Richard Horgan makes a persuasive case that the London-based World Entertainment News Network is commandeering celebrity news and gossip without crediting the right sources, and he argues in his weekly FilmStew column that the popular Internet Movie Database is tainted by its association with the news service.
Not crediting one's sources isn't just rude (to the source). To me, it severely undermines the credibility of the item.
For instance, I'd regard an item attributed to, say, Entertainment Weekly with a lot more interest than I'd give one from Roger Friedman, who all too often seems to be clueless. And an item without attribution is, at best, gossip.
Same goes for unattributed quotes. I just automatically assume the reporter to be making them up to illustrate a point.
Posted by: Teverett at October 29, 2003 03:42 PM

Monica Almeida has the perspective of a native Angeleno who photographs Los Angeles for an East Coast newspaper: the New York Times.
What's the big deal? When producer Edgar J. Scherick died, many major papers, including The Los Angeles Times, quoted from interviews Edgar gave me just before he died, without attributing them to me or my website. This is routine. It happens to me all the time.
Roger Friedman et al, you can't copyright news.
Yes, it is a good thing to always quote sources (not that I always do). The Talmud says that he who quotes a source correctly brings redemption to the world.
But attacking WENN for bad entertainment journalism is incongruous when there is so little good entertainment journalism (best is found in the WSJ).
Posted by: Luke Ford at October 29, 2003 02:50 PM