I've read all this slag in the press lately about how the blogosphere is an 'echo chamber' and blogs just blog about what other blogs are saying. Which is true, but how is this any different than mainstream media all reporting on the same stories? Any different from the wire service distribution of a story of a photogenic toddler going on a pickup truck joyride? I think the only difference is that the sources, at least for those above-the-board bloggers using proper attribution, are more traceable, a trend reporters fear.
I think the only problem is if you pass the work off as your own. Excerpting a piece and adding your own tweak on it is a good tactic as long as you make sure to demarcate what's original and what's not. You guys are different because you're provided an added value by compiling a whole bunch of information in one database (Full disclosure: SalesBrief ran a Blogad on The Spunker last week).
Posted by: Ben Popken | 02/01/2006 at 12:42 AM
We could not agree with you more. Assuming that the original source is given credit, we think helping users find it is a service. There is a fine line, however, between distributing content and profiting from another person's work. We are working hard every day to try to stay on the right side of the line.
Great blog...thanks.
Posted by: SalesBrief | 01/24/2006 at 07:25 PM