As tongue in cheek as it may be ONTD reposted this article with a very lovely (or maybe just over the top) citation. Perhaps you think I’m an asshole for asking for proper citations but whatever, I like it when work is properly attributed to the author. Seeing as all I really wanted was an acknowledgement of the problem I’m pretty happy with this and will be closing down comments here. Thanks for the visit and if you decide to return tomorrow we’ll tackle other important issues like what happened on Rizzoli & Isles tonight and how good The Adventures of Tintin is.

And now an example of a perfectly reasonable citation that could have been used to avoid all this

Source [ONTD]

Stay classy!

This morning, I woke up with a few emails from one of the writers at FemPop. An article she wrote was linked to on Jezebel. Cause for celebration, right? We’re a small, feminist-oriented website and who wouldn’t want a link from the grand pooba of feminism online? Only the link, instead of taking you to FemPop, took you to ONTD, where the writer’s name was removed, there was no mention of FemPop, and the only note that it didn’t originate at ONTD were three small x’s with a link back to the original article.

In what world is this adequate sourcing after reprinting an entire article without permission?

Of course Jezebel didn’t link to FemPop. The contributor at ONTD went out of his/her way to hide the origin of the piece! I contacted Jessica Coen at Jezebel and she was very gracious and kind. She fixed the problem and we shook hands virtually over the internet. Disaster averted, and thank you Jessica for reminding me that the “p” word was a very strong word and not appropriate in the case of what happened with Jezebel! You’re awesome!

Then I contacted ONTD, because they reprinted our article without permission and didn’t acknowledge the original author. It was something so dangerously close to the “p” word that I may have used it a few times.

ONTD promptly deleted the article and all 200+ comments. Well, that’s one way to deal with this problem, but it wasn’t the way I preferred. I would rather have a proper link back and acknowledgement, you know? So I contacted ONTD on Twitter to see if they could make some note about what happened, or, at the very least, deal with the contributor who essentially stole our material.

ONTD first refused, because the article no longer existed. Then they claimed “no one saw it,” despite being up for three days, being linked by Jezebel and having over 200 comments.

I kept downgrading my request, until all I asked was that the contributor be reprimanded so what happened to us wouldn’t happen to other small blogs.

“We’re not punishing members.”

Any further requests for a dialogue so we could seek a solution that would save ONTD face, and make the editorial staff at FemPop happy, were shut down when ONTD deleted our entire Twitter conversation and linked us to Livejournal’s DMCA.

Thankfully, I use YoruFukurou, and the whole conversation was still available to me. So now you can read it, too! It goes bottom-to-top and left-to-right per each photo.

Writing this whole article, I’ve found myself questioning things. FemPop is gearing up for a big announcement and this issue comes at the worst possible moment. So should I even pen this article? Is it appropriate?

Moreover, I’m a lady and a businesswoman and the number one rule for women in business is to let sleeping dogs lie. To quietly allow things like this to happen because raising a fuss–fighting back–is inappropriate. Now, I may be labeled a shrew or an attention whore or any other number of misogynistic and irritating epithets, but folks, we strive to be ethical at FemPop. That means we don’t write about some things even though it will give us hits. We always provide links, even though it will harm our “bounce rate.” We sacrifice success for ethics.

What ONTD did was unethical in every way possible. They perpetuated a very bad model where big sites steal from little sites and tell us to be grateful that eyeballs even see our words. Their reaction was so condescending, unethical and downright nasty that we’ve now made it our policy not to use ONTD as a news source. We encourage other sites who value artists and believe credit is always deserved to stop using ONTD as well.

To comment on how damaging practices like this are to writers, here’s Rebecca Jane:

So, earlier this month, I wrote this article.

The title’s a bit incendiary, but the piece itself is a critical reflection on Diablo Cody’s career.

Today I was catching up on my blogs, and noticed a Jezebel link, directing folks to this.

I went a bit bananas and fired off a couple of emails and tweets and status updates about my work having been stolen, which I then retracted…because they did link to my article, you know, the one they just posted in full, at the bottom of the page…let me know when you find it.

On FemPop.com, my article received 0 comments.

On ONTD, it received well over 200.

I’m going to be a bit more real than I typically am on Facebook (famous. last. words.). I work my ass off on every piece of ephemera that I put out on the internet. I know there are times when I must be the Facebook friend you remove from your feed, due to my love of spamming the hell out of you with all of my links, but the truth is, if I wasn’t writing as much as I was, as frantically as I do, I’m not quite sure what I’d do with myself.

See, it’s all towards the end of making this writing thing a paid deal. Because, after fourteen years, I’ve hit the roof, in terms of my tolerance for quite literally answering a phone for eight hours every day. I put the amount out on the web that I do because I want it to be seen, and I want to be hired.

In the US today, with unemployment being de rigeur, I feel like an asshole bemoaning my job, because I should be lucky to have one. Unfortunately, most of the time I don’t feel lucky. I feel really, really unhappy. I feel like maybe I’ve made bad, poor, wrong choices, and that’s why I’m 28 working a job that could not be more in opposition with what I set out to do with my life.

It’s the writing I do – good bad and ugly – that gives me a sense of purpose and a feeling that, no matter how hard things get, (and at present they are pretty rough) I’ve picked the right path: Write or die.

That’s why, when a site takes my work and does the bare minimum necessary to keep me from flinging the words “Plagiarism” off at them, it only serves to heighten that feeling of being silenced – because when do you something like this, that’s what you’re doing.

Hug a writer in your life. They mostly need hugs.

  • Stetson Cooper

    Way to go, Alex. You show those jerks.

  • Anonymous

    I’m way disappointed to hear that they would do this. Shame on “LikeGunfire” (whoever the hell that is) and shame on ONTD.

    • Anonymous

      “Shame on “LikeGunfire” (whoever the hell that is)…”

      excuse you, likegunfire is a flawfree prince!

      • Anonymous

        This. Haters use MLA format!

  • tim

    wow at the rudeness. likegunfire is wonderful. this was jezebel’s fault not his. he sourced where he found the article. 

    • Anonymous

      Plagiarism is not wonderful. Improperly sourcing something is a form of plagiarism. I don’t know a single serious columnist (online or otherwise) who would be okay with having his or her work re-posted on another Web site without being asked permission first, let alone without being given proper credit in the byline of the article. Three X’s at the bottom of the article with a link to the original site is not proper credit.

      The folks at Jezebel probably assumed that “LikeGunfire” was the original author. That’s what I would have assumed from looking at the ONTD page.

      • tim

        im sure jezebel know how ontd works. its not likegunfire’s fault they were lazy. EVERYTHING on ontd is sourced like that and no posts get accepted without a source. Barely anything on ONTD is original. that’s how the site works. srsly did any of you even do your research and read the rules before wasting your time with all this foolishness?

        • Anonymous

          No, I wasn’t familiar with ONTD, and apparently neither were the authors here at FemPop (who seem to spend a lot more time with celebrity gossip than I do). The entire concept strikes me as moronic though—it would be just as simple to source the articles they re-post in the byline with the author’s name as it is to hide that information at the very bottom of the article. I’m surprised they haven’t been DMCA’ed to death. The fact that Rebecca got zero comments on the original article in spite of the link from ONTD is pretty good evidence that most ONTD readers don’t bother to click the link and learn who the original author is.

          I will agree with you that “LikeGunfire” doesn’t deserve any more hate than any other author at that site for only doing what ONTD apparently does on a regular basis, and if Jezebel was familiar with how ONTD works, they really should have linked to the original article. (They, however, were gracious and professional and immediately corrected their mistake without being jerks about it.)

          I won’t agree with you or anyone else here who is essentially sneering that FemPop should just take whatever table scraps that big sites like ONTD throw at them and like it because ooo, lookie, they’re getting so many comments on this! Authors should *never* be demonized just for wanting proper attribution for their work.

          • N.

            To your first point: ONTD isn’t the first popular content aggregator, it also won’t be the last.

            “The fact that Rebecca got zero comments on the original article in spite of the link from ONTD is pretty good evidence that most ONTD readers don’t bother to click the link and learn who the original author is.”

            I think you’re missing (one of the many) point(s) of ONTD entirely. (Why should I sign up for a bajillion different sites just to comment when I can comment at an aggregator? JW. — Plus people tend to *LOOK* at the source, not comment, so possibly your point of “~not knowing who the original author is~” is slightly bullshitty.)

          • Anonymous

            >>>ONTD isn’t the first popular content aggregator, it also won’t be the last.<<>>Plus people tend to *LOOK* at the source, not comment, so possibly your
            point of “~not knowing who the original author is~” is slightly

            I've been linked from heavy-traffic sites (WashingtonPost, PBS, Patheos, blogs much bigger than mine) with proper attribution multiple times before. Have you? I don't know what your experience is, but mine has been that I *always* get at least a few new commentators whom I've never seen before, even though they were able to comment on the article at the site that linked it.

          • N.

            “I’m lost on how you think this addresses my point in any way, shape or form.”
            It refers to this:
            “The entire concept strikes me as moronic though—it would be just as simple to source the articles they re-post in the byline with the author’s name as it is to hide that information at the very bottom of the article. I’m surprised they haven’t been DMCA’ed to death.”

            There are OTHER content aggregators (what ONTD IS) that provide LESS sourcing than we do, if any at all– and some even do it PURELY FOR THE PROFIT (ONTD, unlike other sites, ISN’T A STANDALONE SITE, it is HOSTED ON A BLOGGING ENGINE, infact, whilst it’s SO POPULAR, IT OFTEN GOES OFFLINE/LOADS SLOW DUE TO THE TRAFFIC (see: Michael Jackson’s death, amongst other ~buzzes~), ONTDers now have to censor posts containing nudity so advertisers will pay LIVEJOURNAL (remember now, ONTD isn’t a lone entity, though you believe it to be) to advertise on it. LiveJournal now hosts ONTD on seperate servers, but THAT’S STILL NOT ENOUGH. Some have sharpened up and now give “proper” crediting (though thinking about it, with your comments in this thread, they’ll need to Harvard reference for it to be “proper” and “correct”)

            “I’ve been linked from heavy-traffic sites (WashingtonPost, PBS, Patheos, blogs much bigger than mine) with proper attribution multiple times before. Have you? I don’t know what your experience is, but mine has been that I *always* get at least a few new commentators whom I’ve never seen before, even though they were able to comment on the article at the site that linked it.”Is your site/blog ONTD, or built on LiveJournal? No? Then your point is null and void. Especially since, you know, ONTDers are now commenting here, in THIS ORIGINAL SOURCE.

            Also lol, don’t even bring Digg into this, Digg has been dead ever since the very unpopular layout change.

          • Anonymous

            >>>There are OTHER content aggregators (what ONTD IS) that provide LESS sourcing than we do, if any at all<<>>Especially since, you know, ONTDers are now commenting here, in THIS ORIGINAL SOURCE.<<<

            I'm supposed to be impressed that ONTD asked its readers to freep the post where FemPop complained about its intellectual theft?

            Sorry, no dice.

          • Guest

            lol you really are an idiot

          • Anonymous

            Personal attacks are always a good way to skirt the point. 

          • ONTD did correct it, but deciding to not post it.

            Also stop calling ONTD a  ~big site~ it’s a friggin’  Live Journal that people post stories from around the net on, lol.

            It’s either give credit or don’t post, and since they gave credit and it wasn’t enough they decided to remove it. It’s fair, and it’s just, and it’s LEGAL.

            The fact that this article got 0 comments and ONTD got 200 proves nothing. Where are the regular FemPop readers? The fact that it didn’t get 1 speaks more to FemPop than to ONTD, really.

            As the twitter said, nobody saw it. ONTD usually gets well over thousands of comments. The fact that it only got 200 shows that nobody really saw it. It clearly wasn’t ~making the rounds~. Articles have gone from 0 – 10,000 here in mere seconds. A LOT of Traffic back and forth also.

            I’ve visited, joined, posted on, and promoted SEVERAL sites that I found through ONTD brand of source linking, and I actually even visted the link to this site posted on THAT THEREAD. So using FemPops lack of traffic as a way to say that ONTD is doing something wrong is silly. Clearly nobody cared enough.

          • Anonymous

            I think ONTD is doing something wrong because they they allow the intellectual property of others to be re-posted without permission and do not give proper attribution in their bylines. Period. FemPop’s traffic (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with it.

            >>>It’s fair, and it’s just, and it’s LEGAL.<<<

            Um, no. Reproducing a work in its entirety without the consent of the original author is *highly* illegal. I imagine that their response to Alex's complaint (immediately nuking the entire post, comments and all) is the routine ONTD goes through whenever an author complains about their work having been stolen.

          • SMH @ you for using ableist language

      • Not if you spent more than 2 seconds on the site.

        It sucks that other a big site posting your article fucks you over on google rankings, but honestly part of publishing online is getting your content scraped. At least the post acknowledged the source of the article. It’s more than you’d get in most cases.

    • S.

      i agree. he sourced it properly so i don’t see what he should be reprimanded for…

    • See above for why your response is silly, small minded and condescending.

      • tim

        lol ok. im bored now anyway ive already given this mess enough attention.

        • S.

          and more comments than any other article on this site lol

      • Anonymous

        bitch plz, that’s you! sit down…

      • Anonymous

        But your complete misunderstanding of the issue and then subsequent posting of butthurt is not condescending at all.

  • Anonymous

    ONTD needs to link sources more clearly. But no need to punish the individual member. 

    • If all that comes from this is a better sourcing policy at ONTD and an end to reposting entire articles without permission I will be a happy camper.

      • Anonymous

        There will never be an end to reposting entire articles without permission because that is the basis on which ONTD is made. If ONTD stopped doing that ONTD would cease to exist.

      • Anonymous

        The sourcing policy at ONTD is perfectly clear if you read the damn rules. Also, ONTD has gotten a few requests from websites to stop reposting articles and they’ve complied without hassle. Likegunfire DID source you, perhaps not in the way you would have liked, but for any ONTDer, it was a clear indicator that if clicked, it would bring us to the original article. Simple as that! If you really are so undone about this whole thing, why not just contact the mods and have your site banned as a source? Is it because–and I’m just venturing a guess here–you know that getting a repost from ONTD (disregarding Jezebel) likely boosted your site traffic anyhow? 

        FYI — you want Likegunfire to be punished but, according to what? He followed our rules and that’s what he would be judged against. SO, if he didn’t break them, why would the mods punish them? Because you’re pissed? Sorry!

  • Anonymous


  • Anonymous

    I’ve seen a lot of Likegunfire’s posts on that website before, and I’m pretty sure that he hates women!!

    • Anonymous

      You clearly aren’t aware of his undying love for Brandy and Stephanie Pratt.

      • Anonymous

        I’ve heard that he’s being ironic because he hates them and all women! He is just mocking them.

        • S.

          you heard wrong.

          • Anonymous

            I hope that as a fellow woman, one day you will open your eyes and see that this world is full of hate, spread by men like this “Likegunfire.”

    • S.

      umm you might want to look again because practically all his posts are in support of women… 

      • Anonymous

        Obviously you cannot see through his facade. He pretends to love those women in a constant effort to spread his hatred. It is clear through his commentary that he is not serious when he talks about loving those women.

        • S.

          omg it all makes sense now…………..

          • Anonymous

            Ignore my other comment then! I am glad you have seen the light. Welcome to womanhood!

          • S.


    • Anonymous

      um, no!

  • Yeah, that will never happen. ONTD is all reposted articles.

  • LOL

  • Anonymous

    Likefunfire is king!!!! Sorry to the author of this post that Brenden was dismissive of your request, but you are clearly not familiar with sourcing at ONTD. A link is required, but no one ever explicitly states the site of the original article. I don’t think lgf needs to alter his signature xxx just because you’re desperate for hits.  

    • Anonymous

      King? Of course you would use such a patriarchal term to defend a misogynist.

      • ummmm maybe mssteven used “king” because likegunfire is a guy?? 

        • Anonymous

          Actually, he’s probably a “queen” if you know what I mean…

          • o.

          • Anonymous

            w o w @ you shaming lgf for ‘misogyny’ and then making such a deplorable, homophobic comment. And for the record, he is a straight male. ETA: Speaking from experience ;)

          • Anonymous

            Homophobic? You bet I am! Just more men trying to steal away what little women have left in this world. We don’t even have femininity anymore because homosexual woman haters like “Likegunfire” have taken it away from us!

          • “Homophobic? You bet I am!” Oh wow. Bigotry is realll cute. 

          • Anonymous

            lmfao dying @ this troll. 

          • Anonymous

            And I’m sorry that you hate yourself so much that you have sexually associated your self with such a foul being.

  • Meko Gregory

    He soured the article you FREAK. You can go shave your back now!

  • Could you be more melodramatic? ONTD has done this for ages, and no one was trying to claim your poorly written, four year too late article. We always post sources. It isn’t our fault that Jezebel didn’t do their homework, and you certainly should be grateful that you were re-posted on a place like ONTD.

  • Anonymous

    You clearly do not understand how ONTD works and that is one reason why the maintainers were so rude to you.

    ONTD doesn’t normally publish original content; 95% of the content at ONTD is stolen from other sites. The member who posted your article, likegunfire, will not get reprimanded because what he did is the norm at ONTD. Basically members of ONTD steal content from around the internet for the rest of the members to gossip over, and the owners of ONTD make money off it.

    What they’re doing is not professional and they aren’t a professional website, so when you’re dealing with ONTD, do not expect the level of professionalism you’re used to. You won’t get it.

    • Thanks for the heads up. I knew a little about ONTD and I know our Gossip editors has used them time to time because they get some legit scoops but they’re so unprofessional and unethical that we won’t be using them as sources from here on out. Here’s hoping other, more mainstream sites stop using them too.

      I mean even Digg and Reddit give credit where credit is due, and like ONTD they operate on user generated content.

      • Why would anyone ever use ONTD as a source? As multiple people have pointed out, almost all the content is from other sites. Every article posted is required to have a link to the source. Lgf had a link to the source where he found the article. 

        Anyone who reads ONTD knows where to find the source of an article.

        • Anonymous

          Exactly. This would be like writing a research paper and citing Wikipedia for all of your sources.

      • S SF

        Honestly, the only issue here is you don’t like how the credit was presented. It was there, any regular reader of ONTD would recognize that as credit.

        Also, did Rebecca actually verify the click counts based on the ONTD linkage or is she just upset that people weren’t replying to her directly?

        • I can verify. We have more hits from Jezebel fixing a three day old link then we had from ONTD and their little x’s.

          And really three little x’s at the bottom of a page is piss poor citation any way you look at it. Moreover reprinting material in full without permission is unethical and potentially illegal. To just toss up one’s hands and say “that’s how it is done” is mind bogglingly silly.

          • Anonymous

            Bet you have plenty more hits now! 

          • Anonymous

            The three little x’s was a link to your article. Do you not know how hyperlinks work?

      • The fact that you would even say you’ve used ONTD as a source in the past is pathetic, given the nature of your complaint. You want credit for what was written, but you’re using ONTD….where nothing is actually written by its users, as a source.

        Hello hypocritical delusion. 

      • Why would you have ever used ONTD as a source? Only lazy journalists/bloggers do that — there is no original material on ONTD.

  • a) ONTD is a gossip site not the Times so  I don’t know what “professionalism” you’re after and b) They did link a source! Every post on ONTD has a source and if you look at half the internet blogs out there a source or credit isn’t exactly common.

    • With popularity comes responsibility. ONTD is a well read site with multiple awards for it’s blogging efforts. It’s broken major gossip news in the past and has an ethical responsibility to exemplify appropriate blogging behavior. Instead it does the minimum effort to avoid a lawsuit and behaves nastily to anyone who questions it.

      • I just hope you realize no-one on ONTD thinks the content their is “original” and they all know where to find the source. I’m not trying to be ‘nasty’ I just think it’s silly to expect the Harvard referencing system from a gossip blog on livejournal of all things.

        I can see where you’re coming from but seriously, you’ve blown this way out of proportion. 

      • ” It’s broken major gossip news in the past”

        No, no it hasn’t, it’s just cribbed it from the sites that did….and linked back to them. But keep on talking out of your rear, it’s working well for you judging by the number of comments on this post.

      • “ONTD is a well read site with multiple awards for it’s blogging efforts.” 

        Incorrect use of apostrophe. :( 

        “It’s broken major gossip news in the past and has an ethical responsibility to exemplify appropriate blogging behavior.” 

        Not technically incorrect but visually unappealing. 

      • Anonymous

        IT’S NOT A BLOG!!!!

  • No one was plagiarizing you. Your article was linked at the bottom, usually on ONTD the original article will be linked by “source“. Every ONTD article is linked, they aren’t allowed to be posted if they’re not. I’m sorry your article wasn’t posted as your liking but it wasn’t stolen. Most ONTD readers were able to recognize where the link back was (the “xxx”). I just think you overreacted.

  • Tracie Howland

    So the clarify because their is obviously a bit of a misunderstanding.  ONTD is not a professional web-site, it is a Live Journal community where users post articles on gossip, celebrities, and/or article mainly having to do with the entertainment industry.  The T&C for posting is that the original source for the article must be linked and about 98% of the content is article that have been posted on another site and summarized.  

    While I understand you feel you deserve the recognition, the T&C for ONTD were followed.  Your persistence on it being done to your liking is quite humorous given the site you asked it from.  

  • megan gray

    Yes it would be nice if ONTD contributors added author info etc, but everyone who reads ONTD understands how it works & where the source is. No one is trying to “hide” the information; every source is placed at the bottom and we know where to find it.

  • Anonymous

    lmao, are you fucking kidding me

    you sound so dumb right now, i can’t even

    if you’re going to whine like a baby bc ONTD is popular and no one knows who the fuck you are, at least learn the difference between “plagiarism” and copyright infringement. they’re not interchangeable.

    gj tho, i’m sure today you’ll be getting more hits than ever bc of this publicity, and then go back to your regular two visitors by tomorrow.

  • HA except the post followed all of the sites rules and DID link back to you, and you’d be surprised how many members do go back to those sites. Especially if they’re worth visiting. If you’re not getting enough traffic, maybe that’s you’re problem. 

    stay pressed. 

  • Whenever I post again on ONTD I’ll MLA source it like the post about this article and include a screen shot and then a photo of the screenshot from a digital camera and a short bio and list of works by the original author. You’re welcome. 

  • Anonymous

    um ONTD isn’t a blog (much less a “professional” anything), it’s a massive livejournal community. i wish i could be more patient/nice in saying this but you people are so frustrating with your obvious lack of understanding of livejournal……this is not a blog with a few contributers who are paid writers. it’s an lj comm with like a million members who are mostly teens/early 20s students posting celeb gossip online when bored. you are seriously making yourself look ridiculous by trying to claim that ontd is “competing” with you as a business or some such.

  • lol are you being serious or..

  • Anonymous

    wow, qt to delete my comment pointing out your inability to know the difference between plagiarism and copyright infringement.

    and yet, the homophobic trolling is left up. w o w. what a wonderful site this is, i’m totes jumping from that ONTD place. you’ve converted me.

  • Melissa Cornwall

    You’re so pathetic. I can’t even.
    Enjoy your free trafic today. Tomorrow you’ll be back to your usual 3 visitors a day.

  • lmaooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo. if anything you should thank ONTD for getting you as many views as you’ve gotten on this post. bow down because this is as good as it’s gonna get for you.

  • The real reason people read ONTD is for the users’ comments. Everyone on LJ knows that nobody in the community actually writes their own articles and all members are careful to source their material appropriately. The mods reject ALL posts that aren’t sourced. ONTD has actually introduced me to many websites and blogs that I now check regularly, more often than not I often go to the original source material to check it out.

    In short, fail, Fempop.

    • Nope. Citation fail on ONTD’s part.

      But keep coming here telling me I’m wrong when ONTD has created a culture of intellectual property theft. Your outrage amuses me.

      • Anonymous

        Um, how is it a citation fail when likegunfire c i t e d your article?

      • Okay you’re right but that still doesn’t make your site any more successful or give ONTD any less hits. It is an issue but it’s not going to change anything in the long run except maybe just maybe we’ll be a little better about citing our sources which I think is what you want? I’m not too sure of what you want out of this ordeal. I’m thinking recognition but you know what assuming does. 

      • Tracie Howland

        Your ego amuses me.  

      • Melissa Cornwall

        You’re so freaking dense. 

      • Anonymous

        I think that your outrage is FAR more amusing.

      • Anonymous

        wait you’re actually reading these comments and you still think youre right? (jwoww voice) what is WRONGGGGGGG with you

      • lollll

  • i don’t think you are prepared to deal with the culture of celebrity gossip blogs and user generated content. ‘ethics’ on ONTD? okay…lol.

  • So you were sourced by ONTD and this one article has 61 comments. The combined total of comments from the other articles on your front page: 3. You should be so lucky to have them source you again.

  • Anonymous

    lol you mad!!!

  • This is far from plagiarism, so you should quit tossing that word around
    as if it gives your article anymore credit than it deserves.

    You’re fussing mostly because they decided to take it down rather than
    give you credit. It’s either or really. You can’t complain because
    somebody decided to handle a matter in a different way then you had
    hoped. Both ways are legal and both ways are proper, you can’t force
    somebody to leave your article up if they decide not to.

    That’s how ONTD works (A Gossip blog run off of LiveJournal, NOT the
    giant corporate beast stepping over some tiny company that you try to
    make them out to be) People post content and then link to the source.
    They can be flagrant or crafty with their links, but if the links
    contains source, it’s legit and fair. You wanted name recognition and I
    get that, but the person decided to instead link to the site. Again,
    another legitimate choice.

    The real wrongdoer on here is Jezebel who you’re only praising because
    they ARE a bigger name and gave you direct credit, which they should
    have from the start. Jezebel is quite aware of ONTD’s sourcing method
    and blatantly went with the source they found it wrong instead of the
    one linked.

    The article was linked to you by the original poster, thus making it
    properly credited. The article was then removed to avoid any trouble, so
    why would you demand the person (who did the right thing) be punished,
    or the site bring it back and put the credit? Obviously they decided it
    wasn’t worth publishing and now you’re butthurt.

    You want to throw this feminist/Sexist shit around and turn everything
    into a feminist issue because it gives you some sort of reason to be as
    uneducated about everything else in the world. I’m a Feminist myself,
    but good lord, come off of it. You were linked by them, moreso than
    Jezebel did.

    And the source/link wasn’t hidden at all on the main page, it is put
    there to deliberately appear on the page before the LJcut, so they see
    the headline and link together. If people opened the link and didn’t go
    to the source it will appear much lower to the bottom, that’s how LJ
    works by design.

    Maybe the guy over Twitter could have been a little more accomodating
    with this responses, but he is right. The matter was taken care of. It
    may not have been the most lucrative choice for you, but it wasn’t wrong
    either. You were sourced originally, and when shit hit the fan they
    decided that the article wasn’t that important anyway.

    Oh, and when he said “Nobody saw it” it means it didn’t attract any new
    eyes. And he’s right. ONTD articles usually garner several thousand
    comments. Nobody from outside of ONTD’s regular readers saw it, and if
    they did it was probably due to Jezebel, who ignored the link KNOWING it
    was there (they’ve had a relationship with ONTD for a while and are
    fully aware of the fact that members use clever ways of linking

    • Anonymous

      the best.

  • oh ffs. no one gives a crap who authored the original article.


  • melanie logie

    OP is a dumb bitch. That is all.

  • you’re talking about very different audiences. the traffic coming from Washington Post is nowhere near the same as ONTD: celebrity-obsessed, bored teens and 20-somethings. they’re people who know technology and internet like the back of their hand, and who comment regularly (and often unrelated to pop culture) on ONTD because of its sense of community. i don’t know why you’d expect this audience to comment on your site. obviously, now that you’ve invoked appeals to their community, they’ve begun to respond. things aren’t fair online. let’s just try to be realistic. 

  • Anonymous

    lol you mad!

  • ONTD users are familiar with their citation method of sources. 200 comments is a small post on ONTD, and most of it is users discussing amongst themselves topics related to the subject of the post.

  • Anonymous

    you should be thanking ONTD for giving your flop article the exposure you couldn’t get by yourself.

  • ONTD isn’t and hasn’t ever claimed to be a site that runs original work and is in essence a glorified message board of links and previews of the information found at those links. Everyone on ONTD knows that the source goes at the bottom of the article. Sometimes this is done in a way that states the site the article came from–JustJared, TMZ, whatever–and sometimes it says something like “Sauce” or “<3BRITNEYFOREVER." The point is that it links back to the article. I think ONTD mods shouldn't have deleted the post before you were made aware of this tidbit but I also think there are better ways to handle this than to blast specific community members or moderators. ONTD mods aren't making money off your posts or off the clicks and comments on your post–Livejournal makes money of ONTD and I think that's an important distinction. ONTD as a community will totally work with you and not allow posts of material you put on this site anymore if that's your request (or maybe even if it isn't, at this point) but if you have a serious complaint about the way the community is run, I think that would be best taken up with Livejournal. 

  • Since you’re a blogger, you should perhaps read up on trends in new media, and learn what’s popular, etc. ONTD is popular. ONTD has always been like this. ONTD has never had problems with plagiarism. Everybody who uses ONTD knows that everything is sourced, and if it isn’t, it’s rejected. Get over it and go masturbate. 

  • Anonymous


  • Iara Maia


  • Author should be happy that the pageviews from the post might make her enough $$ 2 buy her own back shaver imo!

    • Anonymous

      i agree my flawless queen

  • Anonymous

    Since you’re a blogger, you should perhaps read up on trends in new media, and learn what’s popular, etc. ONTD is popular. ONTD has always been like this. ONTD has never had problems with plagiarism. Everybody who uses ONTD knows that everything is sourced, and if it isn’t, it’s rejected. Get over it and go masturbate. 

  • Alright so here’s the thing. Your article was linked, and while it wasn’t done in MLA format, it was linked. It was up to the reader to click the link. And you want to say you’re a business woman but a true business woman wouldn’t have posted this. You did this to anger the users at ONTD into posting this article therefore getting you more traffic, which congrats, you’ve done.

    As someone posted above, Jezebel knows how ONTD works and it has for years. They’re the bigger name and yet you want to paint them in a good light.And when you told them about the plagiarism they took it down. Instead of being happy that they did that you took to wanting them to ban a user who is doing what everyone else on that site does. Which is they find an article, go ‘Hey! This could be awesome on ONTD!’. Post the article and link back to the original source. If they don’t do this then the post gets rejected by the Mods on the site.

    I would say, with respect, that you should be happy they took down the article in the first place. They could have just ignored you.

  • Anonymous

    One time I wrote a 100,000 word essay on how the new My Little Pony series is really a coded manifesto for the Illuminati, and an ONTDer just ganked it and put it up with no citation except for those dastardly Xes. Those bastards. >:(

  • Anonymous

    di OP has di stinky vajine

  • Anonymous

    reply to this thread if you hate women


    • lol ia. Best hope at exposure she could get

  • Chelsea Dugas


  • Anonymous


  • Anonymous


  • Anonymous

    ONTD knows everybody’s business, they know everything about everyone. That’s why their hair is so big, it’s full of secrets.

    • Click the “Like” if you’ve ever felt personally victimized by ONTD.

      • Anonymous

        ontd’s very existence victimizes me tbh.

  • Omg almost 2000 comments on ontd you’re almost as important as a Britney Spears music video

    • Iara Maia

      that’s a 0 more you just added there. and maybe you should compare this amount of comments to like a post of a half-assed movie preview that no one really cares.

    • Anonymous

      this has more comments than a sky ferrera post rn tho


    • Anonymous

      You sound jealous.


        • Anonymous


          ON ~OHENTEEDEE!

  • Mollie Muse

    Let me just say, I love you ladies. I truly do. I feel like you are women after my own heart. I love that you don’t take life too seriously, I love that you give a feminist view – and a very grounded, realistic feminist view, at that – on a segment of pop culture that is often considered “for the boys.” I love that you are here, reminding women of our generation that gender equality has not been won – our older sisters may have started the fight, but it’s up to us to accept their torch. And I love that you actually do “make a fuss” when you’ve been treated wrongly. I can appreciate your initial dilemma – it’s one I know personally – but the fact that you chose to speak out is indicative of why you deserve the respect and re-tweets that I give you.

    I rarely ever comment on the web, but in the few months I’ve been reading this site, I’ve actually commented several times. I’ll try to do it more. I’ll definitely keep sending your links to my friends (even if they are tired of hearing me gush about this great new feminist site I found). 

    And I can’t wait to see what the announcement you subtly referred to is. 


  • Anonymous

    i am di queen… of vagina… and im gettin eaten out by u~!

  • Anonymous

    oh gerls! just saw her google+ profile and let me just say, she shits glamor tbh…

  • ONTD will never be a site that uses MLA/APA/AP Style sourcing. Expecting professional quality from a group of 100,000 celebrity gossip enthusiasts is ridiculous. ONTD has a wide reputation as an aggregator of content and as a discussion forum and not as a crafter of content. Unless you told ONTD in advance to not link your content, you have no legal leg to stand on. 

  • Anonymous

    Reposting because I think my original attempt has been lost.

    It’s too bad you’re getting some abuse in the comments here because this
    really seems to just boil down to a clash of Internet cultures. 
    Hopefully you can wade through and take away the most relevant points, which I think are:

    1. ONTD is not a professional blog.  It’s just a community of pseudonymous users on Livejournal.

    2. Most of ONTD’s posts are not original to ONTD.  They are re-posted
    from elsewhere.  (Jezebel doesn’t seem to understand this either, since
    they apparently source a lot of things to ONTD.)

    3. The ONTD community’s policy is that all such posts must have a link
    back to the original source, or they won’t be accepted to the community.

    4. There was indeed such a link at the bottom of the post you accuse of
    plagiarism, but instead of explicitly naming Fempop or the author, it
    read as “xxx” — however, if you clicked on that, it would take you to
    the original.

    5. One of the ONTD mods has clarified in comments that what he meant by
    “no one saw it” before the offending post was deleted was that no mods
    had seen it, not that no one *in general* saw it.  See here: http://ohnotheydidnt.livejournal.com/65053314.html?thread=11168020098#t11168020098

    6. The mod also says there they will try to make sure community members provide clearer links to sources in the future.

    • Anonymous

      Great points. Jezebel linked to several posts in the same post as the author’s article. The other posts had Source with the link at the bottom of the post.

  • Anonymous

    I’m sorry but you clearly don’t know how the internet works anymore. Have you even been to tumblr? Reddit? Seriously?

    ONTD should be commended for continuing to source every single article
    that comes through. What you refer to as “stolen” content…posted
    without permission, that doesn’t exist anymore. This is the internet,
    not paper publishing. Your age is showing.

  • Anonymous

    di queen has spoken! di post should be deleted for it is not properly sourced! please delete di post, oP or i will sue!

  • Anonymous

    You are so dense.

  • Anonymous

    So after reading your Twitter convo with Brenden, I have to say that you’re really stupid. Like, no wonder your site fails so fucking hard. 

  • all you have to do is read the userinfo at ontd to see how it works. it’s not that complicated.

  • Anonymous

    ewww femflop IMO. btdubbs, i checked out the rest of the site (to be fair) and it’s full of a bunch of nonsensical sexist shit, which i linked to but my comment got “moderated”. LOLZZZ forever. 

  • Anonymous

    If the web is the medium for your art, you really need to educate
    yourself more on common practices before crying foul. Gossip blogs/communities are not held
    to the same standards as reputable news sites. I agree that it’s totally fair to expect a link back to your site, and I know I will be the 329485th person to point this out, but they did in fact link back to your site! It wasn’t in MLA format, but the link was there. Posts are also deleted all of the time for various reasons, so calling it a “cover up” is a tad bit dramatic.

    I can understand asking for better sourcing and hoping for ONTD to make a nice gesture, but I don’t think it makes any sort of sense to ask them to punish a random, faceless person on the Internet, especially after the issue was basically squelched with the deletion of the post.

    • I asked that they kindly reprimand the person. Which can be done privately and with no fuss. A simple “hey dude cite better in the future” would have sufficed. Thank you for being reasonable with you response. It’s appreciated.