Charles Arthur has an interesting story about how ‘The ShinyShiny team are justifiably annoyed at the BBC Panorama team using them and then ignoring their existence in creating their programme about child exploitation in the production of Primark clothes’
The Panorama team spent three hours with the Catwalk Queen team and used their contributions extensively during the programme, yet didn’t credit their business. Instead only their names were used and they were billed as ‘fashonistas or Primark fans"’.
Now I agree with Charles that they are right to be annoyed, but seriously this happens all the time. Just because he doesn’t do this, doesn’t mean to say others don’t. Not everyone has the same standards!
To me it’s simple â€“ if you’re using content you give credit. Yet frequently the media will use a quote or interview, but simply credit it ‘Joe Blogs, solicitor’ rather than the name of the firm, which is actually far more important to readers/viewers as if they want to know more that will be there starting point.
The same frequently happens with ‘spurious’ PR surveys and research. The media will happily cite the stats, but not credit the source. I always find it amusing that journalists say they dislike ‘spurious’ PR inspired research , yet there continues to be an insatiable demand for them and they get used.