Just read an article on the Daily Mirror website, about a house that has been built “upside down”. Nothing earth-shattering in the story or what it was about, just your everyday magazine type feature.
The interesting part is the video report embedded in the page … taken from YouTube, it’s a recording of a BBC news report about a similar house, made by a third party and then uploaded.
Now, whilst the ideal is to embed video of the story in the page (see Andy Dickinson’s guide for newspaper videos) making it much more relevant to the words, actually using someone else’s “stolen” work, might just be pushing the point!
As to the branding … you can barely tell it was a BBC video, just the onscreen Astons giving the game away. Most people will see the Daily Mirror or YouTube branding, and probably not notice the BBC brand, and what’s worse, the Daily Mirror doesn’t even acknowledge the fact that it is a BBC video.
I suppose it’s the ideal for newspapers wanting video for their sites, take what they want and give backas little as possible.
