Plagiarism hurts
First of all, for blindingly obvious reasons, I should acknowledge that the title of this blog post is not original. "Plagiarism hurts" was the title of an article in EMWA's journal The Write Stuff by Elise Langdon-Neuner, its editor-in-chief (page 13 of this issue, 1.6 MB pdf). I'm sure that Elise won't mind me re-using her title, with proper attribution.
Elise was kind enough to show me her article before she published it, and we had some interesting discussions about the best way to describe plagiarism. Is it theft? Is it evil? Is it just lazy? What we both agreed on strongly, however, was that the title of the article was absolutely spot on: whatever else plagiarism may be, it certainly hurts is victim, always on a personal level, if not financially.
Plagiarism may or may not be unlawful, but it is always unethical, and says some deeply unpleasant things about its perpetrator. Now, one may not always wish to judge the plagiarist too harshly. Plagiarism in an undergraduate essay, for example, may not be the result of evil, but simply laziness and a failure to understand the ethical norms of writing. This would be a good opportunity for the student to be taught just how unacceptable plagiarism is.
However, when the plagiarist is a professional journalist, there can be absolutely no excuse. Plagiarism in those circumstances cannot be described as anything other than an egregious breach of ethical standards. And if the journalist in question works for BBC Radio 4's Today programme, normally a shining example of some of the best journalism in the world, and one of the few parts of the BBC that has steadfastly resisted the dumbing down that seems to be pervading ever more of the rest of the Corporation, then to find plagiarism is unbelievably shocking.
So, imagine just how shocked I was when I read this article by Today's Tom Fielden, and saw its remarkable similarity to an article written a few days before for the Smithsonian Magazine by Brian Switek, a freelance science writer and blogger from the US. You can see just how similar the two articles are in this graphic (thanks to @fakelvis).
Now, we shouldn't jump to conclusions. Perhaps there is a perfectly innocent explanation for the suspicious amount of overlap between the two articles. I do hope so. I have always had the utmost respect for Today, but if that innocent explanation doesn't soon materialise, then that respect will be destroyed.
For this latest updates on the story, you should look at Brian Switek's Twitter feed.
[...] In Case You Happened To Think Any Good About The BBC… 23 07 2010 …here’s a story that will make you stop fantasizing. [...]
Don't get me wrong. I think plenty of good about the BBC. It's a fine institution, and knocks most other broadcasters into a cocked hat.
Clearly, this journalist has fallen well below those standards. But I wouldn't want to take the behaviour of one journalist as a damning indictment of the whole corporation.
On the other hand, I and no doubt others will judge the BBC on how they respond to this issue. If they don't take it seriously, my respect for the BBC will be considerably weakened.
Adam - I am the author of the blog that pinged your post here. Yes the BBC is not too bad, but still, in scientific matters it is going through a series of disasters. For example the editors over there are still unable to understand the need to include links to the scientific papers spoken about in the news.
"Churnalism" abounds (the malpractice of editing press releases pretending it's journalism), now we have plagiarism done as if it were nothing of importance, and not too long ago I have found out another journalist writing about "news" long before anything had happened.
Hi Maurizio
Yes, it annoys me when journalists report a scientific study in an online medium and don't link to the source. BBC journos usually link to the journal, but not the article, which is a bit lazy.
I agree that science journalism at the BBC leaves a lot to be desired. But it's probably no worse, and often much better, than most of the rest of the mainstream media. If you think the BBC is bad, try reading some of the articles in the Daily Mail!
BTW, I see that Fielden has now updated his blog. Don't find it terribly convincing.
Adam
[...] section, eventually announcing “slimy” behavior on Twitter. Allegations of plagiarism ensued, and Charlie Petit of Knight Science Journalism Tracker played [...]
[...] …here’s a story that will make you stop fantasizing. [...]