Plagiarism at British newspaper, the Independent

UPDATE Sept 16, 2011: Finally, plagiarist Johann Hari gets sent for journalism training.

UPDATE June 29, 2011: Media Guardian reports more allegations of plagiarism by Hari.

Johann Hari of the Independent in Britain has been caught plagiarizing.

Except he says it’s not plagiarism because a) none of his interviewees has complained, and b) he thinks it makes for better reading.

Uh, right.

Guardian silent on plagiarism question

It’s amazing how unresponsive some media organizations can become when they are called to account.

A case in point is a British website, guardian.co.uk, the online edition of the Guardian newspaper.

A few weeks ago, I noticed that a column by one of its media commentators, Rory O’Connor, sounded familiar. So I checked into it.

Sure enough, two passages in O’Connor’s column — one of them a very long paragraph of a hundred words — were virtually identical to a news release put out by Unesco a month earlier. If you’re curious, compare the extracts at the end of this post.

I raised the matter in the comments section of O’Connor’s blog, giving my name, as I always do, and my email address. My comment was duly published but there was never a response to my request for an explanation.

I then emailed the editor of the Guardian’s “Comment is Free” section, in which O’Connor’s column had appeared. Again, no response.

Finally I emailed the Guardian’s “readers’ editor” on May 3, almost three weeks ago. I think that’s plenty of time for a response, and I’ve received none.

As a long-time journalist and editor, I find it astounding that a) the Guardian seems unconcerned about what looks like plagiarism, something most journalists regard as a cardinal sin, and b) that it doesn’t even respond to a reader’s legitimate question in a timely manner.

I’d like to close with two points:

  1. If a writer wants to use passages from a news release or anywhere else, they should always quote and acknowledge the source.
  2. Anyone who writes a “column” or “opinion piece” ought to be able to come up with original words to express original thoughts — that’s really the whole idea of being a columnist, or a blogger for that matter.

Continue reading

CBS still covering up

Katie Couric’s podcast commentary on Barack Obama [“Is America ready to elect a president who grew up praying in a mosque?”] has been removed from CBSnews.com and replaced by an extensively edited text-only version that highlights new wording while giving no indication of what was removed. [jadegreen, however, compares the edited commentary with the original on her blog.]

There’s no explanation for the changes and, just as in the earlier plagiarism case, CBSnews.com has disabled comments on this item.

So much for accountability.

Footnote: Andrew Ferguson of the Weekly Standard has an amusing look at the practice of ghostwriting for television.

CBS bungles the Couric plagiarism case

Three days ago, I commented that CBS appeared to be trying to sweep the Katie Couric broadcast/podcast incident under the carpet.

We now know more of the story, and it again calls into question the ethical standards at CBS, coming in the same week as the company’s obvious reluctance to fire shock jock Don Imus despite his having made racist/sexist insults on the air.

In the Couric case, a producer has been fired for plagiarising the work of a Wall St Journal columnist when she prepared the April 4 edition of Katie’s Notebook, a daily commentary presented by Couric. No surprise there, instant dismissal is the customary and predictable consequence for such a serious breach of journalism standards.

The New York Sun yesterday named the producer who wrote the commentary, although the network won’t confirm the name.

Indeed, secrecy seems to be a theme in this story. The video clip was removed from the CBSnews.com site, being replaced with a bizarre Editor’s Note offering a “correction” and claiming there had been an “omission”. Those are quite inappropriate terms to use when describing plagiarism, which is obviously an error of commission. Here’s what the note, from Couric & Co editor Greg Kandra, said:

Correction: The April 4 Notebook was based on a “Moving On” column by Jeffrey Zaslow that ran in The Wall Street Journal on March 15 with the headline, “Of the Places You’ll Go, Is the Library Still One of Them?” Much of the material in the Notebook came from Mr. Zaslow, and we should have acknowledged that at the top of our piece. We offer our sincere apologies for the omission.

The note hints at plagiarism but is sufficiently ambiguous to raise more questions than it answers. Moreover, CBSnews.com will not accept comments on the Editor’s Note posting, although it solicits comments on every other posting on the Couric & Co page.

So, after all this, two big questions remain:

  1. Why does CBSnews.com characterize this incident as an “omission” instead of as “plagiarism”?
  2. Why does Katie Couric present as her own thoughts material written by other people? She ends each of these commentaries with “That’s a page from my notebook” and they appear on CBSnews.com as “posted by Katie Couric”. The implication is that the words are hers.

The answer to the first question can be inferred: some senior journalists at CBS don’t consider themselves to be accountable. They choose to obfuscate and then to deny readers an opportunity to ask questions or make comments about what they’ve done.

As for the second question: well, that’s show business – a theme explored by Timothy Noah at slate.com.

CBS under cloud after pulling Couric podcast

CBSnews.com has pulled the April 4 edition of a daily video podcast by its very high profile news anchor Katie Couric, under circumstances that have to raise eyebrows.

CBS says there was an “omission” in failing to acknowledge that “much of the material” in Katie’s Notebook came from a column by Jeffrey Zaslow in the Wall St Journal.

Is CBS saying Couric plagiarized from the WSJ? If that’s what happened, then this is a very serious breach of ethics. Unfortunately, the editor’s note posted on the Couric podcast page gives very little information.

The CBSnews.com blog Public Eye has at least some of the story.