4 ms·

Just a heads up that The Dollop unapologetically built their huge, lucrative following via naked plagiarism. I have my own history podcast (with a much smaller

Just a heads up that The Dollop unapologetically built their huge, lucrative following via naked plagiarism. I have my own history podcast (with a much smaller audience than The Dollop), and a few years back I discovered that they were re-reading lengthy segments of my original podcast scripts word-for-word on their podcast without permission or attribution. When I called them out they claimed this is "Fair Use", and that non-fiction cannot be copyrighted. It really knocked the wind out of my sails, and it bothers me to this day, so I can't see them recommended like this without adding this important asterisk. My open letter to them from 2015, with audio evidence: https://www.damninteresting.com/a-special-note-to-the-writers-at-the-dollop/ https://www.damninteresting.com/a-special-note-to-the-writer... Sorry for the bummer. MBMBaM is great though.

Kye 8y ago
It looks like their defense is that they make it clear they're reading what someone else wrote and making jokes. That wasn't clear, but I do understand where they're coming from. I listen for the jokes, not the history. They should be more upfront about their sources. It's similar to MBMBaM reading Yahoo Answers questions word for word while being silly about it. Except they do make the source clear. I do agree with them that it fits under fair use since it usually protects parody and commentary. They list all their sources now, so it's moot. I was much more moved by hearing that Lore basically reads off wikis. They don't add anything. That's why I switched to Myths and Legends.
- DamnInteresting 8y ago
  Well, if they had been reading one single article they found online, and just reading it aloud and making jokes about it, I might accept (though still be annoyed by) the "oops we forgot to attribute" defense. But if you look at what The Dollop actually did, they took 5-6 paragraphs from one article, 7-8 paragraphs from another article, a few solitary paragraphs from others, and just glued it all together and never said a word about where the text came from. Cribbing segments from various places like that, and "forgetting" to attribute, that is classic, flagrant plagiarism. Like you say, MBMBaM credits their source. They're also using 1-2 sentences from a public forum, not a dozen paragraphs from a competing podcast.
  - Kye 8y ago
    I don't now what The Dollop was like four years ago when this happened. What I do know is they list all their sources now, and I can't find any issue with the ratio of quoted material to original. You obviously put a lot of work into your project. It's not to my taste, but there's a place for a plain telling of history. It's unfortunate The Dollop's early missteps still affect you all these years later. I know what it's like to get hung up on something for long enough that everyone else thinks you should have moved on.

Kye 8y ago

It looks like their defense is that they make it clear they're reading what someone else wrote and making jokes. That wasn't clear, but I do understand where they're coming from. I listen for the jokes, not the history. They should be more upfront about their sources. It's similar to MBMBaM reading Yahoo Answers questions word for word while being silly about it. Except they do make the source clear. I do agree with them that it fits under fair use since it usually protects parody and commentary. They list all their sources now, so it's moot. I was much more moved by hearing that Lore basically reads off wikis. They don't add anything. That's why I switched to Myths and Legends.

DamnInteresting 8y ago
Well, if they had been reading one single article they found online, and just reading it aloud and making jokes about it, I might accept (though still be annoyed by) the "oops we forgot to attribute" defense. But if you look at what The Dollop actually did, they took 5-6 paragraphs from one article, 7-8 paragraphs from another article, a few solitary paragraphs from others, and just glued it all together and never said a word about where the text came from. Cribbing segments from various places like that, and "forgetting" to attribute, that is classic, flagrant plagiarism. Like you say, MBMBaM credits their source. They're also using 1-2 sentences from a public forum, not a dozen paragraphs from a competing podcast.
- Kye 8y ago
  I don't now what The Dollop was like four years ago when this happened. What I do know is they list all their sources now, and I can't find any issue with the ratio of quoted material to original. You obviously put a lot of work into your project. It's not to my taste, but there's a place for a plain telling of history. It's unfortunate The Dollop's early missteps still affect you all these years later. I know what it's like to get hung up on something for long enough that everyone else thinks you should have moved on.