About that Vaughters article...

[Granville57]

Yeah, the much-discussed one here:
http://forum.cyclingnews.com/showthread.php?t=18464

As far as I can tell, no one from CN ever bothered to respond to some of the direct question within that thread in regards to the article being ripped from the forum and stamped onto the homepage.

(C'mon now, you can't fool us. You do read what goes on in The Clinic, hence the article in question.)

So here are my questions, in the appropriate sub-forum.

1. Was JV contacted before the article went to the homepage? (If not, did CN receive a response from him afterwards?)

2. Has there ever been a specific policy in place at CN regarding separation (or lack of) between the forum and the main site?

3. Does CN have any thoughts regarding the matter in light of the recent JV article?

4. Is there a general understanding (as some have suggested would be fair) that, Hey, it's our friggin' site, we'll do whatever we want with the content regardless of where it appears (providing, of course, that the validity of the info is either self-evident or can easily be corroborated)?

5. Did the circumstances around the article (it being stripped from the forum) generate any reaction amongst journalists or other websites?

6. Is there any sort of official "line in the sand" not to be crossed in regards to using forum content outside of the forum?

As an example of the above: Suppose, let's say, The Hitch, produced another one of his award-winning, second-to-none, incredibly informative and wildly entertaining race previews. Let us further imagine that said content was ten times more engaging that what would normally appear on the homepage of any cycling website (hypothetically, of course).

7. Would CN then feel they have the right to simply transplant such awesomeness to the homepage in order to entertain readers, attract more "hits" and please it's sponsors? I can't imagine that anonymity would be an issue since the Vaughters article in questions was only attributed to "Cycling News."

8. Would CN ever approach a forum member and ask permission to reprint on the homepage something that member had contributed to the forum? (Not talking about the instances when specific threads were started for that very reason)
And would they ever offer a fee for doing such?

9. Would CN prefer to take more of a jazz approach to all of the above?

Just improvise, man.

10. Would you prefer questions in this particular sub-forum to not be accompanied by images?





11. Are there any CN staffers who participate in the forum without their affiliation being made known?














12. Have I asked eleven questions too many?

 

[mewmewmew13]

G, it's a beautifully written opening post, but did you have some spare time on your hands today??

 

[krebs303]

"Please note that if you upload or post any information to a public part of the Website, we may use it in accordance with our terms and conditions of use and it may be viewed and used by others. Future accepts no responsibility for this"

 

[hrotha]

Yeah yeah from a legal point of view CN can do whatever they want. But is it ethical?

I remember when Susan started a thread to gather some quotes from forumers to use in an article. IIRC, she said CN would only do that for that kind of thread, ie. one started specifically to collect content for the main site.

I'd also like to point out that we Clinic forumers asked the questions the journalists should be asking, but aren't. We did all the work here, and we didn't even get any credit.

 

[krebs303]

Ethical or not. We agreed to the terms and conditions much like the 7 times disgraced cyclist Lance Armstrong did when he signed up up to be a cyclist.

 

[Daniel Benson]

The T&Cs answer the majority of the questions raised above. The basic general line is that once something is in the public domain it's free to report on, for us, for any other site and I don't know what other reactions there were from other sites and journalists. I didn't ask around.

Was JV contacted before the story went up? Yep.

Daniel

 

[hrotha]

You contacted him to notify him in advance, not to ask for his permission, right?

 

[Daniel Benson]

I'm not going into conversations that takes place away from the public eye, ie what's in my sms inbox remains there. Again, see the T&Cs on the site.

Daniel

 

[hrotha]

I'm not going into conversations that takes place away from the public eye

*shrugs*
It seems to me you already did by mentioning you contacted him at all. No harm in asking for further details.

Anyway, the T&C covers the legal aspect, which was never in dispute, but I think this could lead to an interesting debate about journalistic ethics.

 

[Granville57]

Yeah yeah from a legal point of view CN can do whatever they want. But is it ethical?

Exactly my main point.

Was JV contacted before the story went up? Yep.

Thanks Daniel. That was the first question raised by several members in the thread itself. All we were looking for was a simple answer (and I have to imagine that you aren't the only one capable of providing it).

The basic general line is that once something is in the public domain it's free to report on.

But I'm not interested in generalities. Those are obvious to me. So let me ask just one, specific, pointed question:
Do you think that running a feature article on the homepage that was generated by JV's contribution to the forum will have an adverse effect on JV's future participation in the forum? And do you care either way?

(OK, so maybe that was two questions. I leave hrotha to ask the next few )

 

[Froome19]

Indeed, it is unfortunate if JV has decided not to partake in discussions anymore. I do wonder whether Cyclingnews considered that before they put up the article and it would be a shame for the forum to have lost what was in truth a pioneer project for cycling. For a manager and someone so heavily involved as JV to speak so openly to fans is a rarity currently and we can only hope that this episode has not stunted this avenue.

Though CN do seem to have a good relationship with JV considering they organised a Q&A with him on the forum and so hopefully relations have not been harmed.

 

[ElChingon]

Other than Johnny V providing the dopers in his team he hasn't really added much other than his spin doctoring on the doping omerta. I guess if you want to read more spin doctoring you could always follow him on Twitter or other forms of his social spin doctoring. All I know is many of us got verification that yes there was/is doping on Team Garmin, if you need proof read the clinic threads its all in there, again it happened while at least one of those riders was a signed Garmin rider getting a paycheck, just because he didn't test positive or race till it was flushed out doesn't erase it.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Exactly my main point.

Thanks Daniel. That was the first question raised by several members in the thread itself. All we were looking for was a simple answer (and I have to imagine that you aren't the only one capable of providing it).

Its a public forum.
Perhaps JV now understands that more than just 12 people read it.

But I'm not interested in generalities. Those are obvious to me. So let me ask just one, specific, pointed question:
Do you think that running a feature article on the homepage that was generated by JV's contribution to the forum will have an adverse effect on JV's future participation in the forum? And do you care either way?

(OK, so maybe that was two questions. I leave hrotha to ask the next few )

I hope not - and I doubt JV would care about that, he knows what he writes here and on twitter is closely monitored.

Which of course is why Pat McQuaid suddenly found his voice (unless you think he is interested in anti-doping) and basically told JV to shut-up by wanting to open an investigation in to these guys.
(Hi Pat, Hi Pats lawyers)