5 comments

• 

  Jon Buscall

  9 months ago

  Having grown up on a staple diet of British tabloid journalism I didn't blink an eyelid when I read the initial post.
  
  Perhaps my reaction (or lack or reaction) says something about how Web 2.0 is blurring the boundaries between PR, reporting and textual warfare ?
  
  I appreciated your frank reangling of the issue; the transparency you showed convinces me that The Inquisitr will remain a regular feature in my RSS newsreader.
  
  The web is full of mistakes waiting to happen. It's how we deal with them that builds or ruins our credibility.
  reply
• 

  Svetlana Gladkova

  9 months ago

  Duncan, 100% with you on pulling the post issue, it is always disturbing to see someone even suggesting deleting an already published post - especially when it hit all the feed readers and the links are scattered around various bookmarking and voting sites. What's the point when everyone interested has already seen it?
  
  I have been asked to pull a few posts myself (one was a negative - and well-deserved at that - review of a startup and once I was even asked to pull a post by a very influential figure in the web 2.0 world because the figure was not happy about his personal brand damaged by the content of the post) and I invariably refused to do it - after all, it's already out there and it will only attract more interest when it gets deleted and people will start asking why and someone will be sure to republish it on their blogs from their RSS feeds. So why provoke further interest when interest is the last thing you want for that post?
  reply
• 

  mollyfud

  9 months ago

  I don't expect you to delete the post dude, but how about removing the screen shots of the Private email? Or better yet, often you use images that convey the idea of a story, so instead of Sarah's email, why not replace them with some of your own showing that private info had been put up?
  
  The real reason you don't want to get rid of it is that you see it as a way to drive traffic to the site. I hope this isn't right, but its the only logical conclusion. Prove me wrong, Duncan, Prove me wrong.
  reply
• 

  Tom

  9 months ago

  Breaking the story? Fine. Posting the stolen content? Not an honorable thing to do. You should have asked yourself, could you report on this without the screenshots like many others have?
  
  If not you should take some very basic communication and journalism classes. Possibly an ethics class as well.
  
  Learn to to tell the story without perpetuating the original crime.
  reply
• 

  Duncan Riley

  9 months ago

  Tom, if you'd read the post, you'll see I made that call WITHOUT knowing the other sites had the emails. All I knew at 8:30 this morning my time was that Wikileaks was down, and we had the shots, and they were the core of the post, so I called it based on what I knew (ie, not pulling the post...it was already up). Had I known that they were splashed over other sites the decision process and the call may have been different.
  reply