Blatant Berry: Can I Quote You on That?
Adventures in discussion lists on the web
by John N. Berry III, Editor-in-Chief -- Library Journal, 11/1/2004
"Once you let someone read it, it isn't yours anymore." My father said that one day when I complained about his heavy editing of a news story I wrote for the Logger Tidings, a weekly newspaper he published in Shasta County, CA. While I think his admonition is valid, I still complain about heavy editing, though I need and get a lot of it at LJ. We're an odd assortment of editors, journalists, and librarians here. Our discussions often tiptoe through the minefields of ethical practice in all three professions.
Recently we received a barrage of e-flak because we quoted postings from electronic discussion lists (they used to be called "listservs," but now that's someone's trademark). In both cases the quotations supported a negative portrayal of some of those quoted. In one story they were attributed to the writer, while in the other the quoted material was not attributed by name. One of the discussion lists from which we quoted has some 1500 subscribers, the other about one-quarter of that.
Before publication, we decided it was unnecessary to get permission to quote these posts, since a large audience had already received their messages. After publication, we read an e-storm of messages on the list saying it was bad journalism, bad netiquette, and bad ethics to quote people without even telling them, or asking their permission. Some of us had second thoughts.
My first reaction was to send the old man's advice to all the complainers. Of course, I knew that would only provoke them (what fun!), so I asked our diverse LJ crew what they would do, hoping we'd agree on some practice for the future.
I also telephoned around. I asked Leonard Kniffel at American Libraries what they do. I had a brief but very helpful chat with Robert Niles, editor of Online Journalism Review, at his office at the University of Southern California and a delightful talk with Susan Scheiberg, librarian at the Rand Corporation Library and owner of the Newlib-L list. Scheiberg was troubled by the quoting but later said, "That old cliché about 'all press is good press' is true." I talked with one of the posters who complained about our excerpts, Nanette Wargo, from her office in tech services at the Champaign PL in Illinois. She was cordial, even friendly, but stuck to her view that we should have asked for permission.
My survey garnered more agreement than disagreement, but the question of whether posting on a discussion list constitutes "publishing" or "publication" seems undecided, so far. I'm sure this is a can of worms we'll all have to open up again someday soon.
I agree that it would be a courtesy to ask writers before we quote them. I also agree that there is some risk for new librarians if they complain angrily in public while they are looking for a job.
On the other hand, I believe that those who go public with their thoughts, whether on the Internet, a web discussion list, or in print, have some responsibility, too. I'm still haunted by my old man's counsel. If you want to keep your thoughts private, you shouldn't put them in writing and send them off for others to read and discuss.
Anonymous writing is cowardly, irresponsible, and undermines your credibility. If you want to communicate privately with a very small number of people, you must identify your communications as private and not for reproduction. If you post to the Internet, to any electronic discussion list, or publish in print, like the old man said, what you write no longer belongs to you. After all, for better or worse, Google has a long reach.
We'll continue to discuss this question here at LJ. Right now, we'll probably go on as we have, quoting what we think will add to the richness of our professional discourse, whether it comes from discussion lists or print publications. We'll also welcome comment from list owners and those who post as we work our way toward a definitive standard practice. We'll probably ask for permission more often, although when the material quoted has been posted to hundreds of others in public, we won't guarantee that we'll take "no" for an answer.
