fc2ブログ

Uncharted Territory

自分が読んで興味深く感じた英文記事を中心に取り上げる予定です

RSS     Archives
 

常習犯だった?

 


Vanity Fair最新号を読んでいて、CNNのFareed Zakariaが再び盗用疑惑をかけられているのを知りました。昨年の9月に話題になっていたようです。元上司のようですが、クロ認定をしています。

Parsing the Plagarism of Fareed Zakaria
With Fareed Zakaria accused of plagiarism, V.F.’s columnist (Zakaria's onetime boss) examines the fine line writers walk—and whether the pundit crossed it.
BY MICHAEL KINSLEY

Somewhere between plagiarism and homage, there is a line. Fareed stepped over it. For example, way back in 1998, he wrote an article for Slate about the glories of the martini. American Heritage magazine had run an article on the same subject the previous year, by Max Rudin. Rudin wrote that the martini “had acquired formal perfection, a glamorous mystique.” He also noted that Franklin D. Roosevelt “liked his with a teaspoon of olive brine.” In his own article, Fareed wrote that the martini had “acquired an air of mystery and glamour” and then noted that F.D.R. “added to the standard recipes”—can you guess? right!—“one teaspoon of olive brine.”

In a memo to me, Fareed makes a vigorous and often persuasive defense of himself. Unfortunately, CNN won’t let it be quoted. When he acknowledged making a mistake, at the time of his suspension, he didn’t just use the classic Nixonian passive-voice evasive formula, “Mistakes were made.” However, conscious changes in wording like the ones about the martini are not “mistakes” in the sense of something inadvertent or accidental. Fareed made these little changes in order to disguise his borrowing. His pursuers cite many examples (including this one).


Wikipediaにも経緯が載っています。2012年に関しては前のブログで取り上げたことを記憶しています。

(Wikipedia)
Plagiarism controversies
Zakaria was suspended for a week in August 2012 while Time and CNN investigated an allegation of plagiarism involving an August 20 column on gun control with similarities to a New Yorker article by Jill Lepore. In a statement Zakaria apologized, saying that he had made "a terrible mistake." Six days later, after a review of his research notes and years of prior commentary, Time and CNN reinstated Zakaria. Time described the incident as "isolated" and "unintentional"; and CNN said, “we found nothing that merited continuing the suspension...."

The controversy intensified in September 2014, when Esquire and The Week magazines reported new allegations that were first identified and documented in pseudonymous blogs. Newsweek added a blanket plagiarism warning to its archive of articles penned by Zakaria, before altering it to appear in seven specific articles that Newsweek felt warranted it. On November 10, 2014, Slate and The Washington Post added corrections to their articles by Zakaria. Slate warned on one that, "This piece does not meet Slate’s editorial standards, having failed to properly attribute quotations and information...". Slate executive Jacob Weisberg, who, months before, exchanged barbs with one of the aforementioned anonymous bloggers on Twitter in defense of Zakaria, kept his original position that what Zakaria did was not plagiarism. The Washington Post in turn told the Poynter media industry news site that it would be investigating the new batch of allegations against Zakaria. Later on the same day, November 10, the Post said that it had found "problematic" sourcing in five Zakaria columns, "and will likely note the lack of attribution in archived editions of the articles."

In total, some 26 individual reports attributed to Zakaria have been found to possess questionable passages.


盗用を告発したサイトOur Bad Mediaが作成した動画をみると一発です。



SEP 22, 2014 @ 10:55 AMNEWS & POLITICSJUST
CNN Does Not Get to Cherrypick the Rules of Journalism
The news is evolving. Old media is not evolving with it.
BY CRUSHING BORT AND BLIPPO BLAPPO

以下がOur Bad Mediaのサイトで詳しく検証しています。

NEWSWEEK CORRECTED 7 OF FAREED ZAKARIA’S PLAGIARIZED ARTICLES; THE WASHINGTON POST NEEDS TO DO THE SAME FOR THESE 6
by @blippoblappo & @crushingbort
UPDATE, 11/10/14, 2:45 PM: BuzzFeed’s Andrew Kaczynski has pointed out that Slate appears to have updated one of Zakaria’s “Wine’s World” columns with an editor’s note regarding plagiarized text. Our story has been updated to reflect this note.

Newsweekのインタビューに応じていました。きっと検証ソフトにでもかけたのだろうと思ったらそういうのは使っていいないと主張しています。sudden shifts in voice; inaccurate statistics; and the deployment of incredibly specific factsなどが盗用の兆候だそうです。

An Interview With the Anonymous Media Watchdogs Who Accused Fareed Zakaria of Plagiarism
BY TAYLOR WOFFORD AND ZACH SCHONFELD
11/7/14 AT 1:23 PM

NW: Tell me about your methods. How do you go about finding specific instances of malfeasance? Paint me a picture of the process.

BB: We do what any diligent editor would when marking up a piece, with an eye toward: research claimed as “original” that seems beyond the skill of the author; sudden shifts in voice; inaccurate statistics; and the deployment of incredibly specific facts. There was surprise that we were able to find Zakaria’s theft without the use of anti-plagiarism software (we don’t use software because, well, it’s expensive, and considering the lengths some will go to cover up their lifting, it’s hard to know if those programs would be adequate in ferreting out theft). What we’re surprised about is that any editor could have read Zakaria’s pieces and not have found clear theft. Many of the examples stuck out like a sore thumb, even to the untrained eye.

NW: Why did you choose to be anonymous? Do you think your anonymity has helped or hurt your cause? Would you ever consider shedding your anonymity? Do you expect it to last?

CB: Like a lot of other people on Twitter, we’ve just used the site as an anonymous outlet to shoot the shit, joke around and catch up on news. We were anonymous before we ever posted anything on OBM. While we’d like to think that calling out blatant plagiarism is a nonpartisan good deed that wouldn’t result in any sort of underhanded backlash, we don’t feel an overriding need to test that theory. Brian Stelter reinforced that recently when he went on a multibillion dollar news network to trash our work without ever feeling the need to seek or acknowledge any comment from us. As for whether that anonymity has hurt us, we’ve never felt that we’re the ones losing face here. Even assuming the worst-case scenario here where we’re some kind of Astroturf operation or hired guns (we’re not), the examples we’ve found are public and independently verifiable, as well as newsworthy for a number of reasons. Zakaria’s a big name who already had one well-reported instance of plagiarism that his outlets claimed was isolated. It very clearly wasn’t and it very clearly hasn’t stopped. If reporters pass on that story because we won’t give our names, I don’t think we’re the ones people would be raising eyebrows at. How many anonymous sources does the average reader already come across on any given day?


盗用を疑われた記事に関しては、Newsweekなどは現在、以下のような注意書きをつけるようにしています。

TACKLE THE NUKE THREAT
BY FAREED ZAKARIA 6/20/04 AT 8:00 PM


Note: Newsweek has established that this article does not meet editorial standards. It borrows extensively from June 1, 2004 remarks by John Kerry without proper attribution. Newsweek acknowledges the error.
スポンサーサイト



Comment


    
プロフィール

Yuta

Author:Yuta
FC2ブログへようこそ!




最新トラックバック



FC2カウンター

検索フォーム



ブロとも申請フォーム

QRコード
QR