Suggestion maybe or maybe just a thought

[iOrlando]

what is the generally policy of citing stories or rumors on macrumors?

If a statement is made (say by the NYT) but then is talked about in gizmodo in a written piece, i find macrumors tends to include the story and then link to gizmodo although the original news is from apple (via NYT).

Another example is with:

Google Claims That Apple Did Reject Google Voice iPhone Application [Updated]

and more specifically the Update: Silicon Alley Insider reports that Apple has issued a statement reiterating its contention that the Google Voice iPhone application has not been rejected.

But Silicon Alley Insider simply got their story from Reuters who got their story from calling the company. Why not just cite the original source (the company) and why include the whole silicon alley insider aspect to it? It makes it sound like Silicon Alley Insider did the work and called apple but thats not true.

Why not just say.. Update: Apple spokeswoman confims apple didn't reject ...

instead of Update: Silicon Alley Reporter reported Apple Spokeswoman confirm apple didnt reject.


granted I am using a few data sources where it tells me apple spokeswoman commented to reuters. Maybe you dont have access to that..but i just felt its a little misleading.

or maybe your policy is to quote wherever you are reading the news even thought that news might be originally from somewhere else. i'm just curious.

 

[joro]

Well it would seem to me that whoever is writing the article is going to cite where THEY got the story from rather than the original source. It would be time consuming to track down the true origin of each story published on a daily basis but if it’s that important to you, you could always follows MR’s citation and track it back that way through the various sites.

 

[WildCowboy]

Our general policy is to trace rumors and news back to cite the original source. If we picked the story up from someone else, we'll frequently cite them as well.

In your first instance, we would almost always link to the NYT instead of Gizmodo, unless we got the story from Giz, in which case we might add a "(via Gizmodo)" attribution after linking to the NYT.

In the second case, I got the news from Silicon Alley Insider. SAI did not refer to a further source, so I cited them directly.

Perhaps SAI did get it from Reuters, but SAI didn't cite them. Or maybe Apple sent the same statement to multiple news organization that has asked for comment, including SAI and Reuters, which is what I assume happened. It looks like the same statement was sent to The Loop.

 

[iOrlando]

thanks for the response.

btw nice job with the posting over the past few months (or has it been a year already)

anyways good work.