Quote:
Originally Posted by genuinegirly
If you're talking about a scientific study, the researcher received his piece of pie before he completed the work. Usually the way it works is one applies for grants, which offer them funding. In order to obtain future grants, one must frequently publish their research. No rational-minded research scientist expects their name to be quoted every time their research is mentioned in a non-academic setting. They expect someone to mention the journal wherein it was published, or the institution where the research took place.
|
Notoriety helps to get grants, though, just like good stories make for a good reputation as a journalist. That was my point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
You keep changing the premise. Is it an attempt to put us off balance, or is it that you're not really sure where you're coming from here? Either the hypothetical journalist quoted the banana scientist's research paper directly without citing it (thereby what? Claiming that the journalist himself discovered the link?), or just reported what it said.
|
I'm not 100% sure where I'm coming from on this particular subject. I'm starting to think the illustration does hold water.
I'm not talking about word-for-word, I'm talking about the story. If a newspaper reporter breaks a story about something, he should get credit when it's reported elsewhere, shouldn't he? They're getting plenty of money and ratings for that story that they just lifted (and then changed the syntax in order for it to be palatable for tv audiences).