Love it Jon!
I think all too often news sources think that they can take things from online only sources, and have no need to actually give credit where credit is due. I know someone who writes for a similar online publication to WN, and one of the big magazines basically copied the article word for word.
I had spotted the similarity between the articles.
I submitted a comment to the SMH asking why their article resembled the prior Weekend Notes piece so closely. My comment did not make it through their moderation process. Perhaps the SMH is a bit too sensitive to any form of criticism.
I am not so sure... it's a topic I wrote about on another site last year... The SMH article is much more detailed and the places that are mentioned in both like Art after Hours and the Bondi walk are both very welll known cheap ideas...
Perhaps we are being a little paranoid. Surely everyone gets ideas from the various things that they read online and then if they think it will work for their readers try to improve on them.
I admit the timing is suspicious but I have had blog posts scheduled to appear only to find someone like timeout beats me by a few days...
The plague of plagiarism! I see it happening far too much, and it is certainly not acceptable. If the journalist went to university they would realise how wrong it is. Good work for naming and shaming.
Ethically, they should attribute the article to the original author - the one who put the all the effort into researching and writing in the first place! Legally, I'm fuzzy on that but I was under the impression if you write it, you have copyright & the place where it is published has first publication rights - from my researching into submitting into magazines. It irks me that a reputable paper like the SMH can just take credit for something I wrote without giving me credit.