4th International Plagiarism Conference from Will Murray on Vimeo.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Thursday, June 10, 2010
Catching the copycat - BBC Learning Zone
Launch in external player |
Claire pulled together a report using internet sources, editing some sections, reorganising paragraphs and taking content from multiple sites. We ran the essay through Turnitin when Claire visited our offices and Turnitin found all of the materials that Claire had taken her content from including all of the reorganised text.
Wednesday, September 05, 2007
Nafarious Unacknowledged Text Sources (N.U.T.S.)
It is common practice for nameless copy writers and researchers to provide the content for important people that either ‘don’t have time’ or ‘don’t have the right words’. Of course if you don’t have time to write it, you may also not have time to read it, or check it, leaving you exposed to the nefarious unacknowledged text sources of the people you hire.
In this context it shouldn’t be such a surprise to read the piece about the JSU President and his plagiarised ghost written column reported by Fijolek(2007) in the Chanticleer recently. Apparently, William A. Meehan, President of Jacksonville State University, had a column written for him for several years by Al Harris, a ghost writer who on this occasion, due to illness, used unacknowledged content from a site Mercksource.com.
It occurs to me that we don’t really expect important figures to write their own material anymore. The practice of ghost writing is widespread, as is the risk of exposure to this type of problem.
I feel the real question is not the lack of integrity of the plagiarising ghost writer, which is certainly an issue, but if we should continue to accept that authority figures use unacknowledged materials. There is something inherently counterfeit and a bit pantomime about it. We all know they aren’t writing their own materials so why keep up the pretence? Wouldn’t it be better for them to take credit as the organiser, editor or approver and give the actual writing credit to the real author? You are not fooling anyone – we know it’s not yours anyway!
The case for acknowledgement is strong. It’s the right thing to do and exposes the actual author to their own responsibility to give proper credit. Sure there are internet based tools that will help test for originality and these will no doubt become an essential step for all publishers. However such steps are not foolproof, giving credit at least places the risk and reward at the feet of actual author.
Alternatively (in jest!) add the caveat: ‘This article may contain N.U.T.S.’ to all ghost written work…
References
A, Fijolek (2007) 'Students react to plagiarism accusations', The Chanticleer, August 30, 2007 [Online]. Available at: http://media.www.thechanticleeronline.com/media/storage/paper670/news/2007/08/30/News/A.Problem.That.Started.At.The.Top-2942427.shtml (Accessed: 31 August 2007).
It is common practice for nameless copy writers and researchers to provide the content for important people that either ‘don’t have time’ or ‘don’t have the right words’. Of course if you don’t have time to write it, you may also not have time to read it, or check it, leaving you exposed to the nefarious unacknowledged text sources of the people you hire.
In this context it shouldn’t be such a surprise to read the piece about the JSU President and his plagiarised ghost written column reported by Fijolek(2007) in the Chanticleer recently. Apparently, William A. Meehan, President of Jacksonville State University, had a column written for him for several years by Al Harris, a ghost writer who on this occasion, due to illness, used unacknowledged content from a site Mercksource.com.
It occurs to me that we don’t really expect important figures to write their own material anymore. The practice of ghost writing is widespread, as is the risk of exposure to this type of problem.
I feel the real question is not the lack of integrity of the plagiarising ghost writer, which is certainly an issue, but if we should continue to accept that authority figures use unacknowledged materials. There is something inherently counterfeit and a bit pantomime about it. We all know they aren’t writing their own materials so why keep up the pretence? Wouldn’t it be better for them to take credit as the organiser, editor or approver and give the actual writing credit to the real author? You are not fooling anyone – we know it’s not yours anyway!
The case for acknowledgement is strong. It’s the right thing to do and exposes the actual author to their own responsibility to give proper credit. Sure there are internet based tools that will help test for originality and these will no doubt become an essential step for all publishers. However such steps are not foolproof, giving credit at least places the risk and reward at the feet of actual author.
Alternatively (in jest!) add the caveat: ‘This article may contain N.U.T.S.’ to all ghost written work…
References
A, Fijolek (2007) 'Students react to plagiarism accusations', The Chanticleer, August 30, 2007 [Online]. Available at: http://media.www.thechanticleeronline.com/media/storage/paper670/news/2007/08/30/News/A.Problem.That.Started.At.The.Top-2942427.shtml (Accessed: 31 August 2007).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)