Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Blue Sky View Post
I knew this practice goes on at The Oklahoman regarding their recycling of content from this site and presenting it as their own. However, I think only now am I realizing how often this occurs. For what it's worth, Pete, since your move from LA to Oklahoma City, and seeing your hard work and commitment to OKCTalk, I have a whole new respect for you and see you as a trailblazer and a force for nothing but good in our fair city. The Oklahoman is embarrassing and I'm disappointed to read that the Journal Record is also resorting to the same practices.
Thank you for saying this.

Of course, I come at this from a somewhat fresh perspective and don't assume to know things without researching them. This lifting of information without credit always seemed very wrong to me but still, I have interviewed journalism ethics experts, the chair of the ethics board for the Society of Professional Journalists, and writers and editors from Reuters, Bloomberg and others. They all have said, unequivocally, that this practice without proper attribution is highly unethical and have forwarded handbooks for other publications that specifically spell out the proper way to provide credit and when it is to be done.


There is another highly unethical journalistic approach used heavily by the Oklahoman that has a specific name in the industry: Access Journalism. Basically, it's becoming overly friendly with the subjects you report on and having them feed you information and entire stories with the obvious understanding things will be reported a certain way and no tough questions will be asked. (Otherwise, why feed this to a particular person or publication at all?) This is unethical on both sides, including the source of the story. The Alliance and staff from the city of OKC have even engaged in this practice which is wrong on many levels.

When I first started to report, I would often get flat denials. Then I would point out I was holding their permit/plans/info in my hand. Then it would turn to, "Well, we aren't ready for that to be out." And I finally started telling people, "Look, I have the story. I'm just giving you the opportunity to comment. I'm not seeking your permission." The fact so many people were floored by that illustrates the way news sources are used to controlling what actually gets reported.

Still, I will hold a story at times. But never due to a personal relationship or favor granting; more because there may be a delicate issue or some other intervening factor.

I've also had several developers tell me, "I/We don't like OKCTalk because we can't control it." Which, of course, implies that they are used to controlling the media to some extent.


Someone who is also new to OKC but in a different field summed all this up in a way that I greatly appreciated. He said that people say they want change and growth and progressiveness but that most people in power are very threatened by those things when they actually start to happen. And that new people with fresh approaches that don't conform to the old way represent a particular threat, and often the wagons get circled against you by the Old Guard.

I think all that is very true and I've had to let go of negative comments and judgments. In the end, I have to do what I know to be right, without compromise. And regardless of ethics experts and industry standards, what is right is usually very obvious.