|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
Hi all, I have an idea for an article and have been trying to figure out the do's and don'ts in using the sources from my information.
Scenario: I infiltrated a Facebook Group that is based on a viewpoint I am opposed to to gain information on what they actually talk about. Some of the things they post publicly on their actual personal pages is part of the meat to my research, other stuff are things the group posts in a general day to day discussion. The article is not aimed with any malice in mind but more towards having people know this large group of very intrusive people exist (if that makes any difference.)
Can anyone tell me if I keep actual names out and don't give away the name of the group precisely (the topic will lead people to figure it out) Can I get into trouble publishing someone's comments if they are used in public.
Please dont reply with assumptions - I have traced back though heaps of websites on rights ect but cannot find an exact match for my question. I just want to hear from someone who may be or has been in the Journo game and knows for sure.
Hi -- I myself can't answer this, but I know there are sites where professional lawyers answer this kind of question for a very small fee. I used one for a question about copyright and was very satisfied. You definitely need a laywer's input. Good luck!
Thanks for that! I haven't put the time into writing the article as yet as I would hate for it to go against some law I am unaware of so that is probably good advice. Journalistic rights is such a broad area. My topic won't get me killed or anything, but it's definitely something I think will be a bigger issue over time, which is why I want to write about it.
I'm a professional journalist with decades of experience dealing with media legal issues. I'm no lawyer, but I don't see a problem with it as long as you are putting the comments in quotes, attributing the person saying it and citing where you got the content, i.e., Facebook.
Keep in mind that someone's post on social media like Facebook doesn't below to Facebook. It belongs to the person who posted it. Content rights are more important on a commercial site such as WashingtonPost.com than on a social media site.
That said, first read the terms and conditions of the site where you want to take the content. In fact, I just went to Facebook as I wrote this and found the following in its T&C:
"You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how it is shared through your privacy and application settings."
Ugh, sometimes I forget to search for the obvious. Its clear that if you are allowing your content to be public according to FB it's free game.
Not sure how that can overide say a tog who clearly copyrights their work but I think Ill commence writing and see how far I get using properly attributed public commentary.
Thanks for taking the time to respond! Ive read a few articles from journalists who are part of the FB community to have access to content they need to produce work as a modern means of research but some mentioned specifically asking a source if they could be quoted so I began to doubt myself but perhaps thats just when they want to actually name someone.
The Facebook ToS does not say you are allowed to reproduce posts word for word, only that you can use information shared. So not exactly 'free game'.
Thats not what I said at all. I am not reproducing anything. I want to quote comments in an article. By free game, I simply meant if a person specific to FB make a public post for eg saying they like to eat dogs it can be referenced in an article about ppl who like to eat dogs. If it were private I wouldnt be able to see it unless i was in their friends list and if i was i could ask them permission. Bug thanks for your comment.
You are correct. As I said above, if you use quotes, attribution and the content source, you are simply reporting what someone said in a public forum. That's how real journalism works.
For that reason, media sites quote posts from social media accounts all of the time. For example:
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/08/preside … itter.html
It is not much different than Google grabbing the title and first paragraph of your Hubs for search results. You can reproduce selective quotes as part of an article. You don't want to reproduce an entire Facebook page, which would infringe on Facebook rights.
Other legal risks include misquoting a person, offering a libelous opinion in response to a quote or doing anything to defame the character of that person.
That makes sense Promisem, thanks for the advice. I see it all the time also. When it relates to original content, I think quotes of this nature work well when used correctly. Everybody has an opinion but sometimes making it public opens you up for others to have an opinion too. And round it goes.
For the record, a forum and forum posts are public if they are available to the public whether the site requires a login or not.
A forum post is just a type of website. I run forums for work that are absolutely not public, they are specifically designed to be private and confer no rights at all even to approved users.
I don't know about the rules on this, but I do know that writing a hub that has many "quotes" in it won't pass muster here on HP. It kind of concerns me that you are planning on writing a hub that exposes people's personal thoughts, though. I know I wouldn't like it if you did that to me, and a professional writer might just find some way to sue you for doing so because even though you may "veil" the information, if people find out you've done this to them, you could be creating problems for yourself. This is not something I would personally fool with for these reasons and I also think it's unfair to those who have posted their thoughts on FB. Nobody wants to be involved in a malicious expose.
By the way, I noticed on your profile that you are using professionally prepared photos. Did you get written permission from their creators to do so? If not, you could be sued. Just sayin'
Awesome that you think my profile has a professionally prepared photo, I took it. HP doesnt allow watermarks but if you click on source it has my name.
Ive just checked and source foesnt show on profile pics but in my bio I tell you where you can find my portfolios of further work.
I wasn't referring to your profile photo..I was referring to the photos you use for your articles. Sorry.
Thanks for clearing that up, I have sought advice re: photos. Cheers anyway
Advice is not written permission. Protect yourself! Two writers here of whom I am aware were sued within the past several months for using professionally done photos without permission.
TT, while I usually hold your advice in high regard (I belive u won this years most helpful) unless you are going to be more specific on at least the type of writers you are referring to and the specific nature of the photos they used (ie a blogger using a picture of a football player), offering statements like that off topic, is not helpful here.
It's irrelevant what type of writers they were - they were hubbers. It's also irrelevant what the images were. The fact is, someone is violating copyright if they use materials they haven't the right to use. So:
Images must be Creative Commons licensed. You also need to check that they can be used on a commercial site. Because HP is a commercial site. Some CC licenses forbid commercial use.
Or images can be in the Public Domain, i.e. they are over a certain age (depending on the country of origin and its copyright law) or have been put into the Public Domain by their owner.
Or you can obtain express permission from the copyright holder/owner to use them.
Or they are your own photos/artwork.
In the case of movies and other similar creative works, I believe it is acceptable to use promotional materials released to the press. However, I'm not 100% sure, as I don't use such images.
HubPages guidelines on image use here: https://hubpageshelp.com/content/Learni … -image-use
Edit: http://blog.webcopyplus.com/2011/02/14/ … -10-photo/
Firstly they are not all the same. If you two would like to start a new thread specifying the guidelines feel free to do so.
And yes when pertaining to public domain use regarding media stills for use in critique it is nearly always acceptable to do so. I challenge both of you to show me an example where a critic was sued for attaching a photo of the movie they are critiquing.
Well, I did say I'm not sure about images from movies but there is a relevant quote from Warner Bros here: https://www.martineve.com/2015/05/12/an … reenshots/
By the way, threads do morph and change, it's just the nature of the beast. I simply picked up on your comment that you had sought advice. It's always a good idea to avail oneself of the facts rather than relying on advice, especially when there are legalities involved.
Of course they do, but if you read my post I also asked for qualified opinion on my topic not assumptions and 'I reckons' which I got anyway. To then have it suggested I need to check my work because of a 'maybe you are doing the wrong thing' is just annoying. I see these comments over and over again on many threads off topic in nearly 100% of cases and none even relative to the specific situation. That particular link only strengthens my case if you click on more of the related links within the article itself and the first one actually pertains to an author writing a book. Sure this is a commercial site but if Hollywood want a percentage of the 20c I made from a review they are welcome to it. Worst case scenario is I have to remove a hub not go directly to court to be sued, there is always a process. I know you have been part of threads on this topic before from much more well versed authors on the subject, and not once have I seen an proper argument as to it being against copyright to write articles the way I and thousands of other do. It's the ones that go outside good faith and use recordings of movies and go above the limit of allowable use that might get in trouble and even then, its only might. I appreciate that you guys need to jump on every single person that puts a picture up in their hubs and make them doubt what they are doing but in this case I will argue that you are wrong until perhaps the day comes when Warner Bros. send me an email to cease and desist.
What I can tell you is that forum and facebook group postings are protected by copyright. So there is no "safe" way to quote them, it is a matter of competing interests.
A forum that requires a password is not considered "public". I think you'll find those quotes by journalists were from social media posts set to "public". I have had my social media posts quoted by mainstream media, but only from profiles that were set to public and required no sign-in or "friend" connection to see.
This page is helpful: https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2010/01 … iew-sites/
It does say that using thumbnail images is acceptable Fair Use but if you intend using full size stills it's a good idea to request permission. You have to bear in mind that HubPages is a commercial site which makes it different from a hobby blog review.
I have actually read that article previously. And while it does say you should seek permission where you can it also says, you are relatively safe as long as the stills aren't more than a certain percentage of the movie in full. I have read a lot of articles as well as sought advice from professional critics and none have suggested what I am doing should be a problem.
by Elxar2 days ago
Hey guys! I'm a new Hubber and I just wanted suggestions on how to get more followers and more clicks to my articles.
by Brian8 years ago
I decide it would be fun to start my own facebook group. I uploaded it to the site, and I already have a fan. He is one of my former co-workers, but I wasn't expecting anyone to join right away.Anyways. If you would...
by Ellen6 years ago
Whew, Google's been coming thick and fast with the updates lately: killing paid blog link networks, Panda 3.4, Panda 3.5, Penguin, the glitch with parked domains, and now Panda 3.6 only 8 days after the last Panda. It...
by Susannah Birch2 years ago
I'm bored. Ok correction, I'm procrastinating. I randomly come on and off the forums and on this return visit I've seen SO many people questioning why their hubs aren't making money and/or getting traffic.So for as long...
by Anthony Goodley5 years ago
First a disclaimer is in order.I broke the evergreen rule with this approach. I knew it going in and did it anyway. What the hell, sometimes rules are made to be broken. Sometimes a gamble pays off, often it doesn't. I...
by Paul Maplesden5 years ago
We all know that there's so much competition to rank in search engines, and we've all heard that 'content is king', but what does that *really* mean?What it means is that Google is now placing much more importance on...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.