can take for "finding" a NY Times article. In cases like the blog about the guy eating the really hot chili (one of the specific examples in your message to Russ), should I have included some kind of "via Metafilter"? Probably. If it helps, I'll start doing that, and I could even go back and add that in on older posts. But let's be honest, most of the stuff I've found on Metafilter and then used on Splice is not this kind of obscure blog stuff. It is, like I said, from pretty heavily trafficked and well known sites, and the fact that it gets posted on Metafilter (or any other aggregate site) doesn't really mean a whole lot.

Please feel free to share this email with the Metafilter community, if you're so inclined. Also, if you want to talk further, my email is [e-mail]

Best,

-Zach Kaufmann

posted by Rhaomi at 1:51 PM on March 23, 2010

Christ, what an asshole!
posted by jtron at 2:10 PM on March 23, 2010

Except that some links, like the one I posted about "You Tube Closing Down For The Night" was a fairly obscure thing (around 300 views) before I posted it to Mefi and it went crazy. I'm not look for credit, I'm just pointing out the fallacy that just because something turns up on Metafilter it's already "in the air". Even links have to start somewhere. Often I'll put the really interesting things up on Mefi and not my own blog because I know they'll get the most exposure here.

Plus, the source he venerates, The Web List, is a less functional PopURLS. Does anyone know if they posted that linking credit at the bottom of their page as soon as it launched?
posted by feelinglistless at 2:24 PM on March 23, 2010

and the girl who manages all of the billing and what not

what
posted by rtha at 2:56 PM on March 23, 2010 [2 favorites]

So he's going to "address it internally" but it's a "very, very small operation?" Who is he trying to shift the blame to?
posted by flatluigi at 3:37 PM on March 23, 2010

Probably that secretary girl who does all the billing and what not. What was her name again?
posted by bluishorange at 6:02 PM on March 23, 2010

So we can get him on child labor laws, then?
posted by The corpse in the library at 6:17 PM on March 23, 2010

For once I say "Yay, Metafilter is mad about something so I don't have to be." Put in a less jokey way, I saw the comment about the girl who manages all of the billing and what not and was going to note it. But it's noted, and I feel slightly less insane. Anyway, yeah, sounds like we got her fired.
posted by bunnycup at 8:11 PM on March 23, 2010

Follow-uppingly, aggregrator SpliceToday linked yesterday to this Slate article on a dispute between The Wrap and Newser over -- get this -- "The ethics of aggregation". With no comment, no recognition of interest, no apparent irony.
posted by chavenet at 10:44 PM on April 6, 2010