Skip to main content

The Straits Times kena stomped by... well.. STOMP

The Straits Times was found to have made use of a photo without the explicit permission from the photo taker. The photo was taken from STOMP, Singapore Press Holdings' citizen journalism site, which also chose to publish on the website without proper attribution.

Singapore Press Holdings is also the publisher of The Straits Times.

Wrote Lucian in his email to The Straits Times' photo editor, Stephanie Yeow,


"...All I can say is that this is a straightforward case of intellectual property theft from an organisation that ought to know better. I believe in the openness of the Internet and have contributed a significant amount of content via Creative Commons licenses. SPH is a for-profit company that cannot beat on the intellectual property drum with one hand, and use online content without attribution or proper compensation whenever it feels like it.

This is gone on for far too long, and I am appalled at the lack of ethics. You had my name, my number, and I entertained more than a handful of calls to provide information for the story.

We need a higher standard of journalism in this country..."

In the reply email, Stephanie assumed that Lucian wanted payment for his photo, but Lucian denied that was the case in his email.

Replied Lucian,

"It is not my intention to extort any form of payment from ST, but my main priority is to point out that something is wrong with your policies. It is not uncommon to see ST attributing photos to “Facebook” or “Twitter”, which is extremely slip-shod journalism and unbecoming of a flagship paper...

The STOMP post that had the photo I took was attributed to “the STOMP team”, which I assumed was from ST. I know that STOMP takes in reader contributions, and its terms and conditions allow for content to be reused across SPH properties, but STOMP should under no circumstance function as a clearinghouse to launder intellectual property of their copyright.

It is important to get your processes in place so that ST can evolve to utilise the power of new media without losing the ethics of established journalism."

Maybe seeing isn't worth believing as photos too need to be have their source verified or with proper attribution, something which the STOMP site seem to ignore in today's age of the control c and v. One can only hope that The Straits Times and SPH put in place a proper system to respect IP as everybody now becomes media.

In June 2012, one of STOMP's content producer posted a photoshop image of an opened MRT door while the train was moving. MRT personally investigated the matter and the image was found to be edited. The content producer was eventually sacked.



In a photo incident not related to STOMP, Red Sports noted that a photo taken by them was also used on one of SPH's online website and Chinese print publication without the explicit permission from Red Sports.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why is Ramly Burger banned in Singapore?

Yahoo Singapore ran an article of the Ramly Burger by highlighting that it is ban in Singapore.

Yet, the writer from Makansutra failed to address the most important issue of why the Ramly meat patty is banned in Singapore.

A search online easily did highlight that the famous Malaysian meat patty is banned by the AVA but didn't go into details.

Wrote Arlina Arshad for The Straits Times in January 2004,

"But the importing of beef and beef products from Malaysia is not permitted, said theAgri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA).

Selling and supplying them without a permit is also an offence, and offenders can befined as much as $50,000 or jailed two years, or both, said the AVA."

In May of the same year, another article highlighted that a man was even charged in court for "smuggling" the Ramly burger in 2004.


"The AVA said that meat products processed in Malaysian food factories which it had notapproved were banned here.Suzali was yesterday jailed for four month…

Did She Run Or Did She "Just Fake It" For Adidas?

Andrea Chong, a Adidas appointed influencer, posted a photo of herself in the middle of the Standard Chartered Singapore Marathon 2015 and captioned how she was "all smiles" during the run.

Unfortunately for Andrea or the PR agency, one of her readers checked her bib number #75148  at the Marathon's website only to find it to belonging to somebody else.

That somebody else is Kuvin Kuar, a intern at Edelman PR and the bib number had a status "DNF" or did not finished.

This raised the first red flag as one of the rules stated that "A Participants is strictly not allowed to transfer his or her race entry to another party".

This cascaded into perceptions that Andrea herself did not even start or complete the race and was only "planted" by Adidas or the PR agency, Edelman PR, to look pretty in the marathon.

Marketing Magazine noted that Adidas declined to comment about the incident which lead to further speculation that Andrea was possibly just …

Kudos To Huawei 2 Year Warranty For P9 Series

When it comes to smartphones, I think I am jinxed.

For my history of owning smartphones, every time it comes close to the end of the two year contract with my mobile service provider. This time round, it happened to my Huawei P9.

All of a sudden, the LCD screen sort of decolourised. I thought it was a temporary issue but the decolourisation lasted for a few hours. Then the nightmare began.

The touchscreen couldn't be touched. This made it the smartphone a brick.

I thought the Huawei P9 only had one year of warrant. With my contract ending in mid-year, I thought I would have to wait it out till the contract ended and allowed me to buy a new phone under a contract.

Luckily, a friend reminded me that the phone came with a 2 year warranty.

So I decided to go to the Huawei service center, right smack in the center of the city, to see if my phone is under warranty and if Huawei would honour their 2 year warranty.

Thankfully, Huawei isn't as popular as the Samsungs or Apples, and the …