There is always discussion with big newspapers that somehow aggregator websites like Drudge Report and Huffington Post and even Google News “steal” legitimate news gathered by “real” news organizations. Somehow the accumulated Google News/aggregator synopsis is a theft, they believe.

Frankly, I believe this mostly comes from legal departments, who are older, and do not understand the nature of information. The reality is that a fact cannot be copyrighted. The organization of the facts can, but one cannot copyright whether something happened or not. If a reporter is first on the scene of a plane crash, others do not have to actually see the plane crash to write about it. Otherwise, there could be no news.

What is the line between scraping and aggregation? Each instance is different. If the story is only 100 words, and you filch 80 of them and give no link, that’s theft. But if someone pulls an 80 word intro from a major online think piece, and gives a link, then that’s not. There is no way to draw a firm line on the issue, as each case is a bit different. We must all interpret things as we move along in our work, and well-meaning folks can easily figure it out.

And any newspaper writer knows it. It’s called the PM Lead. It’s a basic of journalism. When you’ve missed the big story, you start with the other story as a beginning point, and then you source out some quotes of your own. It’s then your story too.

This Lent, I have seen very easily the value of aggregation, as I gave up Drudge Report for Lent as I felt that I was checking too frequently. For those who don’t read it (I am surprised at how many don’t), Drudge rarely writes his own stories, except for short news items that are genuine scoops. He merely links to other sources, using a courier font and good news sense to make something of value.

The things I am missing this Lent go to the value of an aggregator. What are the aspects that make it unique from the stories it covers?

1. The Humor. The selection of stories is often funny; it’s like reading great headlines on a big city daily of old.
2. The Time: Drudge saves me time, having to look through myriad websites for information is wasteful. Not only do I know from the site what’s news, but I know from the site what the other TV hosts will be talking about.
3. It’s an equal opportunity offender. Certainly, I know the overall slant of Drudge, but he never resists a good story.
4. The Human Condition: A monkey that’s in rehab for smoking and drinking! Bartender in topless bar sues for pregnancy discrimination! 75 year old sues 65 year old for age discrimination! Athlete blames bad ski run on porn! Washington man electrocuted by peeing on power line! It’s all larger than life, and I am missing it.
5. The newspaper sampling. Drudge links to a wide variety of newspapers. While some appear more than others, the overall array of sources is vast. Drudge adds a unique element to the news; he writes new headlines, and his curatorial genius at picking a great assortment of stories is unrivaled. He doesn’t actually even copy anything; he adds a layer to it.

Now, the big newspapers haven’t taken on Drudge, just Google. The service that Drudge provides them is invaluable, namely a stunning amount of web traffic. It would be instructive to try to put a price on the value of Drudge links to the mainstream media. Yesterday’s blazing headline on Al Gore’s New York Times essay must have brought them millions of uniques.

The issue seems to have died down a bit since last year, when Dean Singleton went on a rampage with his buddies at the Associated Press, though we are certain it will be back in some form.

The pity is that the not that the newspaper industry will “win” this issue. They can’t. Technology prevents it. The pity is that they aren’t learning the lessons of Drudge. They are lessons that were good 100 years ago, and still of value today.

Find great stories, write great headlines, and do it all with a sense of humor and enthusiasm.

That’s it.

I will be happy to have Drudge back this Easter.