>"It bothers me when ideas are presented without even a nod towards their history. I guess all writers are not obliged to do scholarship like journalists and ac

>"It bothers me when ideas are presented without even a nod towards their history. I guess all writers are not obliged to do scholarship like journalists and academics, but I wish the publication would point out that we are not reading journalism right now." I think it might be easier to just recognize that an awfully lot of the web isn't any kind of journalism. For instance, this is a reposted blog entry on a site full of "Top X" lists. The context is the disclaimer. ">Even if this guy developed this stuff all by himself, the fact that these are not globally original ideas should be acknowledged. Adams' book cheerfully points out that none of his stuff is really new apart from his personal anecdotes." Why? One is a 1300 word blog post, the other is a 257 page book with a major publisher. It would make for an arduous life if everyone was required to research and/or acknowledge the first recorded instance of every notion they have before sharing.