I’m sure the original author of the article will be grateful for the link back.
(I deleted the link included in the original tweet – you’ll understand the reason why momentarily)
I followed the bread crumbs to the often criticized (by me, at least) 9to5Mac site to an article called “How to unlock an iPhone 4S in 12 easy steps” (again, no link intentional). I read the article, not understanding what Tabini was talking about until I got to the end and see “(via Gizmodo and Singularity)”.
I click on the Gizmodo link and see the same 12 steps and a link to the same Singularity site. Turns out, this is the site Tabini was referring to.
Both 9to5Mac and Gizmodo simply lifted the ”12 easy steps” from the other web site – almost verbatim.
Both of those sites will undoubtedly say, “We included a link to the original!” They did – after they took all the relevant content and made going to the original article completely unnecessary. Both sites also left it until the very end of the “article” to give credit where it was rightfully due.
This is a disturbing trend of a lot of sites - 9to5Mac and Gizmodo are just the latest sleazy examples. I’m sure both of those sites wouldn’t and aren’t happy when their content gets lifted by others – but are more than happy to do it themselves.