The Plagiarism Plague, and more

Clark Hoyt is the Public Editor of the New York Times, sort of a peeping-over-the-shoulder-Tom on behalf of you and me, the readers. This past Sunday he looked into the case of Zachery Kouwe, a Times business reporter who resigned after he was accused of plagiarizing from the Wall Street Journal.

What's worse, the inquiry showed he had lifted copy from other news sources. And who were those news other sources? Why on-line sources. Who in his right mind believes anything you read on-line. Most of it, in my humble opinion is rumor, opinion and unsubstantiated.

This is what "journalism" has come to: in trying to be the first with anything, or at least not the last, once responsible news organizations chase after every item that may, emphasize may, be really newsworthy. Unfortunaltely, again in my opinion, most of it is garbage.

What bothers me most, however, is the New York Times attitude toward all this stuff. As a former journalist, (25 years with newspapers, UPI and CBS) and then as a consultant to business and professional people in how to deal with the media, the Times' attitude toward correcting examples of plagiarisim is abhorrent.

They may print a correction. Does anyone read corrections? I doubt it. What's worse, when Mr. Hoyt asked Philip Corbett, the paper's standards editor, if Kouwe's plagiarized material would be appended in their archives, Mr.Corbett, according to Mr. Hoyt, responded "the paper was not inclined to flag them, partly because there were some clear-cut cases and others that were less clear."

This is a total abrogation of responsibility in my view. When counseling business and professional people, one of the cardinal rules I stressed was that if there were errors in the stories that resulted from their interview, the errors should be corrected not only in the closest edition of the paper but also in the archives.

It doesn't take a genious to realize that some future researcher, calling up an article containing errors of plagiraized material, will assume that what he or she is reading is accurate and original reports when, in fact, it not only may be incorrect but also plagiarized material as well.

Sadly, this is not the New York Times I grew up with. I pass on to all of you the caution I gave to my oldest grandson when he graduated college: "Question everything."

We need to remember that.

Got Apps?

Not yet. Still working on it. My Ipod is so outdated all it does is play music.
Stay tuned.

Next: Cake and Cookies

Heard about the Coffee Party? The antithesis of the Tea Party? Sounds good, to me. But I just might hold out for the "Cake and Cookie Party." And, oh yes, make mine decaf, please.

Corned Beef and Flowers

We went to the Philadelphia Flower show today. It was overwhelming. The garden displays were imaginative and glorious. We walked our legs off but managed to totter to the Reading Terminal Market across the street where the corned beef and potatoe knishes won blue ribbons in the category of delicatessus deliciosus. That's Latin for Yum.

Cheers.

Clueless in Washington

I save newpaper clippings for some time thinking I might actually need them for something at a later date. Well, I just threw out two of them because either I'm tired of looking at them or they're no longer useful. But one item still rankles enough for me to comment on.

From the New York Times, Sunday, Nov. 15, 2009 (did I say I was a pack rat?):

The headline reads: "In House Record, Many Spoke with One Voice: The Lobbyists."

In this case the lobbyists were from Genentech and they were smart enough to craft one statement for Republicans and one for Democrats. The issue was health care but I'm more concerned with how willing our representatives are to accept statements on face value and enter them into the Congressional Record under their own name.

So why did I save this article? Because MY CONGRESMAN, Bill Pascrell Jr., (D-NJ), was one of those who blithely entered the Genentech statement into the Record under his name.

When this was pointed out to Mr. Pascrell, the NYTimes reports him saying he got the statement from his staff and: "did not know where they got the information from." I don't suppose he thought to ask them, did he?

Is it any wonder lobbyists control the Congress?

The Gallstone Report

A committee headed by Dr. Bernard Gallstone of the Combined Nations United Against a Certain Democratic Country in the Middle(Chaotic)East, (CNUACDCME) reported today that the Mossad obviously was responsible for the recent assassination of a Hamas leader in Dubai. The committee's conclusion was based entirely on information supplied by the Dubai authorities, known informally as the Dubiouses. This was sufficient evidence for Dr. Gallstone to issue another charge that Israel as the sole source of trouble in the area.
The report was hailed by all parties in the area for its accuracy and integrity.
Dr. Gallstone was last seen wearing a wig, false teeth and carrying a hockey stick to avoid reporters seeking further comment.

Snowstorm, Feb. 2010

As you can see we had a mooseful of snow these past few days, upwards of a foot or more. The moose is a front yard ornament that is about three feet or so high, half of which is buried in snow.
It took a day for us to emerge from the house and rejoin society, but all seems quiet now.
Let's hope so.
Cheers, all.