More Borges Plagiarism

[JDSal45]

Beat the Press, the WGBH TV program with Emily Rooney had a piece on their show last night about more Borges plagiarism. They also summarized it on their blog last night. This was also stolen from the same writer, Mike Sando. Here is the blog article:

http://blog.greaterboston.tv/

J D Sal

 

[PatsFan-NH]

Yes but they were also making excuses for him, and saying what a great writer he is. They seemed more interested in nailing the Globe for treating him differently than the other 2 plagiarism cases, where the reporters were fired.

Sad really how they all seem to stick together. They talked about plagiarism being wrong, but very little dirt was left at Borges door.

 

[Mark Morse]

As much I dislike Borges, and am glad he was suspended, this is not clear cut plagiarism. The Beat writers have an organization where they pool their stories for the purpose of the Notes section of their articles. This latest example was not a verbatim rewrite of what Mike Sando wrote.

 

[Mainefan]

The phrase "verbatim rewrite" is an oxymoron, like "square circle" or "military intelligence."

It's either verbatim or it is a rewrite. If it's a rewrite, it isn't plagiarism. If it's verbatim, it is--if the column carries Borges' byline.

 

[Fencer]

One substantive paragraph, copied word for word?

That's plagiarism alright.

The only possible theory on which the Globe can not fire him is to say that the word "material" in the attribution to the Notes section is a partial excuse. I say "partial" since the fact that he's been suspended is itself a declaration that that's not a total excuse.

My current guess is that an investigation will show he's been so lazy and irresponsible that he won't be back, but that because of the attribution it won't be billed as a clearcut firing.

 

[wdkantro2]

Come on guys, that is pure plagiarism. The only differences are he called Mora the "Indianapolis Colts Coach" instead of the "Colts Coach" and he put Jr. and Sr. after their names. He even used the identical words "demise," and the "Elder Mora." Also, saying that he declined an interview doesn't mean a whole lot, considering it was Sando, not Borges, who asked for the interview.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

Is everyone here really that bothered by plagiarism?

I mean, it's not right and all, and it's definitely not within the spirit of the community in which he writes. But can we at least admit that none of us is really that bothered by Borges' plagairism. We're just happy about it because we don't like his content, and so it's a big gotcha.

Some of the moral indignancy about plagairism though strikes me as a bit disingenuous. If a writer whose content I liked got a two month suspension for this kind of plagairism, I'd be ok with that. Calling for this guy's hide has a lot less to do with his plagairism and a lot more to do with his crazy agenda, and we should at least be honest about that.

 

[wdkantro2]

Is everyone here really that bothered by plagiarism?

I mean, it's not right and all, and it's definitely not within the spirit of the community in which he writes. But can we at least admit that none of us is really that bothered by Borges' plagairism. We're just happy about it because we don't like his content, and so it's a big gotcha.

Some of the moral indignancy about plagairism though strikes me as a bit disingenuous. If a writer whose content I liked got a two month suspension for this kind of plagairism, I'd be ok with that. Calling for this guy's hide has a lot less to do with his plagairism and a lot more to do with his crazy agenda, and we should at least be honest about that.

I'm 18 and I have had at least 5 kids from my high school get kicked out from plagiarism in my four years. It sends a terrible message when aspiring writers in high school see their friends getting in trouble, but see one of the top columnists for a top newspaper plagiarising with only a two month suspension. Like Jason Taylor said about Merriman, it comes very close to sending a bad message.

 

[Tunescribe]

Is everyone here really that bothered by plagiarism?

I mean, it's not right and all, and it's definitely not within the spirit of the community in which he writes. But can we at least admit that none of us is really that bothered by Borges' plagairism. We're just happy about it because we don't like his content, and so it's a big gotcha.

Some of the moral indignancy about plagairism though strikes me as a bit disingenuous. If a writer whose content I liked got a two month suspension for this kind of plagairism, I'd be ok with that. Calling for this guy's hide has a lot less to do with his plagairism and a lot more to do with his crazy agenda, and we should at least be honest about that.

We all should be morally indignant about a professional journalist plagiarizing. It's like a policeman stealing, or a priest molesting a child. It's a serious violation of public trust. In Borges' case it simply adds fuel to the fire, but even without his agenda I'd be mighty pissed off at him over it.

 

[RayClay]

The phrase "verbatim rewrite" is an oxymoron, like "square circle" or "military intelligence."

It's either verbatim or it is a rewrite. If it's a rewrite, it isn't plagiarism. If it's verbatim, it is--if the column carries Borges' byline.

Just because you move a few words around it can still be plagiarism. He can probably use a limited amount of material verbatim also, that's why the disclaimer.

It's not cut and dried.

 

[PatsFaninAZ]

We all should be morally indignant about a professional journalist plagiarizing. It's like a policeman stealing, or a priest molesting a child. It's a serious violation of public trust. In Borges' case it simply adds fuel to the fire, but even without his agenda I'd be mighty pissed off at him over it.

Come on. Those two examples are crimes. With victims.

Plagairism is a victimless crime, other than perhaps the original writer. But to compare that to a theft victim or a child abuse victim?

Plaigarism is not appropriate. It's taking a short cut at work, and we expect more of public figures. I don't have any problem with that. But why is it so hard to admit that we're happy we got a "gotcha" on a guy who we can't stand because of what he writes?

Honesty is a virtue too.

 

[Fencer]

Is everyone here really that bothered by plagiarism?

I mean, it's not right and all, and it's definitely not within the spirit of the community in which he writes. But can we at least admit that none of us is really that bothered by Borges' plagairism. We're just happy about it because we don't like his content, and so it's a big gotcha.

Some of the moral indignancy about plagairism though strikes me as a bit disingenuous. If a writer whose content I liked got a two month suspension for this kind of plagairism, I'd be ok with that. Calling for this guy's hide has a lot less to do with his plagairism and a lot more to do with his crazy agenda, and we should at least be honest about that.

It's also that he's lazy and irresponsible in other ways. I.e., these aren't isolated offenses.

If they were isolated, we could call it bad judgment about the rules for the notes pool and move on. But since it's not, the explanation becomes more sinister.

 

[shmessy]

Come on. Those two examples are crimes. With victims.

Plagairism is a victimless crime, other than perhaps the original writer. But to compare that to a theft victim or a child abuse victim?

Plaigarism is not appropriate. It's taking a short cut at work, and we expect more of public figures. I don't have any problem with that. But why is it so hard to admit that we're happy we got a "gotcha" on a guy who we can't stand because of what he writes?

Honesty is a virtue too.

Waaaaiiiiittttt a second. You don't understand that plagiarism IS theft?

Ask Mike Sando, who did the legwork, fact-work and research for that article. He gets paid for that and he gets paid if other papers pick up his byline.

Did the Boston Globe pay Mike Sando for his own work? No. Ron Borges STOLE it and got paid for Mike Sando's work.

Do you not understand that Monday morning several national websites and newspapers then compounded the situation by innocently attributing BORGES for the argument of D. Jackson over Moss?

Just because you don't understand the cost of plagiarism does not mean it is not a theft. It is.

It is every bit the same as a bicycle theft or the theft of a patent.

 

[Captain Cliche]

Come on. Those two examples are crimes. With victims.

Plagairism is a victimless crime, other than perhaps the original writer. But to compare that to a theft victim or a child abuse victim?

Plaigarism is not appropriate. It's taking a short cut at work, and we expect more of public figures. I don't have any problem with that. But why is it so hard to admit that we're happy we got a "gotcha" on a guy who we can't stand because of what he writes?

Honesty is a virtue too.

You got me. I admit I don't care much about the plagarism. Hell, Elliot Ness got Al Capone off the streets with tax evasion....whatever it takes.

 

[Mainefan]

Tell me, RayClay, the next time you read something with Borges' byline, will you wonder who really wrote it? I will. I still wonder about Barnicle, whenever he opens his mouth.

Plagiarism is a combination of theft, dishonesty and laziness. I don't know about you, but I'd prefer to read writers who do not exhibit those qualities. The same goes for newspapers.

A writer's (or newspapers) credibility and reputation is his most valuable possession. Borges has dropped his into the mud and stepped on it.

 

[DarrylS]

Another nail in the coffin, there will be more, a guy like him has done it a few times. Plagiarism is the cardinal sin of journalists, and is not tolerated by those who write for a living.

 

[ClevTrev]

Is everyone here really that bothered by plagiarism?

I mean, it's not right and all, and it's definitely not within the spirit of the community in which he writes. But can we at least admit that none of us is really that bothered by Borges' plagairism. We're just happy about it because we don't like his content, and so it's a big gotcha.

Some of the moral indignancy about plagairism though strikes me as a bit disingenuous. If a writer whose content I liked got a two month suspension for this kind of plagairism, I'd be ok with that. Calling for this guy's hide has a lot less to do with his plagairism and a lot more to do with his crazy agenda, and we should at least be honest about that.

You raise an issue that's like scratching a scab. For some, plagiarism is an ethical violation, but not a major issue. For others, plagiarism is among the most despicable crimes, tantamount to stealing, which it is.

I don't want to sugarcoat this. Borges plagiarized. His act is something his profession and his readers must not tolerate. There is no level of degree or measurement on a scale of how much he plagiarized. He plagiarized, full stop.

Now, let's consider one of the reasons for the reactions of the people on this message board postulated by the poster in the following two lines: "But can we at least admit that none of us is really that bothered by Borges' plagairism. We're just happy about it because we don't like his content, and so it's a big gotcha."

My answer is no, I can't admit that I'm not really bothered by Borges' plagiarism. His is a despicable act by one who is too lazy, too lacking in creativity, and unwilling to research in detail the facts for him to form his own opinion in his duty to report to his readers. I am extremely bothered by Borges, Barnicle, Blair, King, and whoever else lacked the commitment to put their own words toward expressing their thoughts.

Having a blog to access NFL football information shared by members of the NFL teams' beat writers is one thing. Copying information verbatim without taking the time to research, verify, and attribute anything not researched directly by the writer is a journalistic violation of the highest degree. And he gets paid for this stuff???

I'll leave you with this thought: Mike Barnicle was fired from the Globe for plagiarism. Mike was extremely popular in the Boston community and a very popular writer for the Globe. He epitomized the blue-collar, working man view and touched many readers. He plagiarized. He will always have that dark cloud hanging over him for this unfortunate act. He always should. While he is now back in Boston and writing again, his was an error in judgement that he would give anything to take back. I guarantee this.

Whether Borges is liked or not should have nothing to do with the price he is now paying and will pay for quite some time. Just ask Mike.

 

[Tunescribe]

Come on. Those two examples are crimes. With victims.

Plagairism is a victimless crime, other than perhaps the original writer. But to compare that to a theft victim or a child abuse victim?

Plaigarism is not appropriate. It's taking a short cut at work, and we expect more of public figures. I don't have any problem with that. But why is it so hard to admit that we're happy we got a "gotcha" on a guy who we can't stand because of what he writes?

Honesty is a virtue too.

Plagiarism absolutely is NOT a victimless crime! How about the guy(s) who Borges stole from?! Or, the readers who were misled into thinking they were reading Borges' work? Sorry, but this is a serious matter.

As for the cop/priest examples, they were meant to illustrate how "trust" is a key component in how we view certain professions.

 

[upstater1]

The phrase "verbatim rewrite" is an oxymoron, like "square circle" or "military intelligence."

It's either verbatim or it is a rewrite. If it's a rewrite, it isn't plagiarism. If it's verbatim, it is--if the column carries Borges' byline.

I'm actually a bit confused. This really is a gray area. I teach. I catch students plagiarizing. Literally speaking, a rewrite IS plagiarism. What confuses me is that this pool of writers trades information which they rewrite. In other words, they allow a form of plagiarism (i.e. rewriting). Which would, I guess, open the doors to the question, if one form of plagiarism is allowed, then are all other forms?

If a student rewrites an argument he finds in another article, it's plagiary. In this case, it seems these writers encourage one another to plagiarize.

I still find it mind boggling that newspapers do this at all. They should simply give the information verbatim and cite the source. Very simple.

 

[upstater1]

Is everyone here really that bothered by plagiarism?

I mean, it's not right and all, and it's definitely not within the spirit of the community in which he writes. But can we at least admit that none of us is really that bothered by Borges' plagairism. We're just happy about it because we don't like his content, and so it's a big gotcha.

Some of the moral indignancy about plagairism though strikes me as a bit disingenuous. If a writer whose content I liked got a two month suspension for this kind of plagairism, I'd be ok with that. Calling for this guy's hide has a lot less to do with his plagairism and a lot more to do with his crazy agenda, and we should at least be honest about that.

I'm bothered by it. Why wouldn't I be? It's dishonest.