Does your news organization credit YouTube or the video creator?

A Twin Cities journalist who asked not to be named sends this email:

The Minneapolis Star Tribune did something that is one of my biggest pet peeves in the journalism world. Up here yesterday, we had a 200-person brawl at Mall of America. Being 2011, someone took video of the melee on their phone. And being 2011, someone posted it to YouTube. The Star-Tribune posted it to their site, but instead of embedding the video via YouTube, they imported it into their own player. One can only assume this was to put ads in front of it. I think that’s tacky, but not terribly so.

But where they really screwed up, in my sometimes-humble opinion, is they credited the video to “YouTube,” rather than to the creator of the video. I think that’s analogous to the Star-Tribune being credited as “The paper.” I think a lot of journalists think anything that’s on YouTube or Flickr is their’s for the taking and there’s no need to credit the actual creator of the work. It smacks of that whole idea that anything on the Internet is fair to use. Ask Judith Griggs how that turned out for her!

I did some searching and found that most news outlets credited YouTube for their Mall melee images. The screenshot above — from Google Images — was also credited to YouTube.

I’ve invited the Star Tribune – check your email Stan Schmidt! – to respond.

UPDATE: Terry Sauer, Assistant Managing Editor/Digital, sends this response:

Regarding the YouTube videos on the Mall of America violence Monday, we probably could have crafted a tighter credit line, but the reasons behind going this route included our wanting to grab a compilation of more than one video since none on their own were all that great, being able to dub out the foul language and also not subject users to the racist comments on YouTube. In addition, crediting users on YouTube generally only yields an anonymous user name, and not their real name. I’ll also point out we do not have any preroll advertising on this video.

Hotelier Doug Manchester (left), who recently bought the San Diego Union-Tribune, tells his readers that “I pray that ownership of the U-T will provide me the opportunity to support our community, promote the economic strength of the region and improve the lives of all San Diegans.” He adds:

I take the stewardship of San Diego’s primary and most significant media very seriously. We will adhere to the highest standard of journalistic integrity and objectivity. We will do our part to be a positive force in our diverse community as we create a superior newspaper and a complement of digital information sources.

Manchester wishes San Diego residents a merry Christmas and prosperous new year, but they aren’t able to return good wishes because, oddly, “comments on this story are closed.” I’ve inquired why.

* Publisher’s note: A day to count blessings and share happiness

* Nov. 17: A newsmaker buys the local newspaper (Voice of San Diego)

UPDATE: Union-Tribune editor Jeff Light sends this email:

We turned off the comments on that piece because I didn’t like the way it was going. The publisher’s letter brought together his thoughts about San Diego and his new stewardship of the Union-Tribune with his personal feelings of faith on the occasion of a religious holiday. I think it was written from the heart, as a sincere message of good will.

In the early comments, you could tell that some people took it that way, and others did not. Soon there was a debate heating up about competing religious dogma, the historical accuracy of Catholic doctrine, and the virtues of the writer.

I thought all of that was way off base. My reaction was, hey, it’s Christmas, let it go. Someone tried, in their own way, to say something nice, and now we’re headed for acrimony and debate.

Not every utterance needs a response on every occasion.

A journalist who asks to remain anonymous sends this email:

Sometimes the actions of publishers astound me. After the recent shooting at Virginia Tech, Tamara Dietrich, a columnist at the Daily Press in Newport News, Va., wrote a column that portrayed the school as snake-bit and a dangerous place to get an education. The column ran on A1 as a sidebar to the main story about the death of police officer Deriek Crouse, although it received more type real estate. As expected, Hokie nation rose up and complained en masse about the column, flooding the paper with calls and emails over it. Publisher Digby Solomon wrote an apology a few days later, but it was buried inside. What makes the story interesting, though, is that it appears the Daily Press has scrubbed the offending column from its website. Solomon’s apology is still there, but any links to the column that I found in numerous blogs results in a page not found error.

The reader sent a second email a short time later:

I managed to finally find a cached page of the column. Here’s the link.

I have invited the publisher, columnist and vice president of content to comment.

* Another shooting at Virginia Tech – the snake-bit college
* An open letter to Tamara Dietrich from a Hokie alumni
* The weight of our words can carry; “we apologize and share our profound regret”

What I tweeted to @romenesko followers today:

* White House’s relationship with reporters took a frosty turn this year

* NYT union to Sulzberger: We’re writing to express profound dismay at several recent developments.

* Indy Star gives $1,000 bonuses to some employees; Guild says 25% of its members got them

* New Haven schools PR man apologizes after grabbing reporter’s camera, demanding that filming be stopped

* Iowa j-school director on the Stephen Bloom brouhaha | “Iowa Teens Respond to Bloom”; video NSFW!

* When millionaire Warren Hellman visited the Bay Citizen, “he was usually dressed worse than the reporters”

Brian Clark tells me that his video of two female sailors kissing has over 1 million views so far. “I can soundly say that I’ve never produced a video, much less made a photo that has received this much attention,” the Virginian-Pilot videographer writes in an email.

I’d echo what [reporter] Corrine [Reilly] said [in this post], comments have been across the board, however, I haven’t directly received any calls or emails from disgruntled or angry readers/viewers. I have fielded several calls from Seattle from folks asking about purchasing the photo. One gentleman called and said he was a social studies teacher and that he wanted to use this historic photo for classroom instruction.

Brian Clark

Going into this story we had no idea that this kiss would take place. The public information officer said simply that we should expect a surprise. I was half expecting sailors dressed up as Santa as the ship pulled in. We did get tipped off a bit before that the “first kiss” would be the surprise and it would have national implications.

I think it is important to note that I’m mainly a video producer here at The Pilot. Sometimes we’re short staffed and assignments get tight so I’ll get assigned to do both video and photos. When I learned of the possible national implications, I can tell you I was a bit nervous to be wearing two hats. To be honest, I’m just glad I did my colleagues justice here at The Pilot. I work with an extremely talented photo staff here.

Do you ever predict how an image will be received by readers/viewers?

I suppose with hot button issues I’m always expecting reaction to be across the spectrum. However, I did not predict that it would receive this amount of attention. The video alone stands at over 1-million views in just a few days. Pretty incredible.