I. Attribution & Disclosure

Sour Duck's Blogging Basics: Attribution & Disclosure

Attribution: Formatting

When you quote someone's work, you need to make it clear to the reader that this is not your writing. If you don't make this clear, you run the risk of looking like you're stealing someone else's work.

You can easily achieve this by using quotation marks around the excerpted text and blockquotes, which indent text, like so:

"To be or not to be, that is the question."

The quotes are good, but the indentation created by using blockquotes creates a strong visual barrier between my writing and Shakespeare's.

Ahem. In case you confused the two.

Attribution: Linking

When quoting or referring to someone's blog writing, it's customary to link to the permalink of the post you're discussing. If you refer to her blog and not a particular post, simply link to her blog's URL.

The permalink is usually at the top or bottom of a blog entry, and is the date and/or time stamp to a blog entry. (For an example, scroll down to the end of this post and you'll see the time hyperlinked - that is the permalink). If you click on it, the blog post's unique URL shows up in the address field of your web browser. That's the reference link you want to use when you talk about specific posts.

If you choose not to link to someone whose work you're referring to, you need to be aware that this can be read as a hostile gesture. Why is this?

Well, within the blogging world, links are a type of currency. Many bloggers pride themselves on the number of links they've accrued, which they can check using a blog service engine such as Technorati.

Moreover, there is a strong correlation with links and visibility. High number of links = high visibility. This has been discussed ad infinitim online, and at technical and blogging conferences.

Even if you don't care about links, chances are the other person does, so it's a courtesy to a sister blogger to link to her when you are quoting her work or referring to her blog in general.

Respecting the reader

Providing links to all sources you cite at your blog also implies respect for the reader. They can easily find what you're referring to, read it in its entirety, and decide for themselves how to interpret it. Without links, they're forced to rely solely on your interpretation of another person's writing.

Rebecca Blood, in her piece called "Weblog Ethics", puts it rather more succinctly:

"Linking to referenced material allows readers to judge for themselves the accuracy and insightfulness of your statements. Referencing material but selectively linking only that with which you agree is manipulative."

In short: always link!

Offensive Sites

Having laid down a hard and fast rule, I must immediately amend it. There are always exceptions, and in this case, the exception may be an offensive site. Paging Rebecca Blood…

"On the rare occasion when a writer wishes to reference but not drive traffic to a site she considers to be morally reprehensible (for example, a hate site), she should type out (but not link) the name or URL of the offending site and state the reasons for her decision. This will give motivated readers the information they need to find the site in order to make their own judgment. This strategy allows the writer to preserve her own transparency (and thus her integrity) while simultaneously declining to lend support to a cause she finds contemptible." (Blood, "Weblog Ethics")

Advanced: There's another solution called rel="nofollow", and is used to combat comment spam. See Phil Ringnalda for his thoughts and a round-up of discussions about the "no follow" protocol in, "Is rel = "nofollow" really as !important as that?"

Disclosure

Disclosure is sometimes also referred to as 'transparency'. What does this mean?

Disclosure means:

1. Telling your readers about your sources;


2. Telling your readers about any conflicts of interest or biases you may hold

In short, it means being up front with your readers.

I talk about (1) in my section on Attribution. Here's explanation about (2) by way of an example:

I receive a free CD in the mail from a band's management and publish a review of it at my blog. I'm quite enthusiastic about it and rave about it.

Readers should be informed that I received this CD for free, because this may have influenced my review of it.

A brief but prominent sentence in my review should do the trick:

Note: I received this CD for free in the mail from X management.

That way I keep my trust and credibility with my readers.

Obviously, if I choose not to write and publish a review, there is no need to disclose anything.

Bloggers have been known to receive free tickets to movies, books, CDs—even trips to Europe—in exchange for reviews or advertising space at their blog. If you want to maintain your credibility as a blogger, you'll let your readers know you received something for free if you write about it.

Otherwise, you may be mistaken for a shill.