Publisher’s Note: The publisher has had no role in editing this essay, which is published as the writer submitted it with the intention of publication in BEACONS.
By Kennedy Tavares
What comes to mind when you think about journalism? Do you think about trustworthy news reports? Or do you think of fabrication and being lied to? Over the past couple decades more and more fraudulent journalists have been getting exposed for committing one of the greatest journalistic sins; plagiarism. Journalists like Jayson Blair, Janet Cooke, and Stephen Glass are merely just representations of good journalists gone bad. Reporting of falsehoods by journalists has negatively affected the trust of society with mass media. Overtime journalists have fabricated, plagiarized, and overall tarnished the profession of journalism.
Plagiarism is not something that can easily be defined. It’s definition in the Oxford Dictionary is, “the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own.” However there is a lot more to plagiarism than just “stealing” ideas without giving credit to the original author. Plagiarism can come in many shapes and forms. Patchworking is just one example of plagiarism. According to the article, "10 ways to prevent plagiarism, fabrication, at college newspapers (and in any newsroom)" written by Mallary Jean Tenmore, “This practice, which tends to be more common than plagiarism, involves relying heavily on source material and changing it only slightly by rearranging phrases and changing tenses." This shows that there are different forms of plagiarism and that plagiarism is more common than one would think.
For centuries society has relied on mass media to inform them of what was happening in the world. The news, which is so crucial, has been plagued with journalists who have spread lies, stolen information, and overall deceived the public. In the Washington Post Article, “‘Jimmy’s Episode Evokes Outrage, Sadness,” the authors Patrick E. Tyler and Lewis M. Simons wrote, “‘People feel the press plays a very large role in shaping society,’ O'Donnell said. ‘They feel sometimes the press takes very heavy-handed positions toward the rest of us mere mortals, telling them how to think and making sweeping judgment calls on what is right and what's wrong." This just goes to show how much influence the media has over the public. Janet Cookie is just one early modern example of this. Janet Cooke was a journalist for the Washington Post when she wrote a story about an eight year old heroin addict. This story had ended up winning her a Pulitzer in 1981. This story was later found to be fabricated and her prestigious award had been revoked. A Pulitzer Prize is arguably the biggest honor that a journalist can receive in their field. In fact, this wasn’t the first time Pulitzer had awarded a fraud. In 1932 Walter Duranty had won a Pulitzer Prize for an article about the famine in the Soviet Union in the 1920s and early 1930s. In the article, “Pulitzer-Winning Lies” which is an article that highlights all the inaccuracies in Duranty’s piece. The author wrote, “As one of the best known correspondents in the world for one of the best known newspapers in the world. Mr. Duranty’s denial that there was a famine was accepted as gospel. Thus Mr. Duranty gulled not only the readers of the New York Times but because of the newspapers prestige, he influenced the thinking of countless thousands of other readers about the character of Josef Stalin and the Soviet regime.” This shows that Duranty had a great deal of influence in the journalism world that he was awarded a Pulitzer prize.
Stephen Glass is another journalist that defrauded the public. Glass, who was a young reporter for The New Republic in Chicago, was later discovered to be a fabulist. A fabulist is someone that makes up elaborate falsified stories. Glass was found to have fabricated over 20 articles, going so far as to make up fake sources, websites, emails, etc. In the Vanity Fair article, “Shattered Glass” the author had gone on to describe it as, “the most sustained fraud in modern journalism." The case of Stephen Glass is just a portrayal of how far someone will go to cover their tracks.
Jayson Blair was a very talented writer and reporter for the New York Times. After his internship the Times not only extended his internship, but then later offered him a coveted position on the staff of about 375 reporters. Blair was known in the journalism world as eager, talented, and charismatic. However, it was later revealed that he fabricated, plagiarized, and overall fictionalized more than 600 stories. Stories that ranged from small daily crime stories, to huge global crises. “CORRECTING THE RECORD; Times Reporter Who Resigned Leaves Long Trail of Deception” written by Dan Barry, David Barstow, Jonathan D. Glater, Adam Liptak and Jacques Steinberg, Blair was given a multitude of chances to redeem himself. In fact, evidence of his unethical behavior was so apparent that, “...Jonathan Landman, the metropolitan editor, dashed off a two-sentence e-mail message to newsroom administrators that read: ''We have to stop Jayson from writing for the Times. Right now.'' This just goes to show that Blair didn’t make a one time mistake, he continuously fabricated or plagiarized his work to the point where editors were warning other people about his inaccuracy.
As much to blame as journalists are for plagiarizing and fabricating their own work, there has to be some responsibility taken from the editors and publishers that don’t fact check people’s work. For instance former journalist Liane Membis was an intern for the Wall Street Journal for reportedly less than 3 weeks. Membis was fired because a story she had written about the reopening of the 103rd Street Pedestrian Bridge in Manhattan, had a lot of unidentifiable sources. According to "Liane Membis, Fired Wall Street Journal Intern, Had Journalism Problems At Yale," by Tyler Kingkade goes into not only her downfall at the Wall Street Journal, but also how while she was an undergrad at Yale had encountered problems with the journalism code of ethics The article stated, "As a freshman in 2009, Membis wrote an article about Yale’s Marsh Botanic Garden that, as the IvyGate blog points out, required a lengthy correction. The correction comes in at 187 words, while the article was 795 words." This is interesting because if Yale had publicly released information regarding Membis and her fabrications, then it’s surprising that a prestigious newsroom would hire her in the first place. Stephen Glass is another case of other editors being negligent when it comes to fact checking. In the article “Rechecking a Writer Facts, A Magazine Uncovers Fiction” by Robin Pogrebin wrote, “How could The New Republic allow Mr. Glass to repeatedly use anonymous sources? Because Mr. Glass was considered a hard-working, trustworthy member of the staff, editors who worked with him say, fact-checkers gave him the benefit of the doubt. ''When you're working together with someone,'' Mr. Lane said, ‘you assume you're being dealt with in good faith.'’” This just goes to show that there should be blame placed upon the editors because they didn’t feel compelled to check his work.
Jack Kelley was a reporter for USA Today and was a Pulitzer Prize finalist who turned out to have fabricated stories from as early as 1991. In the USA Today article, "The problems of Jack Kelley and USA TODAY" wrote, "A virus of "fear"—defined somewhat differently by different staff critics —clearly infected some staffers in the News section and inhibited them from pushing complaints about Kelley. Some staff members said they were scolded or insulted when they expressed concerns about Kelley to editors." This shows that people in the newsroom were suspicious of Kelley and because of his veteran status, they felt a fear of coming forward. Toxic environments can stop work from being done. If the other staffers successfully complained about Kelley, it could've prevented further fabrications to occur. This adds to the idea that published stories with fabrication or plagiarism goes beyond the journalist, it’s a problem in the system.
Plagiarism and fabrication is frowned upon in the journalism world, however the punishment for committing such acts doesn’t always fit the crime of the culprit. Numerous reporters that have been exposed for fabricating and/or plagiarizing don’t always get the punishment they deserve, if they get punished at all. This can be compared with the two former reporters Patricia Smith and Mike Barnicle. Patricia Smith was a reporter for the Boston Globe before it was discovered that Smith had fictionalized people, names, and interviews for her stories when she was forced to resign. Mike Barnicle was a reporter who also worked at the Boston Globe with Smith. It had come to attention that Barincle had plagiarized jokes from the comedian George Carlin; he wasn't asked to resign immediately. In fact in the article "Editorial Observer; The High Priceof Reprieving Mike Barnicle" by Howell Raines stated, "Mr. Storin later relented, saying that his original decision had been hasty and that it was unfair to give Mr. Barnicle the same penalty as Ms. Smith, since his lapse was so much more marginal than hers." This shows that not only was he not asked to resign but they didn't even find what Mike Baricle did as reprimand-able. In an article written by Mark Jurkowitz he wrote, "Still, as the Globe rechecked 30 months' worth of Barnicle columns, editors heard the charges that Smith was cashiered for something Barnicle has been accused of. On Friday, Dershowitz suggested the Globe might be guilty of a double standard rooted in 'race, gender, and ethnicity." This just goes to show that not every journalist is treated the same for breaking the ethical code. These two reporters worked at the same office and yet they weren’t treated the same. If the real reason why Mike Barnicle didn’t suffer the same consequences as Patricia Smith was because of race and/or gender then it goes to show how flawed the journalism world is. Also in the article, “Journalism Has A Plagiarism Problem. But it's Not the One You'd Expect" by David Uberti said, "We should have an expansive view of plagiarism. We should not be afraid to call it what it is. That doesn't mean that's a fireable offense. It's an error that should be corrected like any other error. But let's separate the sanctions from the definition." This just proves that plagiarism, while it shouldn't be taken lightly, should also not be dealt with the same way every time.
Journalists that have been exposed for plagiarism haven’t always been apologetic about their actions. For instance Rick Bragg was accused of fabricating his work and after he got suspended, it was later discovered that he was using an intern to write his articles for him. Bragg's case is particularly upsetting because while plagiarizing and fabrication is frowned upon, having an unpaid intern do your bidding for you, and taking credit for it is unethical. In the Washington Post article, "Rick Bragg Quits At New York Times" by Howard Kurtz, Bragg said this in response to his intern writing his articles, "I had a much better pair of eyes than I have right now out there. We often recreate a scene, or an image, based on someone's memory. I had someone there for four days, soaking up every detail, every nuance. Often that's what stringers are -- not just quote-gatherers, they're your eyes." This shows how unapologetic he was about the situation, instead of just giving credit where it's due. Christopher Newton ___________, was fired from the Associated Press because he couldn't verify more than 45 different people and organizations that Newton had mentioned in his pieces. According to the New York Times article, "A.P Says it Couldn't Find 45 of Writer's Sources," by Felicity Barringer, Newton had said "I am no longer pursuing the situation with The A.P., but rather with an attorney. We have already located some of those people The A.P. says do not exist.'' This shows that he did not want to admit that he had falsified his work.
The case of Jayson Blair is yet another example of journalists not feeling remorse after being exposed for plagiarism and fabrication. In The Los Angeles Times article, “He Stole a Lot More than My Words,” by Macarena Hernandez, was when his lack of compassion became evident. Especially when Hernandez said, “I haven’t heard a single note of regret for what he [Jayson Balir] did to Anguiano, to his colleagues and to readers. Instead he is shopping his story around shamelessly. He says he wants his tale to help others “heal.” He says he had to kill Jayson the journalist to save Jayson the human being. He could, he says, write “a book full of anecdotes” about racism at the New York Times.” The reason this is so upsetting is because Blair tried to make it appear as though everyone’s criticism of him was based on racism. As a black woman, this is infuriating because there is a lot of racial inequality in any workforce, a lot of which is ignored. The fact that he became ‘The Boy that called racism’ is upsetting to people of color that work hard and still encounter racism in their workplaces.
Shaun King was a journalist working for the Daily News when he was accused of plagiarising. It was discovered that in some of his articles he had used virtually the same paragraph from a Daily Beast article without proper citation. King had denied these allegations and instead blamed it on his editor who King said to have deleted his citations without his knowledge. This resulted in the lay off of not only King but his editor who is identified as Jotham Sederstrom. In the article, “Daily News Fires Editor After Shaun King Accused of Plagiarism” by Dylan Beyers stated, “While the Daily News took time to put a statement together, King took to Twitter. In a series of sharply worded tweets, he vehemently defended himself and even suggested that the Daily Beast was motivated to damage his reputation because ‘Chelsea Clinton is on the board of the parent company of The Daily Beast.’ ‘They ride HARD for Hillary," King wrote. "Sure that played a role.’” This shows that King was very defensive and even went as far as to blame other people for this mistake. King even took to Twitter to rant about the situation and plead his innocence. This can be proven when King wrote on Twitter, “‘By in large, if you think I plagiarized a damn thing, you can kiss my a**," he wrote. "Feel free to quote that. Those are my words too.’”
Over time there has been a decrease in the public’s trust of the mass media. In the article “Americans' Trust in Mass Media Edges Down to 41%” the author Megan Brenan wrote, “Republicans became increasingly mistrustful of the media in 2016 when Trump was campaigning for president and was sharply critical of the media's coverage of him. Between 2015 and 2016, Republican trust in the mass media fell 18 points to its historical low of 14%, where it remained in 2017.” This shows that the media is becoming less of a reliable source of information for a lot of Americans and former President Donald Trump even made it his mission to paint the media as the enemy of the state. In the article, "State of the First Amendment Survey" stated, "most respondents (77 percent) agreed that misinformation on the internet and the spread of fake news is a serious threat to democracy, and most agreed it is important for our democracy that the news media act as a watchdog on government". Between these two resources alone I came to the conclusion that the reason why Americans are trusting the media less and less is because of actual journalists. After reading the article "Roundup of plagiarism and fabrication cases" I saw a lot of trusted news sources that have had run ins with plagiarism. Between fake news, plagiarism, and fabrication, it's no surprise that America is trusting mass media less and less.
The pressure being exposed for plagiarism has been a fear amongst journalists who follow a code of ethics in their writing. For instance in the article, "Fewer Sources Go Nameless In the Press, Survey Says," by Katherine Q. Seelye, Seelye talks about how less and less articles are featuring anonymous sources. The article goes into talking about the difference between major papers and smaller ones, and how bigger papers are more willing to use anonymous sources than the latter. From what I've read from the curated sources each week, is that plagiarism is more apparent in major papers such as; New York Times, The Washington Post, and USA Today, than smaller, less known papers. This is most likely due to the increasing pressure that is bestowed upon reporters. In the American Journalism Review's article, "Confronting the Culture," the author Lori Robertson discussed how much pressure goes on in a newsroom, especially after unethical reporters like; Jayson Blair and Stephen Glass. "Then there's the increasing pressure to produce, produce, produce--in a 24-hour, multimedia news world of rampant downsizing. "The more pressure that is put on journalists to produce more, faster, quicker, cheaper, the more the industry encourages cutting corners, which is just another way of saying cheating..." This just shows that the actions of others like Jack Kelley, and Stephen Glass, has influenced newsroom culture, and has really put the stress onto these reporters to not only produce compelling articles, but to do so without cheating. Obviously one of the biggest rules of journalism is to not plagiarize or fabricate your stories, but after so many well respected reporters have been caught with their tail behind their legs, it puts an added pressure on those who are ethical in their writing. In the article, “Why Plagiarize When You Can Rip Off A Writer's Thoughts?" by Marc Fisher it stated, "We will therefore land ferociously on any miscreant who borrows even four or five words from another source. We will turn ourselves into the plagiarism police, vainly straining to show that our work is original, when, in fact, nearly all journalism is second-order—that is, we discover, report, and interpret the ideas and actions of others." This just goes to show that (most) journalists will over-critique their work in order to not get ridiculed for plagiarism, when in reality a lot of stories are going to sound similar, or be similar to previously published work. While obviously it's a good thing that journalists are inspecting their work, and they (always) should, it just seems like this fear or plagiarism is detrimental to honest writers.
In conclusion journalism has been less and less reputable due to unethical journalists. Former journalists like; Janet Cooke, Stephen Glass, and Jayson Blair are just shining examples of how plagiarism is affecting the field. Because of this, society as a whole has begun to trust the media less and less. To rectify this, journalists need to begin to be more honest in their writing and give proper citations if they do choose to use work from others. Until this happens, the trust in media will continue to deplete and the name of journalism will be a thing of the past.
Comments