RSS Feed
Another Jayson Blair moment for the New York Times? Kinda looks like it, if you look at the article published yesterday and compare it to an article he wrote in October 2005 (reg. required).
From yesterday’s op-ed:
“You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Nigger, nigger, nigger,’ ” said Atwater. “By 1968, you can’t say ‘nigger’ — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things, and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.”
From the 2005 op-ed:
“You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Nigger, nigger, nigger.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘nigger’ - that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.
From yesterday’s op-ed:
In one of the vilest moves in modern presidential politics, Ronald Reagan, the ultimate hero of this latter-day Republican Party, went out of his way to kick off his general election campaign in 1980 in that very same Philadelphia, Miss. He was not there to send the message that he stood solidly for the values of Andrew Goodman. He was there to assure the bigots that he was with them.
“I believe in states’ rights,” said Mr. Reagan. The crowd roared.
The 2005 op-ed:
Ronald Reagan, the G.O.P.’s biggest hero, opposed both the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act of the mid-1960’s. And he began his general election campaign in 1980 with a powerfully symbolic appearance in Philadelphia, Miss., where three young civil rights workers were murdered in the summer of 1964. He drove the crowd wild when he declared: “I believe in states’ rights.”
Yesterday’s op-ed:
Republicans improperly threw black voters off the rolls in Florida in the contested presidential election of 2000, and sent Florida state troopers into the homes of black voters to intimidate them in 2004.
The 2005 op-ed:
George W. Bush had to try so hard to disenfranchise black voters in Florida in 2000; and why Jeb Bush had to call out the state police to try to intimidate black voters in Orlando, Fla., in 2004.
If bloggers can find that kind of repetition so easily, why couldn’t the New York Times? And how many other articles of his are repeats of the same nonsense?
One thing is for certain…this guy has his talking points down, wrong as they are, and he’s not afraid to keep beating the “Republicans are racists” horse. Just remember, though…the New York Times isn’t biased to the left at all, no sir.
(Hat tip to AmishDude, who sent me this link last night.)
Popularity: 73% [?]
I have often wondered if, as I continue to write, I don’t wind up repeating myself. Technically, I can’t plagiarize from myself, but the possibility always exists that, after reading other people’s works, and writing about the same subject, do I unconsciously use words that I have read so closely to the original that I have plagiarized someone else, completely unintentionally?
September 26th, 2007 at 7:57 amRepeat yourself once in a post, that’s unintentional.
Twice is kind of pushing it, but I think it’s still unintentional.
Three or more times, that’s an agenda and a written meme that you’re trying to push of as being fact, and that’s done for pure political and partisan reasons.
I know I repeat myself sometimes. You write a blog for this length of time, you’re bound to, I think. But the key is, try and make sure people know it’s a “repeat” (remember my “Democrats wrote the book on corruption” phrase?).
September 26th, 2007 at 8:04 amBob Herbert’s racial hit piece on the GOP (WED AM UPDATE: HERBERT COLUMN A RE-WRITE OF 2005 COLUMN)…
I just got done reading this opinion piece written by the NYT’s Bob Herbert, the headline of which reads “The Ugly Side of the GOP” which reads sort of like a fantasy piece for race-baiting Democrats who have sought for decades to mak…
September 26th, 2007 at 8:09 am[...] Question 1. Can a columnist for the “paper of record” plagiarize himself? [...]
September 26th, 2007 at 8:55 am[...] at Lost In Lima Ohio talks about Sex Ed in school. For Liberty Pundit, I have one question. Since when did “I am for States Rights” mean “Bigots! I am with you!”??? And yes…this guy definitely plagarized himself. Cao interviews Alec Rawls about his fight [...]
September 26th, 2007 at 9:35 amPlagiarize yourself all you want. The only “victim” is yourself. Just don’t try to pass it on as some new insight.
September 26th, 2007 at 9:40 amBob Herbert is known to recycle his material. There was a dust-up about a year ago on this exact same topic. I’ve written about his recycled hyperbole before here as well.
September 26th, 2007 at 9:41 amThis is absolutely idiotic.
The verbatim passages in the various columns are direct quotations from another speaker. He is quoting the same words - they have to be identical in both cases. In fact, the first pair of citations consists entirely of the same statement quoted in full from Lee Atwater - of course they’re the same, you moron!
As to the descriptive passages, they’re simply not plagiarized. The texts in the paired cases are not identical, and not paraphrases - they’re not even close. In fact, with one exception, the only words that appear in both cited columns are descriptive nouns or proper names: “Ronald Reagan”, “Philadelphia”, “Florida”, “black voters”, etc. Since he’s talking about the same thing in both columns, it’s hardly surprising that he names the same people and places. The only passage that is even very similar is where he describes Ronald Reagan in two columns - using non-identical language - as a “hero” to his party, which is hardly an unlikely similarity.
In short, the passages are not identical, with the exception of exact quotes which, by definition must be identical and cannot be regarded as plagiarism since he clearly identifies them as someone else’s words. The passages are also not paraphrases of one another, nor do they repeat the same words or short phrases, except for unavoidable descriptive terms. They simply do not meet the definition of plagiarism, and, in the case of your citation of exact quotes, the charge is not merely ludicrous, it is imbecilic.
There is one form of plagiarism that could be attributed in these cases, and that is the failure to attribute non-original ideas even when not quoted or paraphrased. But since here he has taken those ideas from himself, he still can’t be guilty of plagiarism, or of non-attribution. (What are you suggesting - that he’s falsely claiming credit for his own work?)
He sometimes repeated topics in his columns, over the space of several years, and in doing so made reference to the same people and events. BFD. Writers do that all the time. They even recycle entire passages from their work - which is not the case here - but it’s still not plagiarism. Here, you wouldn’t be right about plagiarism even if he was quoting someone else. You seem to have no idea what you’re talking about.
September 26th, 2007 at 12:38 pmRegarding GOP racism, what, again, do you object to?
How is Herbert unfairly accusing the GOP by accurately citing their own words and actions? If, by describing what Republicans actually do and say, he makes them look like racists, where does the fault lie? And if you think that mentioning GOP racism twice in two years is too often, I suggest you’re merely proving his point.
I think the reason Herbert needs to keep saying these things is that people like you think they’re not worth saying.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:12 pmMaybe Herbert is just in a loop.
It does happen.
September 26th, 2007 at 1:49 pmI don’t think it’s plagiarism, but the management of the NYT might want to ask themselves why they’ve paid for essentially the same piece twice. So few people read Herbert he probably thought no one would notice.
September 26th, 2007 at 2:33 pmKevin, the first quote was from another source, yes…but the rest weren’t.
As for the little “Republicans are racists” slam you got in there, this is exactly what I was talking about the other day. I’m sick and tired of people buying into it just because people on the left keep repeating it over and over again.
There are plenty of examples where Democrats are, by far, the most vile racists this country has ever produced, but simply because they say they care, they get a free pass. It’s ridiculous.
September 26th, 2007 at 3:27 pmThe senior Senator of the Democratic Party, Senator Robert “sheets” Byrd is a damn Klansman. In fact, he held the highest state office in the W.Va. KKK.
During slavery and Jim Crow, the Democratic Party ruled the South. Lincoln was a Republican, fighting against a slaveholding Democratic South
Grow up. Democratic roots are deeply racist and little has changed.
September 26th, 2007 at 10:27 pm[...] think I’ve heard it all now…a NY Times Op-Ed writer plagarizing himself, and now a Rueters reporter who is his own source. The MSM sure knows how to find quality talent. [...]
September 27th, 2007 at 1:20 pm