The article describes how Steve Gibson, founder of Las Vegas-based “Righthaven,” is going after websites that have allegedly stolen content from his first and only client to date, the Las Vegas Review-Journal. Under the federal Copyright Act, violators can be fined up to $150,000 per infringement, according to the article, and Gibson hopes the potential for high fines will force quick settlements.

This is the latest chapter in an effort by copyright holders to prevent unauthorized sharing of their content over the Internet. Previous efforts by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) to stop illegal music sharing via torrent sites and other means met with limited success and generated a lot of negative publicity for the music industry. Artists protested, too—Radiohead released a new album for free online, allowing downloaders the option to pay whatever they felt to be a fair amount.

Of course, writers and the media publications for which they write need to be able to protect their investment. This is an increasingly difficult thing to do in the digital age for several reasons. First, it’s simply hard to find copyright violators due to the sheer mass of the Internet. With millions of websites out there, finding someone who has reposted a news article on their website is like finding a canoe in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

Second, the nature of today’s Internet encourages sharing of information. The most popular websites, such as Facebook and MySpace, bank on it, as do news aggregators like Google and Yahoo!. And third, it’s questionable whether or not media outlets would even want to go after alleged violators. In cyberspace, there are few scoops. If someone doesn’t want to (or can’t) read a news story on a certain website, odds are they can find the same story, or a similar one, somewhere else. Media outlets are almost forced to sacrifice control of their content just to get eyeballs on their website in the hopes that visitors click on their ads.

Generally, fair use allows the news media (including bloggers) to quote from and source copyrighted material, if it’s their intent to report on it, critique it, or parody it. My advice—feel free to continue to quote from and cite copyrighted news sources for these purposes. But don’t reproduce entire articles on your websites or in publications—include a link instead. And always refer back to the original source. It’s my opinion that the original news source will welcome the free publicity and the website traffic that your referral may generate.

While newspapers long excelled in delivering local news, the Internet is less fertile ground—for now. While online national and international news sites such as CNN.com and Yahoo! news, and newsy, political blogs like Huffington Post and the Drudge Report are wildly popular, the local news scene has been hit-and-miss, depending on whether or not local media established a strong online presence. Social media have filled in the gaps where local media have fallen short, helping users to stay connected with happenings online while sharing information and interacting in real time—something that print newspapers can’t do.

The decision by major media companies like AOL and Gannett to go local from the top down—delivered by a national company to the local market—brings up several questions that remain unanswered. First, what about credibility? Consumers can smell an outsider a mile away. If the hyper-local media offerings put forth by these companies don’t “sound” local, with real local knowledge, then consumers will tune them out.

For example, many of the traffic and weather reports given during drive-time on AM news talk stations aren’t originating in a “traffic center” in the local studio. They’re being phoned in on a high-quality digital telephone line from a desk at a location that can be hundreds or thousands of miles away. And sometimes it shows—the announcer will mispronounce a town or street name that any local would know. Hiring local writers and reporters will be key to the credibility of these efforts.

Second, local newspapers aren’t ignorant of the fact that local news sells. In an age when the Internet is a far more efficient source for national and international news, offering up-to-the-minute breaking news and a wide variety of perspectives, the local newspaper—and its online counterpart—remain the best place for Little League news, local human interest stories, and other news that the national companies don’t cover well for obvious reasons. They’re sure to mount a strong challenge, paralleling the fight between mom-and-pop retail stores and WalMart in many communities around the country. What’s uncertain is whether the local news media can be more successful than the mom and pop stores have been.

The battle for hyper-local news dominance is worth watching because it’s part of the much broader debate and battle for the future of the publishing industry. Some major players have decided that this is where at least part of their future is at. We’ll see.

However, if not handled with tact, comedy can backfire and ruin an otherwise fine piece of writing. Writer Suzan St. Maur penned an article a few years ago on using humor in business that makes several good points. She writes that it’s easy to get humor wrong, especially when communicating over the Internet, which is often devoid of context. Sometimes, it’s the body language or the inflection that turns a tasteless joke into a tasteful one. When that human element is missing, all bets are off as to how the recipient of the message will take it.

Still, humor can be used successfully if the proper precautions are taken. St. Maur advises writers to use jokes about situations, not people. All of us can relate to certain situations—a plumbing emergency, a toothache or a speeding ticket, for example—but we may take offense at jokes aimed at ethnic groups, minorities or public figures. St. Maur goes on to say that humor is best used like a spicy condiment in business communications: sparingly, and avoided altogether if one doesn’t know the tastes of one’s audience.

There are other ways in addition to those mentioned by St. Maur to inject a little levity into one’s writing. One is to be self-deprecating. While readers may be quick to condemn an author if that author pokes fun at someone else, they may be inclined to laugh along with the author if they’re poking fun at themselves. And the ability to laugh at one’s self and point out one’s own foibles can be viewed as a sign of wisdom, humility, confidence and a certain level of comfort in one’s own skin.

Another way is quote famous and respected humorists, whose work has gained a measure of respect and acceptance in general society. For example, Mark Twain once said, “Suppose you were an idiot and suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.” A comment like that might offend if an unknown author made it, but coming from Twain, it is likely to make others smile.

Whatever approach an author uses, it’s always best to have respected co-workers (or two or three) review the piece before it goes to print. If it causes raised eyebrows in the office, it’s likely to do a lot more damage with a wider audience. As Shakespeare, himself no stranger to satire and the clever use of humor, wrote in Henry IV, “The better part of valour is discretion.” When in doubt, don’t.

Click here to view the embedded video.

How do you know if you’re a good writer or if what you’re reading represents good writing?

Most people believe that good writing is subjective. They think it is an art, not a science, which is to say that it’s imprecise, follows loose guidelines and is open to interpretation. This approach is in direct contrast to a field such as civil engineering, where there are complex and rigid rules of physics and unbreakable laws of nature that determine success or failure. The levee breaks, or it does not. The bridge stands, or it falls. You succeed, or you fail.

With writing there’s often a different perspective. Some journalists, writers, authors and creative services professionals contend these iron clad standards or formal litmus tests for their output do not exist. They say that good writing just is. Like the crusading politician said when asked what pornography is, “I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it.”

As screenplay writer Josh Olson wrote in the Village Voice in September 2009, “It rarely takes more than a page to recognize that you’re in the presence of someone who can write, but it only takes a sentence to know you’re dealing with someone who can’t.” But even that criterion can be inadequate when it comes to judging the written word. It’s one point to identify a thing’s qualities—this tastes good, that smells bad, this looks great—but it’s another altogether to be able to say why and to apply those same standards to another example.

In an attempt to be more discerning, perhaps in business in particular, it’s best to judge writing not as an art, but as a science. That sounds counter-intuitive, but we have to look at the purpose of the writing and whether that purpose is achieved. What is the goal of business writing? To communicate an idea or to relay information. Business writing is clear, precise, organized and logical. That’s not to say it should be boring, but, on the other hand, it’s not Hemingway or Steinbeck and isn’t meant to be.

Using this criteria (clear, precise, organized and logical), we have a standard by which we can judge the effectiveness of business writing: Does it achieve its purpose? If the goal is to explain a new management strategy, does it adequately do so? If a memo is intended to define a company policy, does it achieve that purpose? Does the reader understand the information? Is the information easy to retain? If the answers are “yes,” then the written output is a success.

William Safire once said, “Avoid clichés like the plague.”

That’s humorous yet sound advice, presuming one knows the definition of clichés. According to Weber State University, they are “old coins of language: phrases that once made a striking impression but have since been rubbed smooth by repeated handling.” There are several types of clichés, which include similes, metaphors, idioms and inflated phrases. Many business professionals consider clichés trite and annoying at the very least, but more often representative of lazy communicators and thinkers.

Business writing has its own special collection of buzzwords that fall into the category of clichés: For example: “synergy,” “win-win,” “scalable enterprise solutions for the desktop,” and “in this troubled economy,” to name just a few. One prominent columnist for Bloomberg News, Caroline Baum, even compiled a list of the six most overused phrases of 2009. Her choices?

1. “new normal”
2. “unprecedented”
3. “exit strategy”
4. “green shoots”
5. “uncertainty”
6. “historic opportunity”

Unfortunately, business writing contains far too many of these phrases, and historic events like the recent recession only provide an excuse to create dozens more. While it’s sometimes difficult to break the habit, it’s important to make the effort. Proof your writing not only for spelling, grammar and content, but for the overuse of clichés as well. I know this is hard to do. Many of us are afraid we’ll seem foolish, ignorant and less than hip if we can’t toss around the latest jargon like a cheap plastic Frisbee at a backyard cookout. Conversely, I propose that using business jargon doesn’t make one appear intelligent and cutting-edge, but rather shallow and lacking in originality and creativity. Rather than denigrate your work, I’ll bet that your readers will thank you for sharp, clear writing—something that is enjoyable and understandable—for a change.

You may know what “editorial” means (that’s on the opinion page in the newspaper, right?), and you probably know what advertising is (the annoying stuff that interrupts my TV show!) But what the heck is “advertorial”? And why do you care?

Advertorial content is the Frankenstein monster of journalism. Part news, part opinion, and part advertising, it’s a section of a publication that looks like a story, but it isn’t. It may contain some news, but it doesn’t quite look right. The type style is just a little different than the previous page. The people in the photos seem a bit too…happy. And the author sure seems enthusiastic about a certain brand of products.

Usually, advertorial pieces in reputable publications are labeled “Special Advertising Sections” or “Special Advertisement,” but not always. This is especially true of online publications, where an advertorial section may be labeled “Info Site” or contain no warning at all that this is advertising and not unbiased reporting.

Why do companies pay for advertorial content? First, there are always those people who won’t see the warnings and who will assume that it’s another story—and gosh, Company Y sure must make great products if Publication Z is so crazy about them. Others may recognize the advertorial content as an ad, but they’ll read it anyway—for the same reason that people read long, multi-page letters from charities raising money at the holidays.

Editorial content on the other hand is different. It comes in the form of opinion pieces, news, by-lined articles, case studies, research results, roundtable discussions, etc. It positions the author as an expert and the company as a leader in its marketplace. There’s no pay to play involved.

Advertising is space within the publication that is sold, usually to companies but sometimes to individuals, for the purposes of promoting a good or a service. Content can be completely self-serving. While advertising content increases visibility in the marketplace, editorial content has more credibility. Generally, advertising, along with subscriptions and single copy sales, is how publications make their money.

At most publications, there is a firm line drawn between the newsroom and the sales department. In other words, it’s important to the editors of the publication that their advertisers don’t influence the stories on which they report or their opinions, in order to protect their journalistic integrity. Likewise, they don’t want to write heavily about certain topics or promote certain opinions hoping to lure in certain advertisers.

Bottom line: nothing promotes your company as well as good old fashioned editorial content. You can’t pay for a front-page article in the paper. Really, you can’t. They don’t sell that. You have to make the news on your own merit.

Lucky for you, Trade Press Services is expert at getting your name into the publications that you want to be in. We help you assemble first-rate editorial content and place it in the finest industry publications, where your customers, potential customers or strategic alliance partners will recognize you as the subject matter expert.

Don’t fool around with Frankenstein. Contact Trade Press Services today.