Reblogging Etiquette
By Marcy Kennedy (@MarcyKennedy)
Lately I’ve seen some bloggers wondering what the etiquette should be around reblogging (blogging something previously posted on another blog).
Before I get into the tips, let me say that I think re-blogging can be useful.
If you’re being reblogged, it’s an honor that someone found your content worthy of sharing with their followers, and it can extend your reach and bring people back to your site without the effort of guest posting. If you’re the reblogger, it can sometimes be a lifesaver in terms of getting content up on your site when your week has fallen to pieces. Plus, you’re providing your readers a service through vetting material for them and bringing them the best.
If done incorrectly, though, reblogging flirts with the line of plagiarism. You don’t want to flirt with plagiarism. She carries some really nasty diseases.
So how can we reblog in a professional, mutually beneficial way?
Ask First
Unless you know that the blogger doesn’t mind others reblogging their content, always ask first. (Kristen Lamb, for example, has an open policy on reblogging. If you want to reblog any of her material, all she asks is that you link back to her site and give her proper credit. You don’t need to get permission first.)
With all the social media options available, it’s not that hard to reach a blogger anymore. If I don’t respond to a comment on this blog right away, you can usually catch me on Twitter, Facebook, Google+, or through email. I know that we’ve entered an age of instant gratification, but patience is still a virtue. I try to answer all requests and emails as promptly as possible, but I have to prioritize my paying work and my life over social media so you might have a delay. If you don’t receive a response after a week, assume my spam file ate it and try again.
You should do more than just ask permission though. Not all reblogging is created equal. Find out the format the original blogger prefers. Are they alright with you copying the entire post onto your site? Or would they prefer you copy only the first couple of paragraphs with a link back to the full article?
Why does the format of the reblogging matter?
Comments – While I can’t speak for every blogger, I like to try to reply to comments on my post. If my post is appearing in full someplace else, chances are good I won’t be able to monitor the comments there as well as on my own site. With a guest post, you’re able to plan in advance. With a reblog, unlike with a regular guest post, I haven’t planned the extra social media time into my day to be able to check and reply to comments on two (or more) sites where my content is appearing.
Site Stats – If you’re a writer who’s blogging as part of building a platform, your site stats matter. They can influence whether you get an agent, whether people take you seriously, and (if you choose) whether you can eventually sell ad space on your site. The click-through rate for a post reblogged in full is much lower than for a partial repost with a link.
Common Courtesy – A good blog posts takes me 1-3 hours to write, depending on the complexity of the topic and the amount of research necessary. While I’m happy to share and to help, I’ve made significant sacrifices to produce my content, and I believe that still gives me the right to decide when and how it’s used.
My personal policy is that people can post the first couple of paragraphs and a link back to the full post without asking. If you want to post the full piece and don’t ask first, and I catch you at it, I will ask you to take my post off your site. If you wouldn’t borrow someone’s clothes or food or chainsaw without asking, why would it be okay to borrow their written content?
Credit the Original Source
If something goes viral and you find it four people down the chain, go back and reblog from the original site. It’s respectful to the owner of the material, and it’s kind to your reader who won’t want to go back through a chain of sites to find the original source to see if they have more excellent content to read.
What if you follow the chain to a dead end? Part of being a responsible writer is doing your research and exercising due diligence. Run a Google search, and see if you can locate the original poster on your own.
Add An Introduction/Conclusion
If you end up reblogging the content in full, add an original introduction or conclusion telling people not only where you found the content but also why you thought it was worthy of reblogging. What’s the point that resonated the most with you? What do you disagree with?
Have you tried reblogging? What other pieces of etiquette do you think should be observed? Do you think reblogging is a great new trend that can benefit everyone or no better than plagiarism?
Dec 19, 2012 @ 14:16:57
I haven’t tried re-blogging. In some instances it could be a nod to the original blogger – the content was good and, if done as you say, some additional exposure for the original source. In some instances, perhaps a blogger’s easy way out – posting for the sake of posting. Thanks for starting the discussion on this topic.
Dec 19, 2012 @ 20:23:02
You’re welcome 🙂
In my mind, a better way to do it would be to quote certain passages and use those as inspiration for your own original post. Jami Gold (who left a comment below) does this beautifully on her blog. Instead of copying someone else’s work, she selects a piece of it to respond to or expand on.
Dec 19, 2012 @ 15:44:16
I have been wondering about this lately. I keep seeing “I re-blogged this” in the comments on blog posts I’m reading and wondering what the writer thinks of that. I have to say, unless it is a few paragraphs with a link back like you suggested, I wouldn’t like it. It seems too much like copying to me. And if I really like a blog post I can share it on Twitter and facebook without having to re-blog it. As a reader, I would prefer to read original content on a site, unless it’s the occasional guest post. But if a blogger had a regular practice of using other people’s content, I would stop reading that blog. But that could just be me. 🙂
Dec 19, 2012 @ 20:21:19
Done selectively and with respect to the wishes of the original blogger, an occasional re-blog doesn’t bother me, especially if the re-blogger is trying to spread the word about a worthy cause (e.g., a petition for new drunk driving legislation).
Regular re-blogging in full feels like cheating to me. The blogger wants the benefit of having great content on their site without the work of producing it. That doesn’t sit well with me. If I saw someone regularly re-blogging, I’d end up following the original sources and not following the blog of the re-blogger.
Dec 19, 2012 @ 15:54:08
Great post! If it’s just 1-3 paragraphs, I don’t need people to get my permission, but a link is always required to refer back to my full post. Like you, I want comments on my site so I can respond to them.
The first time that happened, I freaked out a little. But then I saw the couple of paragraphs and a link to me and was like, “Oh, okay, that makes sense.” (That was Janice Hardy, and now we’re great real-life friends! 🙂 )
In my mind, a couple of paragraphs and a link isn’t much different from quoting someone’s post and linking to it. I quote other posts all the time and give them credit for inspiring my take on a situation.
But reblogging a whole post *is* plagiarism. That’s like printing a book under copyright and putting a new cover on it with their name. Sure, they might give credit, but they’re still taking far more than they’re giving in return. And copyright law differentiates fair use by how much is reused. A full post would never pass the fair use test.
Dec 19, 2012 @ 20:18:02
I’m really glad you agree 🙂 To tell the truth, I was a little hesitant about posting this. I know re-blogging is becoming more and more popular, and a lot of people see nothing wrong with it.
You brought up a great point about fair use. Even though we’re blogging, it still applies.
Dec 20, 2012 @ 04:36:05
By the way, my post going up in a few hours (Thursday morning) is inspired by you and this post. 🙂
Dec 19, 2012 @ 20:34:22
I’ve re-blogged once. I asked her first and she was more than happy because she had a new book out so it was more exposure.
I’d be okay with it as long as it’s credited but I take Jamie’s point above too.
Great post.
Dec 19, 2012 @ 20:41:53
Thanks for chiming in with the opposing view. It sounds like you re-blog the right way even without my two cents 🙂
Dec 19, 2012 @ 22:16:14
Thanks, Marcy. I’ve wondered about reblogging, and you’ve cleared this up for me. Happy holidays!
PS–I’m sending you an email.
Dec 19, 2012 @ 22:23:19
Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to you too 🙂
I’ll watch for it.
Dec 20, 2012 @ 00:15:59
I’m with Jami on this one. Only did it once, with the guy’s permission – we know each other pretty well online – and only because I thought the situation he had described was extraordinary. Intro, credits, backlink, everything. And it was outside my normal blog schedule. I think it’s a touch lazy to replace your own blogs with someone else’s. If someone does it to me I guess I don’t mind as long as there’s credit and back link. But I steer away from it. I think links from a mash are the way to go.
Dec 20, 2012 @ 01:08:15
I’ve done it once as well. August McLaughlin did an excellent post on Cinderella that fit the focus of my blog perfectly. But I waited a few months, asked August’s permission, and made it clear that the material appeared on her site first. It’s not something I would make a habit of, but once in a while, I think it can work well for both parties.
I personally love mash-ups. There’s no way I can keep up with everything worth reading on my own. Everyone benefits where mash-ups are concerned.
Dec 20, 2012 @ 04:43:39
This is a great point about how to reblog in a way that makes sense. Getting permission, allowing a period of exclusivity, and giving full credit–that works.
Dec 20, 2012 @ 00:27:18
I’ve seen a lot of people re-blogging, but I haven’t tried it myself. I’ve also seen a trend in re-blogging your own stuff.
I have done a mash-up where I refer my readers (few though they are) to other sites that I’ve enjoyed, but I’ve never re-posted that stuff.
Good tips. I may try this next year.
Patricia Rickrode
w/a Jansen Schmidt
Dec 20, 2012 @ 01:05:15
I think if you’re re-posting something you’ve already posted it’s more of a replay than a re-blog because you’re still using material you’ve written. For example, Lisa Hall-Wilson and I used to share a blog called Girls With Pens. I’m slowly moving material from GWP over to my personal blog (for the most part either updating it or expanding it into a series). That’s my material, and I don’t want it lost to internet oblivion just because GWP is no more.
Dec 20, 2012 @ 02:02:29
I don’t reblog other people’s stuff, but I’ve wondered about this. Most of The Passive Voice blog is reblogs, but he usually posts little snips and links to the rest. Thanks for the tips!
Dec 20, 2012 @ 16:38:25
You’re welcome 🙂
Dec 20, 2012 @ 03:03:37
I think I have been guilty of it. I just figured that it would post a paragraph or two, and then the link would drive anyone from my blog to the one I was impressed with. Is WordPress really that rotten that they’d repost an entire article on your blog with the click of a ‘repost’ button? That’s ridiculous.
But I do have one question about all of this. What is the difference between posting a paragraph or two, and then linking to their blog for the rest, and using a couple of your sentences, and then a link to drive them there? Or are you supposed to get permission for that, too?
Merry Christmas, Marcy! 🙂
Dec 20, 2012 @ 03:07:05
Oops…I meant to add that a paragraph or so would give your readers a ‘blurb’ to see if they like the writing style of the other blogger.
I just can’t imagine people actually get upset over that though. I’ve had two or three of mine reblogged by others…and I just thought it was cool that they liked them well enough to do that.
Dec 20, 2012 @ 16:43:43
If you’re on a wordpress.com site and you hit reblog, it will pull in the entire post from the other person’s site. (At least that was the case when last I checked. I’m on a WP.org so I can’t always keep up with WP.com changes.)
Personally, as long as the person only posts 1-3 paragraphs and links back to the rest of my post on my site, I don’t care how they do it (i.e., whether they post 1-3 paragraphs of my content with a link or write their own intro with a link). Either way is fine and I don’t expect them to get permission for that. That’s a lot like an extended mash-up.
But I think it’s more interesting for the reblogger’s readers if they tell them why they felt the post was valuable enough to feature it.
Dec 20, 2012 @ 04:24:32
Good post, Marcy. I’ve wondered about this “reblogging” trend, too. One concern I didn’t see addressed here is copyright. I believe “reblogging” violates the original blogger’s copyright. What am I missing?
Dec 20, 2012 @ 16:36:32
You’re not missing anything. Unless the original writer gives permission, reblogging does violate copyright. (Jami Gold talks about that a little in her related post today http://jamigold.com/2012/12/tis-the-season-to-be-chaotic-is-reblogging-the-answer/
Unfortunately, people tend to forget that copyright and fair use rules apply to online content as well as offline content.
Jul 03, 2013 @ 16:13:22
Thank you for writing this. I’m new to the blogging world (on WordPress) and recently hit the “reblog” button twice. It didn’t feel right, but I figured since it was built into the blogging platform it must be fine. “Maybe it’s just retweeting someone” I thought. I now feel very different and appreciate learning this now rather than later.
Thanks so much!
May 29, 2014 @ 15:52:27
I truly appreciate your article. I love browsing the internet and sharing the nuggets that I find. My intent is never to steal anyone’s work but to share it. I love the suggestions that you have offered in regards to how to reblog ethically. I will use these immediately. Thanks again!