Not sure about that.Articles that quote usernames, rather than names, always look wierd to me.
I'm all for credit where it's due, but the average newspaper reader isn't going to be any better informed when they're made aware that something was done by 'Clive Dunn's right bollock' than they would by getting the boards address.
(I'm all for credit where it's due, but the average newspaper reader isn't going to be any better informed when they're made aware that something was done by 'Clive Dunn's right bollock' than they would by getting the boards address.
Not Pineapple anymore,
Fri 21 May 2010, 9:19,
archived)
it's not about your average readerit's about that one reader who works in the media and thinks, hey, I'd like to use that image, if only I could contact the copyright owner to pay him for his work and make using his image legitimate. Oh well, no credit means I can't use that image because I'm a law-abiding media worker. Tough luck clever photoshopy person.
Journos take the piss and hide behind their right to use images in news stories, thinking it means they can use anything in any article. It does not.
(Journos take the piss and hide behind their right to use images in news stories, thinking it means they can use anything in any article. It does not.
Damocles wants no part of your debauchery,
Fri 21 May 2010, 9:35,
archived)