Pardon me if you already saw me bitching about this on Twitter earlier, but I'm really steamed about an NPR story that ran Wednesday. Beth Accomando presented "In Horror Flicks, The Cell Phone Always Dies First," a piece that explores the different types of mobile-phone related drama that recur in horror cinema. Aside from her opening example of The Human Centipede, all of the instances she named -- and accompanying audio snippets -- are pulled from my No Signal supercut. (Note, 2012 is mentioned in the conclusion, but that's a counterpoint about service working, and obviously would have had no place in my video.) complaint does not regard crediting, but I am never mentioned in her piece. In fact, the piece is not about a supercut, but about the information found within my work. It is not until Accomando is done presenting her (i.e. my) case that the host promises, "And you can see all the ways filmmakers kill off cell phones at our website..." If I weren't the one who created it, or, like, aware of what the hell is going on with the Internet, I would have thought they were pimping a montage of their very own.
Look, I understand that putting things on the Internet often amounts to giving them up to the world. Any asshole can embed the YouTube you created without so much as a reference, or rip and reupload it to his own account. However, I did not expect an NPR writer to be any asshole. Mostly, I'm shocked at the creative bankruptcy and level of disrespect here, and I think it comes down to epistemological bias. If Accomando were to pitch a piece that consisted of some bullet points culled from a published (print) review or feature, I suspect she'd be laughed out of her editor's office. Legal might be called. However, there were no apparent concerns in her regurgitating the information in what amounts to a video essay, which I intentionally organized to present the points that Accomando verbalized (seriously, if this piece took Accomando more than 15 minutes to transcribe, she put too much time into it).
And as though it needed to be verbalized anyway! I could have written about this subject. Hell, I could have taken to the airwaves or set up a soap box in the subway to rant about horror cliches to disinterested commuters, but instead, I tailored my medium to my message because DUH*. It's condescending to re-purpose my work in this fashion, because it implies that I didn't say it right the first time and/or that people were too stupid to get it. Considering the brain graveyard that YouTube tends to be, 300,000 views can't be wrong.
I get that if you haven't spent months rifling through films and fitting clips from them together, you probably don't understand the work that goes into making supercuts. You might think they just spring up like mushrooms, if you're whimsical. But what I don't get is how one supposed thinker rips off another in the name of discourse. Accomando lost me there. So yeah, I guess this is about credit, after all.
*I realize I may sound like I'm verging on the hypocritical here, as I converted my I'm Not Here To Make Friends supercut into a This American Life piece, but then, that piece discussed the concept more thoroughly, made several points not in the video and discussed the creative process that went into the supercut. I wouldn't just regurgitate. I respect myself too much for that.
(Much appreciation to Rebecca M., for giving me the heads-up on this.)
Update: Credit achieved. Only online, obviously, since the story has already aired, but as we all know, online is better than nothing.
Update 2: There's now an editor's note at the end of the story that reads, in part: "An earlier version of this story should have credited the work of pop culture blogger Rich Juzwiak. Juzwiak's YouTube video compilation of movie scenes, which is embedded on this Web page, was among the sources that journalist Beth Accomando used in her reporting and influenced the selection of clips used in our story." So that's nice and fair. We're all figuring out this media stuff together...
Update 3: Salon takes on the story...with sexy results. (And by "sexy," I mean "supposedly coincidental.")
I'm going to join you on twitter to let her know that she's a terrible person with no journalistic integrity.
As a journalism student, I am very perturbed, and the greatest way to get under her skin and know she is a wrong-doer is to harass her on twitter.
You asked for it, @cinebeth
Posted by: Brian | May 05, 2010 at 11:01 PM
This is fucking bullshit. And you're right, Rich. It's one thing for some schmo on the internet to put this on his/her blog, but fucking NPR? No. Bitch needs to be called out.
Posted by: Erin | May 05, 2010 at 11:05 PM
Looks like they put your video up, now.
Kind of got the feeling she put it up AFTER someone left a comment saying that they need to give some credit.
Still no credit to you, though. :/
Total BS.
Thanks, Brian, for the Twitter address. I'll be tweeting promptly. Shit likes this makes me so mad.
Posted by: Moucheesy | May 05, 2010 at 11:29 PM
I'm so sorry. Leaving a comment at NPR now. I can't believe your video is up without credit! Astonishing. And this makes me fighting mad.
Posted by: Evie | May 05, 2010 at 11:46 PM
It IS plagiarism. I read this article today, and found it applicable here, too. You shouldn't be considered ripe for the picking just because you don't have a large media conglomerate at the ready with the threat of legal action. http://abcnews.go.com/Business/apple-iphone-leak-appalling-reactions/story?id=10523213
Posted by: Erin | May 05, 2010 at 11:50 PM
*Sigh.* This really is not good. For it to happen to the guardian of Winston and Rudy is just more worser than not good.
Here's Beth's bio page. At the upper left-hand corner, there's a "Contact Me" link. So I contacted her and let her know about her oversight.
Hopefully your readers will do so as well.
http://www.kpbs.org/staff/beth-accomando/
Posted by: Dana Johnson | May 05, 2010 at 11:53 PM
Wow. I'm a member of my local NPR/PRI radio station so I have mad love for public radio, but that's really, really bad. Growing up in a family of writers, I know how ugly it feels to be plagiarized. I'm sorry, Rich. But the good news is that none of the reporters in the NPR/PRI family (even Ira Glass, I'd venture) fancies themselves a celebrity. I'm sure she'll find a way to make it up to you. Or else.
Seriously, though, the story would have been BETTER if they had interviewed you because you're such a horror film buff. Plus Winston probably would have made an appearance. Yeesh.
Posted by: Wiggs (The Beholder) | May 06, 2010 at 12:01 AM
They will get none of my cheddah this pledge drive season.
Posted by: Erica | May 06, 2010 at 12:05 AM
Ultra lame. And yes, definitely plagiarism.
Posted by: DriverB | May 06, 2010 at 12:11 AM
Has anyone slashed her bike tires yet?
Posted by: Dirty Blonde | May 06, 2010 at 12:45 AM
God, this is terrible. So sorry this happened to you, Rich. Registered with NPR just to complain. Hope you get some form of justice soon. Love you.
Posted by: Meow | May 06, 2010 at 12:50 AM
IDEA: Can I give you pledge money? You have added far more value to my life than NPR ever did.
I got other sources for news. You will always be my number one source for everything else.
Posted by: Erica | May 06, 2010 at 01:19 AM
Wow...just wow. That's so blatantly shitty. Boo, Beth Accomando!
Posted by: frigg | May 06, 2010 at 03:54 AM
I really impress with your site.There are good information you share here . Thanks for sharing information.I have checked out this website
and I would like to show this site to my friends to check them out as well. Thanks and I’ll keep an eye of this comments.
Clean Colon Pro
Posted by: Clean Colon Pro | May 06, 2010 at 07:54 AM
You have added far more value to my life than NPR ever did.
I heartily, heartily agree.
Posted by: Jackie | May 06, 2010 at 08:14 AM
I was so angry on your behalf when I saw this article yesterday. Also, I just noticed her replies to you on Twitter--why is she being so defensive? Maybe because she knows what she did is wrong? Tsk tsk tsk, Beth.
Posted by: mackenzie | May 06, 2010 at 08:22 AM
I was going to comment about a lack of journalistic integrity, but I got distracted by the enema spam above.
Posted by: Laurie | May 06, 2010 at 08:35 AM
Legal's probably hearing about it now. Maybe HR too . . . Go Rich!
Posted by: Jessica | May 06, 2010 at 09:05 AM
For the record, I loved that clip on TAL. Very very memorable.
Posted by: C | May 06, 2010 at 09:06 AM
Give a content-creator some credit love NPR! Comment on the page here if you care to fourfour-kateers...
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126391047
Posted by: Adevane | May 06, 2010 at 09:24 AM
I always knew there was a reason I hated NPR!
Rich, I wouldn't be suprised if the backlash from your readers prompts a response from NPR (after all, they need to project the image that they are compassionate media), and if so, I seriously hope you post an update here, as i'm very curious as to see the outcome!
Posted by: matty | May 06, 2010 at 09:31 AM
I let 'em know that they should credit you.
Posted by: Emmarkeefe | May 06, 2010 at 09:37 AM
Just sent an email and posted a comment at NPR. This is a bunch of bull. It makes me wonder what other stuff is blatantly plagiarized on NPR. :(
Posted by: twitter.com/kpurkiss1010 | May 06, 2010 at 09:44 AM
I am always raving about this blog to everyone I know, you are so talented and for someone to steal your work like that (especially in such a main-stream way) is really L-A-M-E!
Posted by: Jillian | May 06, 2010 at 09:49 AM
This is some bullshit. I'm actually a huge fan of NPR, so I'm really disappointed. I hope they respond. I always knew this blog was more clever than anything they do, but I thought they would at least give credit where credit it due. Disgusting.
Posted by: suiterkin | May 06, 2010 at 09:51 AM