Advertiser plagiarism?!

[LikaNui]

Hopefully you're all aware of Ian Lind's terrific blog at http://www.ilind.net . And if you are, you saw his post yesterday about an article in the Advertiser that seemed to have many parts "lifted" straight from Ian's site, without attribution or permission.
So in today's Advertiser, page A-4, "Getting It Straight":
"Two paragraphs in a Page A-1 story Wednesday that reported on a federal probe into the O`ahu Community Correctional Center inappropriately included phrasing from a Weblog reported by Ian Lind the previous day.
"All facts included in the story were based on reporting by The Honolulu Advertiser."
Heh. "Inappropriately"? I flat out call it plagiarism.
Interesting that today's Advertiser website doesn't have that 'correction' posted. Hmmmm.

[RJC]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

Thanks for addressing this. Given how much flak we take at the Weekly for misplaced commas, I was waiting to see what the HT response to this development would be. So far, mostly crickets, which isn't a surprise.

I agree with you about the Advertiser's "correction." Seems almost punchy to me, a little bit of "back off, Ian, we had the story ourselves." Lind has been awfully nice about this, but that doesn't mean the Advertiser should treat it in this lax a manner.

[LikaNui]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

Given how much flak we take at the Weekly for misplaced commas,

Oh, we're equal opportunity media critics here.

Check back and see what we did to Joe Moore when he was accused of plagiarism!
And I know you're new to hawaiithreads, so you might want to take some time and read back through all the threads about the Weakly. Maybe 1% has to do with "misplaced commas" and other typos and editorial misteaks, but 99% lay the blame for the Weakly's problems squarely at the feet of the publisher, not the staff.

I was waiting to see what the HT response to this development would be. So far, mostly crickets, which isn't a surprise.

I'm a "cricket"? Um, is that a compliment or an insult?

[Johnny Yen]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

I flat out call it plagiarism.
Interesting that today's Advertiser website doesn't have that 'correction' posted. Hmmmm.

Yup, if it looks like a duck, walks like duck and quacks like a duck. It must be a duck.

Looks like young Peter Boylan has some explaining to do. I thought his dad, Dan Boylan, taught him better than that.

I'm sure given the tolerance for such behavior in journalism today that he will be quickly shown the door from the 'Agonizer'! I just can't imagine Editor Saundra Keyes sacrificing the credibility of the paper by not doing so. It's practically an industry standard to do so.

We'll see.

[sin]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

From what I hear, Boylan was given an assignment from one of his editors, who provided him with the said plagerized paragraphs. If anything, Boylan is only guilty of not questioning his superiors about where the information came from. Advertiser management is clearly the guilty party here, and should take some responsibility instead of hanging their reporter out to dry.

Then again, that's the Gannett way.

[lorider]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

who got hung out to try? the advertiser's correction was not very contrite.

[sin]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

Wee Mr. Boylan was hung out to dry when it was clearly his editors or whoever it was who handed him Ian's three paragraphs and told him to do a story based on them. Management should be held accountable for mistakes as well. Instead they beat up on a junior reporter who did what he was told. Can you say scapegoat?

[ladat]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

You people are so sad. Is there not anything better to do that you have to pick on someone for something you don't even know about. Does anyone here have any idea what the whole story is? I doubt it. So shut it!

[LikaNui]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

You people are so sad. Is there not anything better to do that you have to pick on someone for something you don't even know about. Does anyone here have any idea what the whole story is? I doubt it. So shut it!

You joined HawaiiThreads four days ago and what you wrote here is your one and only post. That's supposed to earn your opinion some respect... how?

You say that you "doubt" anyone here knows the whole story. So you admit you're just guessing about who we are and what we really know. I suggest you spend some time looking back through old messages, where you'll see that many of us are in the business and do know exactly what we're talking about.
Who do you think you are to tell us to "shut it"?

[Johnny Yen]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

Does anyone here have any idea what the whole story is?

Do you? Puhleez enlighten us!

If your saying there's some sort of 'excuse' for something like this you should look up the definition of plagiarism,

This from dictionary.com

n 1: a piece of writing that has been copied from someone else and is presented as being your own work 2: the act of plagiarizing; taking someone's words or ideas as if they were your own [syn: plagiarization, plagiarisation, piracy]

[MadAzza]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

You people are so sad. Is there not anything better to do that you have to pick on someone for something you don't even know about. Does anyone here have any idea what the whole story is? I doubt it. So shut it!

Hey, Mike Fisch! How ya doin'?

[lavagal]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

Hey, Mike Fisch! How ya doin'?

Oh gosh sakes, that ain't Mike Fisch.

[ladat]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

From what I hear, Boylan was given an assignment from one of his editors, who provided him with the said plagerized paragraphs. If anything, Boylan is only guilty of not questioning his superiors about where the information came from.

It seems someone here with more credibility than me has already enlightened you!

[lorider]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

lidat sure does have a strange reaction here. No one's blaming Boylan specifically, but the advertiser generally. what, because it was the editors' fault everyone gets a pass? Illuminate us as to why this did not deserve a lot more than a glib mention of "inappropriate phrasing."

But since lidat wants to make this about the reporter, I'll say this: no matter where he got the lines, he didn't write them himself, and they got into his copy somehow. let's not pretend the guy is an innocent victim here. the victim is Lind, and the readers.

[Johnny Yen]

Re: Advertiser plagiarism?!

lidat sure does have a strange reaction here.

mebee, it's 'Peter-Boy' himself!