VRT on VMMa

We all know that youtube is a bless for newssites that want to illustrate their stories with some videos. Sometimes, the use of Youtube movies is not as logic as it may seem at first sight. See for example this article about yesterday's UEFA match between Anderlecht and Bordeaux. At the end of the article, one can click on a youtube movie. The strange thing is that HLN.be (which is a newssite of de media group VMMa that also has television channel VTM in its holding) is presenting the highlights of the match which was originally broadcasted by the public television VRT, in the offline world the competitor of VTM. So the voice over is in fact a VRT reporter, and this on a VMMa website. Why doesn't HLN.be link to the short highlighs of the match as it was used in the news on VTM? With the voice-over of the own VTM reporter? Is it a technical problem? If anyone knows why, please email me.

I also wonder if this use of embedded link to the highlights of VRT isn't a infringement of the copyright. In the offline world, every television station has to pay a certain amount to the competitive company which has bought the broadcasting rights of that game. And I assume HLN.be did not pay a fee for putting this link online.

The power of Youtube-news

Telling that Youtube movies are very popular is nothing new. Also I can loose myself for few hours in watching some stupid, funny, intelligent youtube-movies on the platform. Yet it is remarkable how fast a youtube-movie circulates around the web and how fast digital news media implement that same video on their website.

A Youtube movie which shows a presenter who throws up live during the show was presented today on at least 5 Flemish digital newspapers: Standaard Online, HLN.be, Nieuwsblad.be and GVA.be/HBVL.be

Wonder how this goes ... suppose that Nieuwsblad.be copies that video from an international newspaper or directly from Youtube ... a journalist from GVA.be sees that ... decides to copy the movie on their site ... journalist of Standaard.be sees the movie on both sites and thinks he/she are missing lots of potential online visitors and as a consequence decides to copy the movie. Hope this copy-behavior does not happen with important political/cultural/economical/environmental news ... in print, I'm sure it is not the case, but what with online news where copying is soooo easy? I don't know, maybe some online journalist can ease my mind.