How Many Mouths Do We Feed?

I decided to try an experiment, to Google a title of one of my old posts to see how many times it appeared.  It was hundreds.  Being a dedicated follower of scientific method, I tried another.  This time more than a thousand.  How is that possible?

Clicking through some of the choices, it became immediately clear that there is a vast undergrowth of websites whose business model is merely to aggregate the content of others and sell its value.  I’ve got no complaints about other bloggers linking to my posts; in fact, I appreciate their interest and the synergies that develop from cross-fertilization.  But I’m not talking about other blawgers.  I’m talking about for-profit businesses that sell advertising on their websites, their only draw being the content created by people like me.

Unlike scrapers such as US Law.com, who would steal entire posts, superimpose their logo on other people’s blogs and link to them as if they created the content, most of these for-profit businesses handle their aggregation in a more open, acceptable fashion.  They attribute the content to its creator.  They link directly to the blog from which it came.  They do nothing to conceal the source of their fodder.

The problem, however, is that these are businesses.  They are making money off the efforts of others.  They don’t seek or obtain the permission of content creators to use their content, even with proper attribution and links, And there are hundreds of them, more every day.  Want to read a Simple Justice post?  There are hundreds of places to do so, aside from here.

I’ve questioned the people running some of these websites.  They are of the view that they are doing me a favor, helping to “spread” my posts around the internet, all of which inures to my benefit by increasing my reach and spreading my popularity.  They are also of the view that it’s their right to feed off my content.  They don’t need my blessing.  Content is free, theirs for the taking.

While I receive tons of emails from these various websites urging me to promote them by placing badges and buttons here, I have never received an email informing me that they would like to share the wealth.  I don’t know how much they earn from their websites, or how much of it is attributable to my contribution, and I don’t imagine it’s much.  Though there are some that have grown quite big from this business model.  comes immediately to mind.  It wouldn’t exist without the ability to feed off the content of others.  It creates nothing.  They appear higher on the Google page with my post than I do.  How ironic that people may go first to them to read what I’ve written.

It’s not that I blawg for profit.  I don’t.  It bothers me that others are profiting from the efforts of people like me without either our approval.  I have no plans to go after them, as lawyers who aren’t too astute and haven’t thought the problem through often suggest.  Dedicating every waking moment to chasing down ghosts and children is a terrible waste of time and effort.  Even if I could stop ten of them, there would be a hundred more in their place before the sun set.

Most of my brethren in the blawgosphere just shrug their shoulders these days.  It’s just the way things are.  We create and others will take it and profit from it.  At least they attribute it to us, rather than scrape it for themselves as do the truly scummy ones.  Is this the best we can hope for?  Maybe the secret to fixing their wagon is just stop creating.  What will they do then?


Discover more from Simple Justice

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

7 thoughts on “How Many Mouths Do We Feed?

  1. Sojourner

    Wild isn’t it? There are actually automated computer programs that create “splogs”, blogs used for the purposed of generating income via pay per click advertising (splog a cross between spam and blog). You know when you do a search and it takes you to page with some content, but none of the links work (such as the one that should click back to Simple Justice, if Scott’s fine content has been pirated by this ‘splog’) — but wait, the ad links work. In confusions users click on the google or amazon ads filling the blog – just looking for a working link to take them to Scott’s page. Now the splog’s goal has been accomplished – pay-per click income has been generated.

    These splogs can be generated with very little effort – all the programmer has to do is focus on a niche market – blawgs perhaps – and set a few parameters. They’re the nearly fully-automated creation of a computer program pulling in content from other sites on the web. Another aspect of the dark side of the blawgosphere. So bizarre how something so extraordinarily freeing (blogs) turned into something so confining and counterfeit.

    A good friend of mine, a wonderful author, is considering discontinuing her blog because the gestalt on blogs has begun to look at writer’s blogs as marketing for their books, rather than a facile way to exchange ideas. Her publishing company has communicated this. It’s no fun for her anymore. Terrible world (sometimes)!

  2. Norm Pattis

    S:

    I have a secret desire to write books. Because I am too disorganized and too scattered, I settle for blogging. That anyone reads thrills me. That my product is the Chinese food of the written word is expected. Pass the chopsticks

  3. Sojourner

    Have some soy sauce. I’m loving the apt and brilliant Chinese food of the written word metaphor. You’ve definitely found the upside :-), and I am very glad you’re writing Norm.

  4. Nathan

    This hasn’t bothered me too much. I’ve just figured that someone wanted the content on my site, but their search query pulled up that other site first. But then they click on the link and come to my site if I’m what they were looking for.

    So long as the aggregator links them onward to my site, I don’t have any quibble. If the user really wanted my content, then the user’s not likely to click on some tangential ad, so the aggregator’s not making too many nickels from my link. And there’s no unfair use of my copyright, so can’t complain there either. Just as I wouldn’t complain if a magazine that sold advertising were to be sold each week listing blog posts of note with partial quotes and full attribution.

Comments are closed.