Skip to main content

Imitation vs Plagiarism

If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, what is plagiarism?

Theft, say some editors and bloggers who have noted that the Hartford Courant has lifted some stories from other papers with and sometimes without attribution. In some cases stories have been attributed to source newspapers and then appear later minus the attribution under the byline of Courant staff.

Some of the resulting furor may be found in the commentary section of a post written by Courant columnist Rick Green.

Doug Hardy, an associate editor at the Journal Inquirer, comments:

"If you search the Courant's site for "Journal Inquirer" or "Bristol Press" or several others, you'll pull up a listing of numerous stories from numerous towns where our work has been systematically copied and pasted, occasionally with minor alterations and a smattering of additional attribution from the publication. The full story is being used - not just the headline and/or first sentence and a link back to our sites. I would argue that when you're using a free site vs. a paid site, even the link is a violation of fair use. But I'm not a lawyer. Fortunately, we have a few lawyers available to us to make this argument.

"It appears that the lawyers of the HC's corporate parent are assuming the smaller papers won't call this bluff, and they are betting that we won't have the funds to litigate each individual instance where fair use has been violated (a nice phrase for theft, that is)."

"It's like saying we won't hand over all the money in our pockets after we've been shot in the head. It's ridiculous and even sophomoric to think we're not going to fight this."
Apparently, the Courant was using the work of other reporters on other papers as if these papers were a free AP service. But aggregators are bound to flirt with plagiarism. The real problem is that the Courant, having thrown a good portion of its news staff off the ship, may no longer have the resources to cover town news as it once did. The solution to this problem is not to borrow news on the cheap from other papers but to expand its staff – which is expensive. The paper’s owners are in bankruptcy.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p