Journalism

... ...

Profiles in Plagiarism: Journalism

________________________________________________________________________________

Nada Behziz

Red: Severe Risk

A journalism career with California papers such as the Bakersfield Californian and the Daily Republic; "A journalism degree from San Francisco State University . . . prestigious awards . . . several years worth of real-world experience and an internship at the respected Center for Investigative Reporting" (Wenner, G.)

Jayson Blair's Pacific Coast protégée!

Another journalist's career has come to a screeching halt as a result of plagiarism and fabrication in articles written for the Bakersfield Californian.

The Bakersfield Californian evidently overlooked an earlier indicator that their reporter Nada Behziz might have been guilty of "sloppy journalism" ("Newspaper Investigates Plagiarism Allegations"), as indeed Behziz admitted in her own version of explaining her apparent plagiarism and fabrication (Pugh, M.J. "DR Uncovers Plagiarism in Former Reporter's Work").

A letter from a reader, Dr. Girish Patel, should have alerted the popular newspaper that something fishy was going on with their newly hired reporter as early as April 2005 (Wenner, G. with S. Ruby and J. Burger. "Paper Overlooked Plagiarism Warning").

In a subsequent investigation of Behziz's reporting with the Bakersfield Californian, it was found that she had lifted text from sources such as the New York Times, and that she had fabricated and/or falsified/plagiarized quotations as if she had interviewed people when she actually had not conducted such interviews. The Bakersfield Californian reported that these incidents represented "a widespread pattern, not an isolated incident . . . the problems we discovered are significant, not trivial" (Wenner, G. "A California Reporter's Web of Deceit" Bakersfield Californian).

Yet another course in Journalism Ethics 101 for both reporters and newspaper administrators. Given the earlier indicators of Behziz's sub-par journalism, the claim by the executive editor of The Bakersfield Californian that the news of Behziz's plagiarism and fabrication "hit this newsroom like a lightning bolt" would seem to be somewhat inaccurate.

Perhaps Mike Jenner meant to say that "the fallout and resulting publicity from this case hit this newsroom like a lightning bolt".

Act surprised, now! Feign some editorial pain here so as to re-assure readers of your full intention to "take deliberate steps to protect [y]our readers' trust"! This will never happen again, of course. Of course . . .

References

End Profile JOUR-2005-NB/BC

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Jayson Blair

Red: Severe Risk

Scandalous reporting practices at the New York Times

He turned the New York Times upside down! And then Jayson Blair went out and wrote a book about it, Burning Down My Masters’ House: My Life at the New York Times.

In one of the most shocking journalistic scandals ever, a young African-American reporter with the New York Times was found to have gone on a four year "binge of fabrication and plagiarism while assigned to the highest-profile national stories of the moment" (Editor and Publisher, unsigned editorial).

Any satisfaction that editors at the Times might have secretly harbored at seeing the USA Today's reporting scandal caused by the plagiaristic antics of Jack Kelley in 2004 was forestalled in early 2003 as the Times editors found themselves on the hotseat for tolerating more than a fair share of anonymous source reporting, the "root of evil in journalism" according to founder of USA Today Al Neuharth. At the Times, this evil root seemed to be more like an underground forest.

The stories which Blair wrote up for the Times contained some of the most incredible instances of fabrication and plagiarism ever in the history of journalistic practice--tobacco fields which didn't exist, preposterious suggestions as to the identity of the Washington sniper. These sorts of fabulous concoctions were made not on the scene of the events as they unfolded--on the beat so to speak--but in the comfort of Blair's New York City apartment or office where he simply lifted the language and facts from other newspapers, or worse yet, entirely concocted important details for front-page articles of the New York Times !

Blair blamed substance abuse and bipolar disorder for his actions, and he also claimed to have been a "racial pawn". But there seems to have been serious problems with the "system" as well at the New York Times, the way in which reporters were allowed to write stories without editorial verification of sources and background information, and without editors heeding warnings/indications that there were serious problems with Blair's stories.

These problems resulted both in the Executive Editor Howell Raines and Managing Editor Gerald Boyd quitting their jobs with the Times, and newspapers across the nation closely scrutinized their reporting practices as the dust settled.

The public distrust of media outlets, as national newspaper publishers well know, is not something to take for granted. The Jayson Blair ordeal marked a new era in journalism as the profession sought to rein in anonymous source reporting and create a system of greater accountability in news reporting. As a result of Blairs misdeeds at the Times, j ournalistic events are now categorized as occurring either pre- or post-Jayson Blair.

In a post-Jayson Blair world, editors don't take for granted anymore that their correspondents have actually written their own stories--as opposed to plagiarizing, concocting, or otherwise fabricating them while on the journalism beat. And they're checking receipts more carefully to be sure that reporters have actually been in whatever locale for enough time to justify the dateline. More than just a few hours doesn't cut it anymore, as Rick Bragg found out from a drive-by-journalism incident in Apalachicola, Florida. It's a post-Jayson Blair world, and things have changed.

References

End Profile JOUR-2003-JB/NYTIMES

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Rick Bragg

Bestselling books All Over But the Shoutin' and Ava's Man; Pulitzer Prize recipient

In a post-Jayson Blair world of journalism, the aftershocks are still being felt as newsrooms grapple with the reality of the public's distrust of the media. In a panel interview with Greg Mitchell, Julia Wallace, John Temple, and Marvin Kalb, Terence Smith observed that public perceptions of media truthfulness were at an all time low as indicated by a USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll. According to this poll, 62 percent of respondents felt that the media is "often inaccurate" and only 36 percent felt that the news media gets the facts right.

Even a well-regarded Pulitzer Prize winning correspondent has felt the heat following the Jayson Blair ordeal at the New York Times.

Rick Bragg was suspended for two weeks following a reporting stint involving extensive use of an intern's work. J. Wes Yoder did most of the leg work and Bragg simply made a one day stop in Florida to get a dateline for the story before publication. Such extensive use of interns, stringers, and free lance writers work has been referred to as "drive by journalism". A well known, high profile correspondent makes a quick stop in the locale of an important story just to be able to say he had been there, but all of the footwork has already been done by the interns and "stringers" who rarely get a byline for their contributions. Gas and lunch money is about all they can count on beyond a pittance of remuneration from their drive by superiors.

Aggressively defending his jobbing out of the reporting to Yoder, Rick Bragg didn't go down quietly. Rather, he insisted that what he had done was par for the course, common practice and routine among journalists. As Greg Mitchell observed, "I think one of the most shocking revelations in the story was that Bragg said this was routine for him, he claimed it's routine for many people at The New York Times, and it's routine in the industry."

Other reporters backed up Bragg's assertions. For example, Times freelancer Lisa Suhay thought Bragg was "being punished for what I as a freelancer, have seen in four years as common practice . . It was simply understood that I got paid to be invisible, a nonentity" (Howard Kurtz in the Washington Post).

Bragg's aggressive defense, particularly his trenchant observation that the Times fostered a "poisonous atmosphere" for news reporting, cut deeply after the wounds already inflicted by plagiarism and fabrication á la Jayson Blair. Gregg Mitchell discussed the profound "ripple effect" in newsrooms across the US and the tightening up of journalistic standards. Editors everywhere warned their staff, "It can happen here" and "trust, but verify."

Jack Shafer placed more of the blame directly on Bragg, not accepting the Pulitzer Prize winner's assertion that the "poisonous atmosphere" made him do it. For Shafer, it was more of an "elemental sense of intellectual dishonesty" which reveals the deceitful nature of drive-by-journalism. Claiming to have been in Apalachicola, Florida to write up a detailed story on oyster fisherman just isn't an honest journalistic representation of things. The "everybody's doing it" argument just doesn't hold up to scrutiny in a post-Jayson Blair world anymore.

Bragg sumitted his resignation shortly after his two week suspension from the Times, leaving behind a scene of turmoil and ongoing re-examination of journalistic practice.

References

End Profile JOUR-2003-RB

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Lloyd Brown

A 42 year career in journalism with The Florida Times-Union

The Ledger reported on January 24, 2005, that Lloyd Brown had resigned his $80,000 per year speechwriter post with Florida Governor Jeb Bush after damaging allegations of plagiarism and pornography-addiction were publicized by a former co-worker.

Apparently, after 42 years with The Florida Times-Union, Brown was discovered to have lifted editorial content for re-use in his own work for the Times-Union. Coupled with the publicized pornography-addiction allegations, the fact that Brown had left the Times-Union after several incidents of plagiarism represented a potential threat to the public image of his new boss.

So rather than stay on as a speechwriter with Governor Bush, Brown submitted his resignation("A Speechwriter's Exit Speech").

References

End Profile JOUR-2005-LB

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Fox Butterfield

Career journalism

When a bureau chief for The New York Times got caught for plagiarizing in a story about another plagiarist who got caught plagiarizing, he got sacked--for a week anyhow. This was the pre-Jayson Blair era in journalism.

For the New York Times, and for many other journalistic enterprises, time is now reckoned on the pre-J.B. and post-J.B calendar. Journalists today are much more aware of the need for journalistic integrity thanks to that salacious episode in journalistic wrongdoing which disgraced the Times back in 2002-03. Being more aware doesn't always mean though that such integrity will happen automatically after that.

Fox Butterfield lifted around 5-6 paragraphs of the story in the Boston Globe by Anthony Flint and Muriel Cohen ("BU dean used the words of another; Source not given during speech"). Flint and Cohen were breaking the story in the Globe on the unacknowledged derivation in a commencement address by H. Joachim Maitre, Boston University's Dean of the College of Communication.

Butterfield's lifting wasn't entirely word-for-word as he had switched things around a bit and employed some skillful synonym substitution and minimal paraphrase. This bit of plagiarism in a story about plagiarism got Butterfield suspended for only a week, and the New York Times happily kept him on.

Remember, this was the pre-Jayson Blair era.

In the post-J.B. world of journalism, correspondents and bureau chiefs are likely to be suspended for much longer. Witness the case of Jonathan P. Decker, suspended for 2 years from contributing to The Christian Science Monitor for a similar infraction--even a paragraph less at 4 total compared to Butterfield's 5-6!

In a post-J.B. world and the broader "War on Plagiarism", pre-emptive strikes are being effectively employed to counter the threat of textual terror.


References

End Profile JOUR-1991-FB

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Ann Coulter

Yellow: Elevated Risk

Right wing commentary/punditry

Hmmmm. . . where to put this one? Politics? Non-fiction? Journalism?

We'll write up these allegations against Ann Coulter on the journalism page given that the plagiarism accusations included her syndicated columns as well as her Godless book.

Credit the bloggers once again for calling attention to possible instances of plagiarism/fabrication in the media. Salacious allegations of plagiarism against "Rush Limbaugh in a mini-skirt" (as Coulter has been referred to) had been circulating for several months before a New York Post article on "Copycatty Coulter Pilfers Prose: Pro".

As Philip Recchia reports in that bastion of journalistic integrity, the New York Post, chunks of text in Coulter's articles/book seem to have been lifted from sources including previously published newspaper articles. The matching snippets of text were found using the standard cheat detection software employed by Turnitin.com to catch student plagiarists, and, indeed, Turnitin CEO John Barrie described Coulter's alleged copying as "textbook plagiarism".

Tabloid and blogosphere origins of these allegations aside, coming from John Barrie himself, the allegations of "textbook plagiarism" would seem to be rather serious at first glance. As Barrie notes in his consultation with the NYPost, there are "misleading" citations "used purely to try and give the book a higher level of credibility-as if it's an academic work. But her sloppiness in failing to properly attribute many other passages strips it of nearly all its academic merits."

In defense of Coulter, it has been interesting to note that both her critics and her syndicate (Universal Press) have concluded that the allegations are not quite as serious as the mortal enemies of the "leggy blonde pundit" (Recchia, P. "Copycatty Coulter Pilfers Prose: Pro") might have wished. For example, Aaron Barlow, who describes himself as a "certified leftist", writes that Coulter's plagiary seems to be of the sort that

can happen (almost) by accident--and certainly through carelessness. That doesn't excuse it, but it should be seen in a different light . . . The plagiarism of Ann Coulter strikes me as the result of sloppiness and inattention . . . The passages she plagiarized all seem to be plebian . . . What happened to her is probably what happened to Ambrose and Goodwin. All three likely did what I do (or had underlings do it for them), but sufficient care was not taken to keep the copied prose from original writings . . . The failure is not so much one of honesty but of care (Barlow, A. "One Flew East: Levels of Plagiarism").

While Barlow and many others would certainly love to see "Rush Limbaugh in a mini-skirt" exposed for a career-ending plagiarism gaffe, "There are plenty of other reasons for that [destroying her career]" (Barlow, A. "One Flew East: Levels of Plagiarism").

After investigating the alleged plagiary by Coulter ("Syndicate Will Look Into Alleged Coulter Plagiarism On Its Own--And Possibly With Electronic Tool" Editor and Publisher), the Universal Press Syndicate dismissed the charges and released a statement in support of their best-selling author/commentator: "There are only so many ways you can rewrite a fact and minimal matching text is not plagiarism" ("Syndicator Dismisses Coulter Plagiarism Charges." AP article carried by Fox News)

Human Events' Lisa De Pasquale also came to Coulter's defense in "Debunking the Coulter Plagiarism Charges" (July 10, 2006). To De Pasquale, the NYPost article comprised recycled content from "nut websites", and she downplayed the significance of "plagiarism expert" John Barrie's "textbook plagiarism" allegations. De Pasquale notes quite correctly that the NYPost's Philip Recchia "gave no examples of passages that were plagiarized by Ann Coulter so the reader could compare them." It seems that iParidigms/Turnitin.com is unwilling to just hand over the originality report which they compiled on Coulter's book and syndicated columns, a stance which De Pasquale sees as "suspicious".

However, it would seem that a proprietary company specializing in plagiarism detection is not obligated to provide a copy of an "originality report" to any entity other than the entity which paid iParidigms to create that report, the NYPost in this case. Had the NYPost chosen to print portions of this report, this would have greatly added to the substance of the plagiarism allegations against Coulter. John Barrie is certainly no lightweight when it comes to plagiarism detection, and De Pasquale's casual dismissal of Barrie, as exemplified in the quotation marks around "plagiarism expert" (dual use technology here for a quote and seemingly as a tool to cast doubt on Barrie's claims to expertise), are clever attempts at diversion. A smokescreen.

Threat Level Analysis for this case subject to revision depending upon further developments, further study if and when aforesaid passages become available for inquisitive critics of Coulter's composing strategies . . .

References

End Profile JOUR-2006-AC

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Jonathan P. Decker

Teaching broadcast news courses at Howard University; Regular contributor/consultant to PBS broadcast This Week in Business

As reported by Brett Arends of The Boston Herald, an instance of online cut-n-paste has resulted in a two year ban for veteran journalist/professor/consultant Jonathan P. Decker from contributing to The Christian Science Monitor.

The article in question, "Can mutual funds that hedge give you an edge?", was published in the April 18 (2005) edition of the Monitor. Shortly after publication, it was discovered that there were similarities to an article published in the financial journal TheStreet.com by Gregg Greenberg.

Apparently, Decker admitted having cut-n-pasted from Greenberg's article, and the editors of the Monitor felt the journalistic infraction serious enough to institute the two year ban on the veteran journalist and professor.

Decker's students speak very highly of him, having nothing but praise for the vast experience which "help[s] to mold tomorrow's future journalist." He has interviewed a number of luminaries and historical figures, and he is "the only full time White House Press Corp member that is also a tenured journalism professor"(M. Holmes).

Four lifted paragraphs was evidently all it took to cast a shadow on an otherwise impeccable journalistic pedigree.

References

End Profile JOUR-2005-JPD

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Stephen H. Dunphy

Yellow: Elevated Risk

Veteran reporting with the Times

Reading the executive editor's account of the Stephen H. Dunphy case should be a reminder for all journalists to avoid the "careless shortcuts" and "unintentional" plagiarism which resulted in yet another journalistic scandal and forced resignation.

Michael R. Fancher, Seattle Times executive editor, fairly and compassionately represents the different aspects of this case.

It was a perceptive reader who noticed the seven paragraphs lifted from the Journal of Commerce by Dunphy in a 1997 "cut-and-paste job with no attempt to try to camouflage the material." Another instance of language lifting had occurred in 2000 for which Dunphy had been reprimanded, and in a letter to Barry Lopez, from whose book he had plagiarized, he wrote

I am embarrassed, mortified and committed a serious breach of journalistic standards, especially embarrassing for a journalist like myself with more than 35 years in the business.

In 2004, four years after the 2000 case, the 1997 plagiarism incident came into play, and Dunphy's journalistic record was re-evaluated due to concerns that there might be more unacknowledged derivation in his reporting.

As part of this re-evaluation, powerful new technology was used to search online databases to see if phrases used by Dunphy might have been textually appropriated in the all too familiar patterns of borrowing which have characterized other notable incidents of journalistic wrongdoing.

After this search, several stories did raise further questions, and it was agreed that Dunphy should resign after 37 years with the Seattle Times. Dunphy agreed that he alone was accountable for his unattributed language lifting, taking full responsibility for his actions and also lamenting that he should not have taken on so many assignments: "I find that I got into trouble when I tried to do more than just a column . . . But that, as I have said, is by way of explanation not an excuse."

The serious nature of any plagiarism accusation comes into focus as Fancher concludes his report with a paragraph from the concerned reader who wished "to remain anonmous" and did not "want to be known as the person who hurt Mr. Dunphy, his career, and his family. It makes me sad to think that by reporting this I could ruin a man's career and his ability to support his family. The reason I did it is that it would not be fair to the public to not report it. I hope you understand my position."

To this last statement, Fancher responds in the affirmative, "We do. [understand]"

For journalists who may have committed similar journalistic plagiary, unintentional or otherwise, it must be quite un-nerving to realize that an editorial investigation could be conducted using search engine technology to check stories written as far back as the mid-1990s! And yet, as more high-profile cases of plagiarism are discovered, this is bound to become more and more common.

Who knows? Perhaps reporters in the near future will be required to submit their stories and columns for an "originality check" much like college students today are required by many professors to upload their papers to Turnitin.com.


References

End Profile JOUR-2004-SHD/SEATTLE-TIMES

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Steve Erlanger

Blue: Guarded Risk

Career in journalism and news reporting

After an "Editor's Note" in the New York Times admitted the citational faux pas of Jerusalem bureau chief Steve Erlanger, the "P-word" was avoided in favor of more delicate phraseology.

In an article about Israeli film director Amos Gitai, Erlanger certainly did not plagiarize. He did not intend to lift "two paragraphs . . . that were virtually identical to a passage in an article by Michael Z. Wise in the August issue of Travel + Leisure magazine."

Erlanger "inadvertently mingled" parts of the Travel and Leisure article with "his own notes from an interview with Mr. Gitai, and then used some of them in the Times article without attribution." As the "Editor's Note" concludes, "The material from the magazine should have been credited to it [the Travel and Leisure article by Michael Z. Wise]."

Blogs such as "Mediacrity" , "Regret the Error" , and "Israpundit" quickly picked up on this "Case of 'Accidental' Plagiarism". At Mediacrity, Erlanger's inadvertent mingling was likened to shoplifting:

. . . how many times have you walked into Wal-Mart with a shopping bag from another store and "inadvertently mingled" stuff that you pick off the shelves? I mean, it's an "accident," right? Yet those meanie store detectives nab you in the parking lot and toss you in jail . . . Looks like thievery is OK . . . as evidenced by his being caught with his hand in the till and the Times accepting his "dog ate my homework" excuse("A Case of 'Accidental' Plagiarism").

Regrettheerror.com also blogged about Erlanger's inadvertent mingling, questioning whether the Times had conducted a thorough enough investigation:

Obviously, the Times accepts Erlanger's explanation of what happened, and therefore likely chose to spare him any embarrassment. Perhaps this was just a simple, one-time lapse. But the question is, how does the Times know that for sure? Did they examine a selection of his previous work? [as has happened with many a recent journalist-plagiarist] Did they review his notes? [hopefully not a fabricated interview á la Jayson Blair] If more of an investigation was done, the Times should help its cause by offering details ("Plagiarism at the NY Times").

How many times have we now heard the "My computer made me do it" excuse? How many other journalists have been transformed into unknowing cryptomnesiacs by their computers? The ease of click-and-point, cut-n-paste seems to have afflicted many computer users with a new form of cryptomnesia, a form of unintentional derivation whereby those afflicted forget that they have inadvertently mingled text cut-n-pasted from the Internet.


References

End Profile JOUR-2005-SE

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Catherine Fitzpatrick

Fashion reporting; Also known for firsthand reporting on the 9/11 attacks of 2001

In "The Bikini Bungle" and also in "Pressroom Confidential", Peter Robertson analyzes the "attribution problems" of Milwaukee Sentinel fashion reporter Catherine Fitzpatrick, "one of the biggest scandals in the Journal Sentinal's eight year history."

The Sentinal's plagiarism scandal began with an article by Catherine Fitzpatrick about the history of the bikini, in which Fitzpatrick decided to use content appropriated from different versions of a story which have circulated on the Internet for many years now, including hardcore porn sites. Upon investigation, the Sentinel editors found further "attribution problems" in as many as 6 articles. Concurrently, the editors of the Milwaukee Magazine also investigated Fitzpatrick's record, and their investigation discovered "attribution problems" as well.

Instead of taking a firm stance, the editors of The Sentinel soft-pedalled with Fitzpatrick, issuing a guarded "Editor's Note" which acknowledged the dubious provenance of Fitzpatrick's bikini article. Then, after their plagiarist-in-residence hired a lawyer, the Sentinel tried to buy off Fitzpatrick with a confidential settlement in exchange for her "hushed resignation". "In effect, they bought her silence and departure" according to Robertson.

As Robertson points out, The Sentinel never appeared to come clean about the Fitzpatrick affair. Even in yet another "Correction" blurb, the P-word was never mentioned, and Fitzpatrick went on to obtain a teaching position from Mount Mary College, although her contract was not renewed once college officials learned the extent of the plagiarism allegations against their new hire.

In "Pressroom Confidential", Robertson contrasts the relative positions of two journalists, one a plagiarist (Fitzpatrick) and the other a felon (Jamaal Abdul-Alim). Abdul-Alim was open about being a convicted felon, while Fitzpatrick apparently never acknowledged wrongdoing. In the end, Roberton's contacts were reported as being more willing to (re-) hire a convicted felon than an unrepentant plagiarist!

References

End Profile JOUR-2003-CF/MWJS

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Robin Gregg

Blue: Guarded Risk

Freelancing

The tabloid newspaper The New York Post discovered that an occasional freelance author, Robin Gregg, had appropriated material from The National Enquirer in writing up an article about a Wal-Mart marketing decision. This case seems to have been a relatively minor ripple compared to the fallout at the New York Times after the Jayson Blair case. Yet this bit of language lifting seems to have spelled the end of Gregg's freelancing stints with the Post. "We were deceived by Mr. Gregg, and he will never contribute to the Post again" affirmed the Post's Editor-in-Chief.

References

End Profile JOUR-2003-RG/NYPOST

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Edward Guthmann

Yellow: Elevated Risk

Journalistic reporting with the San Francisco Chronicle

A November 2005 series by the San Francisco Chronicle on Golden Gate Bridge suicides was tainted by apparent plagiarism in the very first article.

"Lethal Beauty: The Allure" by the Chronicle's Edward Guthmann borrowed quotations and language from an article previously published in the New Yorker in 2003--"Jumpers" by Tad Friend was evidently textually mined for facts and info in the preparation of the first article in the seven part Chronicle series.

Vidiot, the blogger at telescreen.org who discovered this bit of plagiarism wrote

Last week, I discovered some plagiarism at the San Francisco Chronicle [in]. . . "Lethal Beauty: The Allure" by Edward Guthmann . . . the first part of a seven-part series about Golden Gate Bridge suicides and the debate over the addition of a suicide barrier to the bridge . . . Something seemed very familiar [to] "Jumpers", by Tad Friend [which] was published in the October 13, 2003 issue of the New Yorker . . . quotes were the same . . . I read the two stories side-by-side, with increasing disbelief . . . this is an issue of trust. As one of my print reporter friends put it, not attributing the quotes gives the reader the sense that the reporter is conversing with the subject himself . . . and when that trust is broken it hurts the journalism business (Vidiot, Telescreen.org Blogger who discovered the Guthmann plagiarism incident in "Plagiarism at the San Francisco Chronicle")

The first installment of a [San Francisco Chronicle] series of stories on Golden Gate Bridge suicides . . . contained material that had appeared in the Oct. 13, 2003, edition of the New Yorker magazine. The story should have attributed quotations . . . to the magazine. It also used language nearly identical to that of the magazine to describe the California Highway Patrol's decision to halt the official count of suicides at 997 and to describe the unofficial 1,000th death ("Editor's Note", San Francisco Chronicle)

Guthmann's explanation to the San Francisco Weekly was a fairly typical version of the poor note-taking excuse, similar to saying "My computer made me do it!" in this Postmodern Age of Cut-n-Paste:

During the months I worked on the piece, I gathered a huge amount of research and interview transcripts that I stored in computer files. At one point, I read about the 1,000th suicide in the New Yorker article and pasted two sentences in my text as a 'flag'--a reminder to myself to mention the fact. But when I went back to the piece, which may have been days later . . . I forgot those weren't my own words. I should have set them in boldface or larger type, or not moved them at all. Huge mistake . . . " (quoted in Palmquist, M. "A Bridge Too Far").

Huge mistake indeed in these days of citational fastidiousness!

After reporting Guthmann's explanations of how these unacknowledged quotations occurred, Mike Palmquist suggests that editorial decision-making might also have been partly to blame: "[I]t's worth considering whether the greater crime lay in the conception of a series that all but retraced the New Yorker's footsteps" ("A Bridge Too Far", San Francisco Weekly's "Dog Bites").

Poorly kept research notes, mysterious computer behavior, and editorial over-enthusiasm for an already well covered topic are the key components in this case of Golden Gate plagiary. Why didn't the editors just ask for reprint permission to begin with?


References

End Profile JOUR-2005-EG

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Molly Ivins

Trenchant political commentary in speeches and books such as Bushwhacked: Life in George Bush's America; "sharing heartening news with 'discouraged liberals' who live in 'red states' (W. Edelstein, "Molly Ivins said that?")

"[C]urious how plagiarism seems a minor thing when the plagiarist is an ideological soulmate" ruminated a member of a listserv for editorial writers. She had been following a discussion of syndicated political columnist Molly Ivins' most recent plagiarism gaffe--copying of content from a Washington Post story which incorrectly detailed President George W. Bush's Social Security plan.

The copying probably would have gone un-noticed if the Washington Post's figures had been accurate. But they weren't, and like other notable plagiarists who have gone before, Ivins fell into the trap of copying mistakes and errors which existed in the original text.

On the same listserv which discussed Ivins' copying from the Washington Post, reference was also made to other instances in which Ivin's derivative political commentary merely recycled content of other journalists, errors included--for example, an op-ed by Barry Schwartz in the New York Times.

Ivins' apparent lifting on more than a few occasions seems to have done scarcely more than raise a few eyebrows. Gene Weingarten devoted some Sunday space in the Washington Post to Ivin's re-use (without acknowledgement) of a phrase coined by Clive James to describe California Governator Arnold Schwarzenegger -- "a condom stuffed with walnuts" for James' original "a brown condom stuffed with walnuts" [emphasis added]. According to Weingarten's diligent research investigating the provenance of this condom-walnut combo, one must concede the possibility that Ivins produced the phrase independently. But as Clive James cautioned Weingarten, "It is also possible that a peasant llama farmer in the Andes independently thought of the Internet. We have no way of knowing! In fact, please print that so the llama farmer is not deprived of his credit" (G. Weingarten, "Below the Beltway").

After Ivins employed a mix of misquotations,as well as some acknowledged and some blatently un-acknowledged derivation from author Florence King's Southern Ladies and Gentlemen in a 1988 Mother Jones article on “Magnolias and Moonshine", King responded as follows:

My name is strewn through this article, but never where it counts. She credits me on minor observations, but when the subject is politics—her turf—she plagiarizes me.

Ivins admitted the plagiarism in a response to King:

Dear Ms. King,

You are quite right . . .

I owe you an apology and I hereby tender it. I am deeply ashamed. I regret not giving you credit, and devoutly wish the matter had been brought to my attention earlier so it might have been corrected in subsequent editions and the paperback edition of the book.

. . . I realize this does not excuse my lifting lines of yours without credit, but I did want you to know.

As for the rest of your observations about me and my work in your Author Author! column, boy you really are a mean b——, aren’t you?

Sincerely,
Molly Ivins, plagiarist

King wrote back with some well-formulated generalizations with regard to writing and the use of words:

First, the Washington Post, in breaking this story, referred to your “side” and my “side.” How can there be a “side” in this when everyone involved is either a writer or an editor? All of us, by definition, are on the same side—the word side. Every word I write is a piece of my heart, and I presume you feel the same way[a quite generous presumption, particularly considering Ivins' continuation of her characteristic composing strategies].

Thanks to skillful use of synonym substitution and minimal paraphrase, Ivins' misquotation and plagiarism of Florence King's text, her lifting of the "condom stuffed with walnuts" phrase from Clive James, and her occasional recycling of journalistic content for (incorrect) re-use in her own syndicated political columns probably would not have been flagged by standard plagiarism detection software had such been employed somewhere along the line in the journalistic process (i.e. this wasn't the "Golden Girl" equivalent of the USA Today's "Golden Boy"). However, Ivins' un-wieldy liftings over the years have not gone un-noticed within the journalism communities as indicated by editorial listserv discussions and jabs from fellow columnists concerned about protecting their identity and reputation as honest, ethical, scrupulous, fair, balanced . . . and accurate practioners of professional wordsmithery.

References

End Profile JOUR-2005-MI

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Peter Kadzis

Years of successful work as a journalist with news outlets such as the Boston Globe, Providence Journal, New York Daily News, Money, Forbes, Boston Business Journal, and most recently as the Editor of the Boston Phoenix; Has also authored a book on the American Civil War, Blood.

The case of Peter Kadzis and his plagiarism of several articles written for the Boston Globe back in the 1980s would seem to represent an instance where a young writer-journalist made a serious mistake, learned from that mistake, and recovered to move ahead with a very successful journalism career.

Kadzis eventually became the Editor of the Boston Phoenix, and said of his unacknowledged derivation, "It was a shameful and reckless act, and I've worked hard to put it behind me."

Like Nina Totenberg, Kadzis learned early on the importance of avoiding the plagiaristic behavior which has tainted the public image of newpapers and media outlets today, marking the end of the road for many an unscrupulous and/or careless journalist.

References

End Profile JOUR-1986-PK

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Jack Kelley

Red: Severe Risk

High profile reporting in dangerous environments

As the next major journalism scandal to hit the headlines following the Jayson Blair episode at the New York Times, Jack Kelley’s forced resignation from USA Today stunned reporters and readers alike. USA Today’s founder, Al Neuharth, reacted with a stoical “I told you so” in reference to the lax editorial policy which permitted certain correspondents the freedom to write articles based on unidentified sources. A flurry of articles in USA Today and other major US news outlets reported on major journalistic infractions reaching as far back as 1991 in the career of the USA Today's "Golden Boy".

After an internal investigation of their star reporter following an anonymous tip, USA Today discovered serious discrepancies in Kelley’s version of how he wrote his stories and reported the news. Possible plagiarism and fabrication were among the chief concerns which prompted editors to launch an internal investigation of his reporting.

This internal investigation subsequently uncovered an attempted hoax by Kelley in response to an editorial fact check of an earlier article. Upon being confronted with evidence of the hoax, Kelley abruptly resigned from his post, communicating only through legal intermediaries.

Following these developments, USA Today launched an independent investigation of all stories written during Kelley’s tenure with the newspaper, and the results of this investigation were highly publicized in an effort to maintain a semblance of journalistic integrity at the USA's first truly national newspaper.

With a history of reporting for USA Today since its founding by Al Neuharth in the 1980s, Jack Kelley’s reporting spanned a wide range of global events including Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait, the war on terrorism, the Kosovo turmoil, and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He toured the globe with Neuharth in a “Jetcapade” interview of world leaders and co-authored two books with the newspaper’s founder.

As a foreign correspondent, Kelley’s insightful reporting and stories of lucky hair’s breadth scrapes with death earned him admiration and journalistic privilege. From this privileged position he was given leeway to report from anonymous sources. But according to Neuharth, such leeway represents “the root of evil in journalism.” Apparently, Neuharth’s preaching against this evil—for over twenty years, he claims— was not enough to avert Kelley from his self destructive course.

In the former Yugoslavia, from his privileged position of anonymous source reporting, Kelley wrote of a three ring binder he had seen and described as “the strongest and most direct evidence linking the government of President Slobodan Milosevic to ‘ethnic cleansing’ in Kosovo.” The Yugoslav army binder purportedly contained orders to “cleanse” a village in Kosovo. In another journalistic scoop Kelley reported on finding a Serbian girl’s diary containing, he said, “green and black drawings of Serbian soldiers” and “poems, songs and stories about the Serbian effort.”

Kelley compared this girl and her diary to the WWII era diary of Anne Frank. Scrapes with the Russian mafia, rides with gun-toting Israeli settlers, battlefield reporting from the frontlines in Chechnya—these were the kinds of experiences which led to Kelley’s nomination for a Pulitzer Prize in 2002 for his coverage related to America’s “War on Terror.”

Yet these experiences—nearly unbelievable in their variety and good fortune—aroused the suspicion of envious colleagues. They questioned how one reporter could make so many scoops, come up with such “pithy” quotes, and survive so many close scrapes with death. So they began keeping files on their “Golden Boy” colleague. They analyzed Kelley’s articles beginning in the mid-1990s and looked for similarities, inconsistencies and other signs of fabricated or plagiarized reporting.

An anonymous letter of June 26, 2003, to Executive Editor Brian Gallagher accused Kelley of embellishing and using fake quotations that did not “sound like the way people talk.” The letter further questioned Kelley’s being able to arrive “in virtually any foreign land, not speak a word of the language, and within an hour or two come up with pithy quotes.”

Following this letter, an internal probe of Kelley was launched which included the hiring of private investigators. In the process of this internal investigation, during a routine fact check of a previously written article, USA Today editors were confronted with an attempted hoax by Kelley. He could not corroborate facts pertaining to the July 1999 article from Yugoslavia on the alleged “three-ring notebook” containing the ethnic cleansing directive, and so, he chose another path. A path of deception and denial.

When asked to verify the details of this July 1999 article, including how he managed to come across the Yugoslav Army notebook with the supposed ethnic cleansing directive, Kelley gave conflicting accounts. One account involved two translators, while another involved only one. And quite unwisely, he arranged for a poseur-translator to verify the report. In fact, the translator was not who she claimed to be—and Kelley knew this. She was another woman Kelley had hired years before while on assignment in Russia.

The private investigators assigned to Kelley’s case found this out by comparing telephone recordings. A voice match between the supposed Yugoslav translator and the Russian translator from a previous assignment meant that the game was up for Kelley. When confronted with evidence of the attempted deception, Kelley claimed he had panicked and used poor judgment. In a subsequent interview with the Washington Post, Kelley admitted that he had hired a Russian translator named Luda to pose as a Serbian translator named Danielja.

While the investigation into Kelley’s alleged falsifications and journalistic misdeeds remained ongoing, specific allegations of plagiarism surfaced after comparisons of two stories, one written for USA Today by Kelley and published on September 2, 1998, and the other written for the Washington Post by Kevin Sullivan and published on July 9, 1998. Passages from these stories were similar enough to arouse suspicion, particularly since the reports were made from the same remote Pakistan-Afghanistan border town of Darra Adam Khel.

USA Today printed side-by-side comparisons of extracts from the two articles and reported on the “similar wording” found in the two stories. Apparently, Kelley’s expense reports confirmed his presence in Darra Adam Khel, yet these reports were under review as part of the independent investigation. As Kelley’s lawyer put it, “It makes no sense to me: to go halfway around the world and then copy another reporter’s story.” Yet the similar wording suggests that at the very least Kelley had read and been influenced by Sullivan’s earlier article from the same town. In a worst case scenario, Kelley plagiarized portions of Sullivan’s article and fabricated the rest without ever having been to Darra Adam Khel.

At first glance, the similarities between the two articles were enough to arouse suspicion, prompting the editors of USA Today to issue a call for “readers, sources or employees” to contact the paper with any new information. They promised, “We’ll look into any story. We’ll work our way through this process.”

The description of the gunfire noise in the remote Pakistani town was one questionable similarity between the two articles. Both Kelley and Sullivan made reference to the town’s dogs, particularly their being unbothered by the constant gunfire. Sullivan wrote that “not even the dozing dogs flinched.” Kelly wrote, “The dogs didn’t even flinch.” There were several further closely parallel sentences in the two articles including a reference to the Darra gun market, descriptions of the kinds of firearms available in that market, as well as comments on U.S. made Stinger missiles provided to the Afghan Mujaheddin in their struggle against Soviet occupation of the 1980s.

The allegations of plagiarism and possible fabrication resulted in a preliminary internal investigation involving the editors of USA Today as well as private investigators. This internal review of Kelley’s reporting included fact-checking of previously submitted articles. With the heat on to provide verification of sources, Kelley opted for deceit and attempted to pass off a Russian translator named Luda as the Serbian translator Danielja. The hoax was discovered, Kelley was confronted, and this resulted in his forced resignation from his coveted post as a privileged foreign correspondent with USA Today as well as the resignation of USA Today top editor Karen Jurgenson and the retirement of managing editor Hal Ritter after publication of the final investigation results.

Did Kelley succumb to the temptations surrounding the use of anonymous sources? Was it the journalistic root of evil which eventually strangled the career of a star reporter? Apparently so, in an extremely unfortunate twist of fate for a veteran reporter. And for a coming-of-age newspaper. Once found out, the path of deception is not an easy one.

References

End Profile JOUR-1999-JK/USATODAY

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Glenn Mitchell

Reporting for the "Lifestyle" section of the Herald Sun

Claiming to be "Australia's biggest-selling daily newspaper", the Herald Sun was found in 2003 to be harboring a plagiarist. Glenn Mitchell, a frequent contributor to the "Lifestyle" section of the Herald Sun, cribbed two articles back in 2003 from the Minneapolis Star Tribune as Rick Shenkman reported ("Another Case of Plagiarism--This Time by a Journalist").

The lifted articles were two pieces written by Eric Black on the history of Iraq, "far more thoughtful than the usual fare" as Shenkman observed. Glenn Mitchell (or someone else at the Herald Sun) cut-n-pasted both of Black's articles, and when Black complained to the Herald Tribune, Deputy Editor John Tevorrow apologized and admitted the "clear case of plagiarism".

But Shenkman notes skeptically that Mitchell continues to write for the Herald Sun even after supposedly being "severely disciplined". Ethical reporting doesn't seem to be too high on the list of priorities for "Australia's biggest-selling daily newspaper" !

References

End Profile JOUR-2003-GM/Herald Sun

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Michael Olesker

Yellow: Elevated Risk

A lengthy career as a columnist with the Sun

Just shy of a 30 year writing gig with the Baltimore Sun, Michael Olesker found himself facing allegations of plagiarism made by Gadi Dechter, a reporter with the Baltimore City Paper.

"Mr. Dechter said he and a researcher had reviewed Mr. Olesker's columns during the past two years and found instances in which the columnist had apparently used the work of journalists at the New York times, The Washington Post and the Sun without attribution." In addition to charges of plagiarism, Olesker has allegedly reported on events which he did not attend as claimed by the staff of Maryland Governor Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. ("Columnist quits Sun over plagiarism charges" The Washington Times).

Olesker resigned shortly after these allegations surfaced, admitting "I made mistakes . . . I am sorry to say that in the course of doing those columns, I unintentionally screwed up a handful of paragraphs. I am embarrassed by my sloppiness" ("Columnist quits Sun over plagiarism charges" The Washington Times).

Yet another journalistic career brought to a painful end by a failure to follow standard practice when it comes to acknowledging sources and reporting--"drive by journalism" no longer allowed. Reporter must actually be on site in order to write.

So far, not a good start to 2006. Some New Year's Resolutions appear to be in order.

Editor to newsroom staff: "Uncross those fingers behind your back while repeating after me":

"Throughout the entire year of 2006, I will not plagiarize. I will not fabricate or engage in 'drive-by journalism'. I will not report on major news events as if I were on scene, when I was actually somewhere else. I will properly acknowledge the re-use of text/words, particularly articles which have appeared in the print runs of our competitors, so help me Author !"


References

End Profile JOUR-2006-MO

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Ken Parish Perkins

Yellow: Elevated Risk

A "nimble intellect", "insightful writing", and dedication to his work as a TV Critic with the Star-Telegram; known for mentoring and encouraging other members of the Star-Telegram 'family'

The popular TV Critic Ken Parish Perkins has resigned from The Fort Worth Star-Telegram after "an examination of his work revealed several instances of apparent plagiarism" (Jim Witt, Star-Telegram Executive Editor).

It was a *reader* who first reported the allegations of plagiarism, and a subsequent investigation by the paper would discover "a clear pattern to Star-Telegram editors that Perkins was violating our ethics policy on attribution of material that was not original" (David House, "'Star-Telegram' TV Critic Resigns After Plagiarism Inquiry").

In "Another Side of the Story", Eric Celeste maintains that the snitching *reader* "was an editor at the paper's regional competitor, The Dallas Morning News", and he faulted "the runaway train known as 'the process'" which ended up costing Parish his job with the Star-Telegram. Celeste believes that editors should have given Perkins a serious reprimand rather than forcing the resignation of a dedicated and respected African-American TV Critic, a departure which now leaves only three blacks nationally in TV Critic positions as Richard Prince observes ("Perkins' Departure Leaves 3 Blacks Nationally").

Across America newspapers have taken a much tougher stance against lapses in journalistic ethics, paricularly since the highly visible incidents of plagiarism and fabrication at The USA Today and The New York Times. New positions have been created under various headings such as "Standards Editor" or "Reader Advocate". New procedures have also been implemented to check out the sources and language of newspaper articles, either on a random basis or as standard practice.

At the Star-Telegram, Reader Advocate Dave House oversees the fact-checking procedures implemented in March 2004. These procedures involve "staff stories [being] . . . randomly selected at least once a month for verification of information, quotes, paraphrased comment and original reporting." House reports that an "accuracy questionnaire" is also used along with the iThenticate plagiarism detection technology, the Turnitin.com equivalent of cheat detection technology which generates an "originality report" after scanning the language of a text for potential matches with other text on the Internet or in the iThenticate database (David House, "'Star-Telegram' TV Critic Resigns After Plagiarism Inquiry").

Fits of *plagiarism paranoia* seem to be on the rise in a post-Jayson Blair world. This observation is not intended to suggest that the Star-Telegram's response to Perkins' alleged plagiary was such a case of paranoia. Rather, it might be seen as a general observation that newsrooms and the media are coming to realize that they can't--and won't--take the risk of losing their credibility with readers. And for journalists, this means that one reader's question about their work could place everything they've previously written under the microscope for a thorough cheat detection analysis.


References

End Profile JOUR-2005-KPP

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Ken Powers

Yellow: Elevated Risk

Sports Reportage

In another blow to the New York Times several years after the Jayson Blair episode, a local newspaper owned by the Times found that one of their sportswriters had been lifting language from Sports Illustrated and other sources.

Powers was terminated from the paper as an employee in spite of expressions of support. Because "the nature of the offense was just so severe" the management felt that no other options would suffice.

References

End Profile JOUR-2005-KP/Worcester Telegram and Gazette

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Gary Puleo

Green: Low Risk

Small time reportage with a local newspaper

Not all cases of journalistic plagiarism have such a happy ending. Gary Puleo, a reporter with the Times Herald, lost his job after lifted material was found in an article which reproduced portions of text verbatim from the Philadelphia Inquirer.

Puleo grieved his firing with the support of the Newspaper Guild of Greater Philadelphia, arguing that the Times Herald bore responsibility for adequately training its journalistic staff. Since he had not been properly trained in source attribution, he should not be fired for questionable attribution practices which many newspapers actually condone.

The arbitrator for Puleo's grievance found that editors with the Times Herald were lax in their editorial oversight, and that cut-n-paste journalism without acknowledgement was a regular occurance.

Puleo appeared to have plagiarized unintentionally, and he was reinstated as a Times Herald employee. His fellow workers welcomed him back joyfully, although the ordeal of losing his job and benefits has apparently taken its toll on his health.

References

End Profile JOUR-2003-GP

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Richmond Times-
Dispatch

The Richmond Times-Dispatch covers national and international news from Richmond, Virginia

An un-named college intern with the Richmond Times-Dispatch was accused of "visual plagiarism" in an editorial by Louise Seals ("Ethics Case: We Erred, and Now We Are Taking Action"). On the cover of the Times-Dispatch's August 22nd (2005) edition of MetroBusiness, a photo is featured which mimics, or rather, visually plagiarizes the cover of the December 22nd (2004) of Style.

After visiting a Richmond candy company, where she supposedly saw a copy of the Style Weekly magazine, the intern submitted a photo and an article which replicated the visual art and content from Style Weekly even down to the "Sweet Return" caption which accompanied the photo on the magazine cover. It was a different picture, but obviously derived from the Style Weekly candy factory feature.

Louise Seals writes, "We learned that the photographer had seen the Style photo while at the candy company, and was told of the similarity, but submitted the picture anyway as original work. That is visual plagiarism and that is why we have dismissed the photographer."

After this incident at the Times-Dispatch, the editorial staff had decided to supervise interns more closely and to include as part of their training ongoing discussions of journalism ethics.

A camera in hand, an innocent looking stack of candy, the seemingly appropriate stock-phrase "Sweet Return", and another journalist finds herself back at college and out of a job as an intern with the Richmond Times-Dispatch as a result of "visual plagiarism".

References

End Profile JOUR-2005-RTD

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Mike Riegel

Obvious writing talent, "shrewd, cynical and humorous way with words" (Rhonda Nelson, UCF English Dept.)

Being found out for plagiarism is not a good way to start a career in journalism! Described as a talented young writer with much potential, Mike Riegel was discovered to have lifted an article on the topic of cell phone directories from the Baltimore Sun. He made a few changes, including possibly fabricated quotations, and tried to pass off the article as his own.

Once this plagiarism/fabrication was discovered, Riegel lied about his quotation sources, for instance, claiming he had contacted a Pennsylvania congressman when he really hadn't. The Orlando Sentinel, where Riegel wrote a regular column on college life, also conducted a review of Riegel's work, finding the only possible irregularity to be a non-existent student who had been quoted in one of Riegel's columns.

Riegel has resigned from his positions with The Orlando Sentinal and the Central Florida Future, finally admitting to "one large mistake and perhaps several other smaller ones." Other journalists have plagiarized at the beginning of their careers, some seeming to turn things around and hang on within the profession (i.e. Nina Totenberg), others having to call it quits all together with their journalistic ambitions (i.e. Jayson Blair).

As one Future reader commented, "This incident will follow Riegel to every job interview he has . . . Riegel has wasted all the time and money he had put into earning a degree in journalism" (Sarah Clark). In Riegel's favor is the fact that this incident occurred while he was still a student. Hopefully, future employers will be able to look past this incident of plagiarism at Riegel's writing talent, and hopefully, Riegel will have committed himself to never making such "mistakes" again.

References

End Profile JOUR-2004-MR/CFF

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Tim Ryan

Yellow: Elevated Risk

Reporting with The Honolulu Star-Bulletin since 1984; Served as Hawaii correspondent for publications sch as People, US Magazine, Daily Variety ("Hawaii Film Office Blog")

Star-Bulletin entertainment writer Tim Ryan found himself out of a job after allegations of plagiarism were substantiated in articles written since 2001.

These articles "contained phrases or sentences that appeared elsewhere before being included, unattributed, in stories that ran in the Star-Bulletin" ("Honolulu Star-Bulletin Fires Veteran Reporter", The Hawaii Channel).

According to Malia Zimmerman, the investigations by the Star-Bulletin into Ryan's questionable journalism was instigated by "two reports in Wikipedia.org and Hawaii Reporter, which documented that Ryan seemed to have lifted large sections of national stories -- directly and without attribution -- for his local reports." As Zimmerman points out, Star-Bulletin editor Frank Bridgewater labels Ryan's plagiarism as mere lifting of "phrases and sentences" [in his letter to readers about the plagiarism], when in actuality he had borrowed "large portions" of 'his' stories from "Wikipedia . . . Yahoo News and TV.com" ("Honolulu Star-Bulletin Fires Veteran Reporter for Plagiarism After Investigation by Wikipedia.org and Hawaii Reporter").


Ryan's dismissal comes at the start of a new year, a dismal indicator of other journalistic infractions which will most certainly be discovered as the laundry truck makes its rounds for 2006 . . .

References

End Profile JOUR-2006-TR

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Dave Simpson

Orange: High Risk

A career in editorial cartoonmanship

Bob Englehart's editorial cartoon "When Does Life Begin?" featured a priest, a judge, and a teenager with different outlooks on a vitally important question. For the priest, life begins "At the moment of conception". For the judge, life begins "At birth". And for the teenager, life begins "When you get your driver's license". This was back in 1981 when the cartoon appeared in the Hartford Courant.

Now jump ahead nearly 25 years to 2005 when virtually the same cartoon appears under the name of Dave Simpson, editorial cartoonist with the Tulsa World (see cartoon image above). The characters are exactly the same except for superficial details. So are the words spoken by the priest, the judge, and the teenager.

Bob Englehart vented his anger over this case of cartoon theft with a jab on Editorialcartoonists.com, what would appear to be a reference to a previous incident of plagiarism by Simpson: "Having not learned his lesson in the late 1970s when he was busted for stealing Jeff MacNelly's cartoons, he has recently stolen one of mine" ("Plagiarism Rears Its Ugly Head in Two Cases").

Simpson proffered a very weak explanation for his lifting of Englehart's 1981 cartoon, claiming that "he found an unsigned copy of the cartoon in his creative files and mistakenly believed it was his own. He said he redrew the cartoon, which then was published in June 7 in the Tulsa World" ("Tulsa World Cartoonist Dismissed Over Plagiarism Allegations").

Simpson was dismissed from his post at the Tulsa World over this plagiarism incident, the Author asserting his supra-textual rights in this particular question of "When Does Life Begin?"



References

End Profile JOUR-2005-DS

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Tom Squitieri

High profile reporting with the USA Today in war zones from Panama to the Persian Gulf

What goes around comes around!

Tom Squitieri was one of the most vociferous critics of The USA Today's Jack Kelley and his dubious journalistic magic which seemingly enabled him to come up with great stories the moment he landed in country for international reporting gigs.

After Kelley's downfall and disgrace, journalistic standards were closely examined, and the USA Today created a special new position, the watchdog standards editor. In May 2005, one of the whistleblowers in the Jack Kelley affair found himself being investigated by this new standards editor, and the outcome was quite the surprise for Tom Squitieri.

He found himself in the same position as Kelley a few years earlier, and was forced to resign after 16 years with the national newspaper of the US. The language lifting was not nearly as serious as the fabrications and plagiarism in the Kelley case, but it was serious enough for the newspaper to demand Squitieri's resignation: "This is a clear violation of our sources and attribution policy, and when that happens, a reporter has to leave the paper" warned USA Today Editor Ken Paulson (H. Kurtz, "USA Today uncovers plagiarism by reporter").

The plagiarism committed by Squitieri had to do with his re-use of verbatim quotations from other newspapers without acknowledgement, for exampled a quote from the father of an American soldier killed in the Iraq war which had appeared in the Indianapolis Star. There were other instances of plagiarism discovered as well in additional stories which Squitieri had written (" 'USA Today' Reporter Resigns After Borrowing Quotes for Story").

Such recycling of textual content is dishonest since it implies that a reporter has actually obtained the quotations from firsthand sources himself unless otherwise indicated.

No doubt other journalists are going to be implicated in the years ahead by the new oversight of watchdog positions such as the USA Today's standards editor and similar posts in other news outlets. Such are the facts of life in a post-Jayson Blair era of journalism. Pre-emptive strikes and all other options are now on the table--before a plagiarist becomes dangerous enough to cause widespread textual mayhem and carnage again at the nation's top newspapers.

Journalists, your communications and every move are being monitored. You have lost many of the freedoms formerly enjoyed. You are now a prisoner of the new "Journalistic Standards Act". Against standards? Gasp . . . this one's gotta go. Check everything this guy's written and get 'im outta here . . .

References

End Profile JOUR-2005-TS

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Siddharth Srivastava

Free lance reporting

Regret the error.com analyzed the curious case of a New Delhi based writer who lifted an article from the British press for submission to US news outlets for consideration--and publication.

Siddharth Srivastava evidently thought no one would notice the plagiarism in his derivative article of December 1, 2004, which was published in both the San Francisco Chronicle and the International Herald Tribune.

The San Francisco Chronicle published a correction, noting that in Srivastava's article "When women kill for justice" much of the "material was taken verbatim, and without attribution, from an article written by Randeep Ramesh that appeared in The Guardian of London on Nov. 9, 2004." This published correction also noted that Srivastava's "work will no longer appear in The Chronicle."

This sort of international language lifting has happened before in different times and different contexts, from not only one geographical region to another, but also from one language to another in the case of inter-lingual language lifting. Plagiarists seem to feel somewhat more secure in borrowing/deriving material which is less likely to be discovered by readers.

References

End Profile JOUR-2004-SS/SFC-IHT

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

TBS

Newsreporting and television broadcasting

A case of plagiarism in the Japanese media has seriously damaged the credibility of Tokyo Broadcasting (TBS). This loss of face in Japan results from an as yet un-named sports division manager who lifted material from other newspapers for as many as 35 columns posted on the TBS website under the title of "Dugout."

At first, TBS tried to pass off the blame to a freelancer, and other news networks picked up this false story, including the Yomiuri Shimbun, from whom the anonymous sports manager had lifted content. Othe sources for the derivative newsreporting included the Mainichi Shimbun, the Asahi, and the Sankei Shimbun. The Yomiuri Shimbun responded to the plagiarism and falsified explanations by TBS on its editorial page, as David Jacobson reported at Japan Media Review.

As Jacobson observes, the Yomiuri Shimbun left themselves a bit of wriggle room by acknowledging the great temptations created by deadline pressures and Internet accessibility of the latest news stories.

The apology of TBS President Hiroshi Inoue was duly noted by the Yomiuri: "I'm ashamed of the deeds. I offer my sincere apologies to The Yomiuri Shimbun, The Mainichi Shimbun, and the Asahi Shimbun . . . It's a shame that the manager shifted the blame onto a freelancer, who was in a more vulnerable position. In our original investigation, the freelancer admitted plagiarizing the stories and we were troubled. I'm extremely sorry for that."

References

End Profile JOUR-2005-TBS

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________

Nina Totenberg

Green: Low Risk

Covering the Anita Hill sexual harassment case against Judge Clarence Thomas; has received a number of awards for her reporting (Long Island University George Polk Award, Sigma Delta Chi Award from the Society of Professional Journalists, and the Joan S. Barone Award--all for for excellence in journalism); appears regularly as a panelist on TV programs and was named as Broadcaster of the Year as well as receiving sundry other awards for related achievements

The plagiarism case involving Nina Totenberg in 1972 demonstrates a successful turnaround at the beginning of a journalist's career after losing a job over an incident of questionable source use.

Totenberg lost her position as a print journalist with the National Observer after appropriating several paragraphs from an article in The Washington Post.

In relation to that experience, she agrees that she deserved the consequences which followed and feels that young reporters are "entitled to one mistake" so long as they learn a lesson from the unpleasant results.

One can only speculate as to how her career might have gone had she not been confronted with such allegations early on as a young journalist. Clearly she made a determination to turn an unfortunate experience into a stepping stone, and a fantastic career history of dedicated journalism testifies to the benefits of ethical/honest reporting.

References

End Profile JOUR-1972-NT

... ...

________________________________________________________________________________