I had read about this story. If newspapers change the Reuters text, they should omit the byline or say "based on" or some such to indicate that what they're publishing is not the Reuters original. I'm not sure off the top of my head exactly which rule publishing an amended story under the Reuters byline breaks--copyright, forgery, I dunno-- but it's clearly wrong.
<<In other words, Reuters must amend its copy to suit or its reporters may be harmed. >>
Huh? Reuters isn't amending the text, CanWest is. That line doesn't make sense.
As for the substance of this issue, it's one that's come up before. Seems to me that Reuters can use whatever standards it wants. They're upfront about their word usage policy, which is to avoid loaded words. If they're using loaded words without realizing it, it's bias. If they're doing so intentionally but surreptitiously, it's propaganda. If they're avoiding using loaded words, they're doing their job, IMO. |
