Why Should We Expect A Rebuilt Internet To Work Any Better?

If Plagiarism Is Presenting Someone Else's Work As Your Own... What Did Katie Couric Do?

from the someone-please-explain dept

Mon, Apr 16th 2007 6:48am — Mike Masnick

There have been a number of interesting discussions from people rethinking the concept of plagiarism lately. From famous authors like Malcolm Gladwell to Jonathan Lethem, some folks are realizing that the line between plagiarism and inspiration isn't as clear cut as some would like it to be. While some claim it's just the younger generation that has a hard time understanding the difference, it clearly shifts over into the business world as well. This week, there's been some buzz over CBS News having to fire a producer who "borrowed extensively" from a Wall Street Journal column in writing up a "commentary" for newscaster Katie Couric. However, this has a few people scratching their heads -- as they realize the general definition of what plagiarism is (presenting the works of others as your own) actually applies equally to Katie Couric having some staffer write up her personal commentary (including supposed nostalgia over getting a library card). Yet, somehow having someone else write up your personal opinion and commentary is fine -- unless that commentary actually comes from someone else. And we wonder why many students today don't see plagiarism as being that bad. It's because they see the same thing done every day by adults who don't see it as being wrong at all.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

49 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

student, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:14am

damn citations to hell!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Luke, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:21am

Plagarism is over rated
People go on and on about how plagarism is all over the place in our educational system and how its gotten worse. I don't think it's gotten any worse it's just now far, far more easily detected. "Plagarism" has been in society for a very long time...why else would we have a word used solely for explaining someone stealing someone elses thoughts?

I think some people are just grumpy that they didn't do a good job plagarising when they were students so they want to bitch now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Luke, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:21am

Plagarism is over rated
People go on and on about how plagarism is all over the place in our educational system and how its gotten worse. I don't think it's gotten any worse it's just now far, far more easily detected. "Plagarism" has been in society for a very long time...why else would we have a word used solely for explaining someone stealing someone elses thoughts?

I think some people are just grumpy that they didn't do a good job plagarising when they were students so they want to bitch now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tom, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:23am

People go on and on about how plagarism is all over the place in our educational system and how its gotten worse. I don't think it's gotten any worse it's just now far, far more easily detected. "Plagarism" has been in society for a very long time...why else would we have a word used solely for explaining someone stealing someone elses thoughts?

I think some people are just grumpy that they didn't do a good job plagarising when they were students so they want to bitch now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- haywood, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:30am
  
  Re:
  It is just so easy to do now, blame computers and the internet. I often copied and pasted a nicely fitting paragraph into my papers and edited them down to less than plagiarism. I also blame instructors who will assign papers in subjects other than composition which are mainly busy work that serve little purpose and overload the students just so they have something to grade.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tom, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:23am

;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RandomThoughts, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:26am

Did anyone actually believe that Katie was writing that content anyway?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Bum, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:27am

If Plagiarism Is Presenting Someone Else's Work As
She anchored it. She's the Anchor. Nothing she does is hers. I give more credit(or blame) to the producer.,
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ConceptJunkie (profile), 16 Apr 2007 @ 9:21am
  
  Re: If Plagiarism Is Presenting Someone Else's Wor
  Yes, I don't think you can blame the dummy when the ventriloquist makes a mistake.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Walter Cronkite, 16 Apr 2007 @ 9:34am
  
  Re: If Plagiarism Is Presenting Someone Else's Wor
  "Katie Couric is the anchor and managing editor of the CBS Evening News with Katie Couric."
  
  From the cbsnews.com homepage.
  
  So she is more than a (pretty) talking head. She has some responsibility for what is said.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
ehrichweiss, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:29am

dammit..
Tom, you beat me to it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Guru80, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:31am

After spending hours upon hours upon hours on my thesis I can definitely understand the draw to plagiarize especially after finding out years later that a good friend of mine did nothing but in his. How it wasn't caught is beyond me.

Plagiarism basically comes down to laziness and no imagination or creativity. Never have understood how someone could knowingly and willingly take credit for someone else's work as their own.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:32am

People go on and on about how plagarism is all over the place in our educational system and how its gotten worse. I don't think it's gotten any worse it's just now far, far more easily detected. "Plagarism" has been in society for a very long time...why else would we have a word used solely for explaining someone stealing someone elses thoughts?

I think some people are just grumpy that they didn't do a good job plagarising when they were students so they want to bitch now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mark Murphy, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:36am

Authorized vs. unauthorized
When I type "plagiarism" into dictionary.com, the first definition (courtesy of Random House Unabridged Dictionary) says plagiarism is for unauthorized use.

Do I think non-disclosed ghostwriting, like in the Couric case, is a great idea? Heck no -- it's Milli Vanilli with better material and shorter hair. But if the author and the speaker agree on the nature of their relationship and how the material will be presented, it's not plagiarism. In many ways, it's no different than staffers writing reports that corporate VPs take credit for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
William, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:36am

Plagiarism is over rated
People go on and on about how plagiarism is all over the place in our educational system and how its gotten worse. I don't think it's gotten any worse it's just now far, far more easily detected. "Plagiarism" has been in society for a very long time...why else would we have a word used solely for explaining someone stealing someone else's thoughts?
I think some people are just grumpy that they didn't do a good job plagiarizing when they were students so they want to bitch now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Swiss Cheese Monster, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:37am

This is a great commentary on the problems of plagiarism. I'm going to use it in my paper on plagiarism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
JChan, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:40am

the difference
The difference between what the producer did and what Katie Couric did is obvious. The producer didn't have permission to use the content from the Wall Street Journal. But the producer did give permission for Katie Couric to use the content he or she had written.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ben, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:56am
  
  Re: the difference
  But the producer did give permission for Katie Couric to use the content he or she had written. One step further: the commentary piece is a for-hire work. If done properly (and not plagerized), it is the property of CBS, even though they may disclaim the contents. Simply put, it is the producer's job to write the commentary with the intent that it will be presented on-air by the news anchor.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matt, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:51am

Plagarism is over rated
People go on and on about how plagarism is all over the place in our educational system and how its gotten worse. "Plagarism" has been in society for a very long time...why else would we have a word used solely for explaining someone innocently borrowing someone elses thoughts?

I think some people are just unhappy that they didn't do a good job plagarising when they were students so they want to kvetch now.

I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- comboman, 16 Apr 2007 @ 8:07am
  
  Re: Plagarism is over rated
  I must be tired this morning, it took me a while to get this joke. That and the fact that people often hit the submit button twice and get double posts, so I tend to ignore duplicated content anyway.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Apr 2007 @ 7:51am

funny
"This is a great commentary on the problems of plagiarism. I'm going to use it in my paper on plagiarism."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Overcast, 16 Apr 2007 @ 8:10am

The difference between what the producer did and what Katie Couric did is obvious. The producer didn't have permission to use the content from the Wall Street Journal. But the producer did give permission for Katie Couric to use the content he or she had written.

True - from a legal stand point, yes.

But plagiarism is really defined as: "the act of appropriating the literary composition of another author, or excerpts, ideas, or passages therefrom, and passing the material off as one's own creation."

So - permission or not.... The Network tries to pass of the stuff Katie's reading as 'Katie's Commentary'.

No doubt it's legal and expected. But if you are looking for a literal interpretation. It's still plagiarism.

Now assuming someone the Network credits the original writer, then it's a bit different. For instance, if they say 'Commentary written by.... so and so' In that case, you aren't trying to pass off a work as someone else's.

It's really nothing to do with the law - it's how they attempt to present it. And have you ever seen them clarify that the stuff the anchors read was written by others? Ehh, maybe somewhere in there they mention it.

No big deal in the regard anyway.

Politicians are by far the worst at giving speeches and trying to pass them off as their own.

Lucky for me, I don't have to read off speeches, news articles, commentary's all day that other people write.

Wouldn't that make most normal people feel stupid?

I mean - if you are a 'News' person or a 'Statesmen' - isn't part of the pride in accomplishing the 'news' or 'speeches' yourself?

Guess not to some, hehe.

But when you look at it...

In the grand scheme of things, history will likely remember reporters who went out and got the news, who really worked as a journalist. Those people who just sit behind the desk at the camera.... ehhh... maybe.

Katie Couric will be remembered as a pretty face. It's a shame the networks don't appreciate real journalism anymore, it's all about money and politics now.

Who you think will be remembered in 100 years from now?

Katie Couric
Walter Chronkite

I suspect Walter has a better chance...

But there are REAL events Chronkite took part in. Other than sitting behind a desk and looking pretty what will there be to remember Couric for?

I'm not knocking Katie herself at all, it's just the way the news is now...

All politics.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RandomThoughts, 16 Apr 2007 @ 8:15am

Folks, the issue isn't that Katie didn't write it and that her producer wrote it, the issue is that the producer copied the content from the Wall Street Journal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Apr 2007 @ 10:26am
  
  Re:
  Or Kate is taking credit for something her producer wrote and passing it on as her's.
  
  All in all somebody's hand is in the cookie jar.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wrinkle Beans, 16 Apr 2007 @ 8:21am

Lazy
Kids engage in plagiarism because they are lazy, plain and simple. They don't care where they get the information as long as they don't have to write the paper. The same goes for adults. No kid is going to steal material just because they see idiot adults doing it. Do kids even know who Katie Couric or for that matter Don Imus is? Going to the library is so 20th Century anyway. They are obsolete. I can't even walk into a library without thinking, hmmm I could find this information twice as fast on the internet. Libraries should be a server room in the basement with all the new documents already set in a digital format and the rare books scanned into the database and preserved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ajax 4Hire, 16 Apr 2007 @ 8:24am

plagiarism is good; schools should
teach plagiarism more often.
In engineering, software, production, body of law;
Plagiarism is preferred.

How many times have you heard:
"Don't re-invent the wheel"
"Code re-use", prior art.

There is a reason you build on others work, because it was good; patent law and copyright allow you to legimately compensate those who created the prior IP.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
mrshl, 16 Apr 2007 @ 8:50am

Something else you might not know.
Most television shows employ a separate group of "writers." Then a different group of people called "actors" mouth the words the "writers" give them.

This has been done for many years. They even have different guilds.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Greg andrew, 16 Apr 2007 @ 8:51am

I think this is called ghostwriting
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
bshock, 16 Apr 2007 @ 8:52am

Educators are missing the point
Educators should stop preaching that students should avoid plagiarism. The point for students has never been the ethics of using someone else's work -- it's that students don't learn anything unless they do the work themselves.

That's right, kids: your English paper is not expected to enhance world culture, it's meant to enhance you yourself. The point is that you practice thinking, using written language, and gathering information sources.

So teachers, shut up about "plagiarism," as if that means jack to these kids. If you want to give them a useful analogy about why they should write things themselves, try something accessible, like sports. Perhaps ask them what sort of athletes they'd be if someone else lifted weights or ran laps on their behalf. The point of school work is the exercise that develops your mental muscles.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Apr 2007 @ 9:20am

Educators are missing the point
Educators should stop preaching that students should avoid plagiarism. The point for students has never been the ethics of using someone else's work -- it's that students don't learn anything unless they do the work themselves.

That's right, kids: your English paper is not expected to enhance world culture, it's meant to enhance you yourself. The point is that you practice thinking, using written language, and gathering information sources.

So teachers, shut up about "plagiarism," as if that means jack to these kids. If you want to give them a useful analogy about why they should write things themselves, try something accessible, like sports. Perhaps ask them what sort of athletes they'd be if someone else lifted weights or ran laps on their behalf. The point of school work is the exercise that develops your mental muscles.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The infamous Joe, 16 Apr 2007 @ 9:41am
  
  Re: Educators are missing the point
  It's been a little while since I've had the joys of the public school system, but I believe appealing to the children's love of knowledge won't work anymore than putting the fear of the law into them. Most (the ones who would plagiarize) are not in it for the knowledge, they are in it for the grade.
  
  To use your metaphor, ask the kids if they'd rather run the laps everyday for 3 months to train for the championship and win the race-- or take someone else's medal and put their name on it. Same end result-- *way* less effort.
  
  Guess which one they'd pick. ;)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Andres, 16 Apr 2007 @ 9:37am

work is work
It's not plagiarism if the author is writing as a career. e.g. speech, advertising, television, political writers. Ghost writing has been a time honored profession for the newly born authors. this has been done for eons. Most writers come to terms with this when starting out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
no, 16 Apr 2007 @ 9:45am

The difference between what the producer did and what Katie Couric did is obvious. The producer didn't have permission to use the content from the Wall Street Journal. But the producer did give permission for Katie Couric to use the content he or she had written.

True - from a legal stand point, yes.

But plagiarism is really defined as: "the act of appropriating the literary composition of another author, or excerpts, ideas, or passages therefrom, and passing the material off as one's own creation."

So - permission or not.... The Network tries to pass of the stuff Katie's reading as 'Katie's Commentary'.

No doubt it's legal and expected. But if you are looking for a literal interpretation. It's still plagiarism.

Now assuming someone the Network credits the original writer, then it's a bit different. For instance, if they say 'Commentary written by.... so and so' In that case, you aren't trying to pass off a work as someone else's.

It's really nothing to do with the law - it's how they attempt to present it. And have you ever seen them clarify that the stuff the anchors read was written by others? Ehh, maybe somewhere in there they mention it.

No big deal in the regard anyway.

Politicians are by far the worst at giving speeches and trying to pass them off as their own.

Lucky for me, I don't have to read off speeches, news articles, commentary's all day that other people write.

Wouldn't that make most normal people feel stupid?

I mean - if you are a 'News' person or a 'Statesmen' - isn't part of the pride in accomplishing the 'news' or 'speeches' yourself?

Guess not to some, hehe.

But when you look at it...

In the grand scheme of things, history will likely remember reporters who went out and got the news, who really worked as a journalist. Those people who just sit behind the desk at the camera.... ehhh... maybe.

Katie Couric will be remembered as a pretty face. It's a shame the networks don't appreciate real journalism anymore, it's all about money and politics now.

Who you think will be remembered in 100 years from now?

Katie Couric
Walter Chronkite

I suspect Walter has a better chance...

But there are REAL events Chronkite took part in. Other than sitting behind a desk and looking pretty what will there be to remember Couric for?

I'm not knocking Katie herself at all, it's just the way the news is now...

All politics.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
no, 16 Apr 2007 @ 9:45am

The difference between what the producer did and what Katie Couric did is obvious. The producer didn't have permission to use the content from the Wall Street Journal. But the producer did give permission for Katie Couric to use the content he or she had written.

True - from a legal stand point, yes.

But plagiarism is really defined as: "the act of appropriating the literary composition of another author, or excerpts, ideas, or passages therefrom, and passing the material off as one's own creation."

So - permission or not.... The Network tries to pass of the stuff Katie's reading as 'Katie's Commentary'.

No doubt it's legal and expected. But if you are looking for a literal interpretation. It's still plagiarism.

Now assuming someone the Network credits the original writer, then it's a bit different. For instance, if they say 'Commentary written by.... so and so' In that case, you aren't trying to pass off a work as someone else's.

It's really nothing to do with the law - it's how they attempt to present it. And have you ever seen them clarify that the stuff the anchors read was written by others? Ehh, maybe somewhere in there they mention it.

No big deal in the regard anyway.

Politicians are by far the worst at giving speeches and trying to pass them off as their own.

Lucky for me, I don't have to read off speeches, news articles, commentary's all day that other people write.

Wouldn't that make most normal people feel stupid?

I mean - if you are a 'News' person or a 'Statesmen' - isn't part of the pride in accomplishing the 'news' or 'speeches' yourself?

Guess not to some, hehe.

But when you look at it...

In the grand scheme of things, history will likely remember reporters who went out and got the news, who really worked as a journalist. Those people who just sit behind the desk at the camera.... ehhh... maybe.

Katie Couric will be remembered as a pretty face. It's a shame the networks don't appreciate real journalism anymore, it's all about money and politics now.

Who you think will be remembered in 100 years from now?

Katie Couric
Walter Chronkite

I suspect Walter has a better chance...

But there are REAL events Chronkite took part in. Other than sitting behind a desk and looking pretty what will there be to remember Couric for?

I'm not knocking Katie herself at all, it's just the way the news is now...

All politics.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Effeminem, 16 Apr 2007 @ 9:58am

You don't need sources if you start with "I think therefore I am" in paragraph 2.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SPR, 16 Apr 2007 @ 10:04am

Plagarism
The major difference between Katie Couric and a legitimate reporter is that Katie is only a "news reader" and doesn't create any content.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Apr 2007 @ 10:33am

Will all you morons stop posting 5 fucking times. Click on "submit" ONCE you dumbshits, it's not that fucking hard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 16 Apr 2007 @ 10:43am
  
  Re:
  Will all you morons stop posting 5 fucking times. Click on "submit" ONCE you dumbshits, it's not that fucking hard.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chris M, 16 Apr 2007 @ 10:45am

Plagiarism or research
I think Tom Lehrer put it best: copy from one, it's plagiarism. Copy from more than one, it's research...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Big Dave, 16 Apr 2007 @ 10:45am

Plagiarism: Originality for Dummies
I suspect that the vast majority of people have never had the pleasure of experiencing an original thought. It's OK to use someone else's words when they've communicated a thought you've had in better words - just give them credit.
It's my feeling that plagiarism as it is being used today is just a way to not have to think for yourself. Just Google your subject, and take your pick from the menu of sources to steal from. No need to go any further.
Thankfully, we've got that very small percentage of the population that actually enjoys thinking.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Apr 2007 @ 10:56am

Plagiarism isn't stealing. It's maintaining standards
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
CopyCat1000, 16 Apr 2007 @ 11:29am

Yes I just plagerized Anonymous Coward
Plagiarism isn't stealing. It's maintaining standards
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Matthew Rigdon, 16 Apr 2007 @ 12:26pm

Katie Couric is a brand
They rolled her out when the old brand, Dan Rather, stopped testing well with focus groups.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Apr 2007 @ 2:39pm

You are all Idiots.

Who cars about Katie Couric and her stupid commentary.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Grade 11 Student doing the F****ing I.B., 16 Apr 2007 @ 4:19pm

I've heard the phrase "Sharing is Caring", and I totally agree with it. When we "share" , we care for others who are in tough times by giving them material they could use to "prosper"; now granted they wont better themselvest but lets face it, in this modern society we're living in it's not about bettering yourself, its about getting ahead of the competition, its about propering in life. Look at the famous baseball and basketball players, they use performance enhancing drugs to gain a leg up on the opposition. Now, back to the topic at hand,I thoroghly believe that copyright laws should be eradicated because of many reasons. One is that they always hamper innovation and creativity because they limit the "things" you need to make something. Two is that they also give you trouble when you're in a bind with a paper in school (I've had a lot of those but I manage), they prohibit you from using work as you're own, not even paraphrasing (damn you turnitin.com!!!). In short, I hate copyright laws and I dont give two shits about them. SHARING IS CARING my friends and fellow students.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
rEdEyEz, 16 Apr 2007 @ 8:14pm

Put the blame where is squarely belongs...
Katie is a confirmed hack.

Do you really think that what happened to Danny-boy Rather is any different?

...my anonymous source, - anonymous because he's not officially authorized to comment, says "No"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 16 Apr 2007 @ 9:07pm

Using this logic, U.S. Presidents are committing plagiarism every time they give a speech. (They have speech writers, after all.)

I agree with others who said that plagiarism is UNAUTHORIZED use, and that there is a difference between ghostwriting and plagiarism.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous, 17 Apr 2007 @ 12:09pm

CBS/Katie Couric sunk
I will boycott and avoid Katie Couric and CBS as much as I can.

Katie has always given me extremely bad vibes, even when she was at NBC. Something has never been right about her. She has a sickness.

CBS is truly stupid to attempt these lies on network news. It's almost as if the blogsphere paid them to be this stupid to drive more people to seek their news from blogs instead.

Katie attempted to pass off a long debunked Obama madrassa story from January in APRIL as if this was new news! Not only that, when caught with their pants down they CHANGED the transcript of what she originally said! Such lowdown dirty cheap lying deserves no respect from any viewer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pat, 4 Nov 2007 @ 6:00am

Changing the Author on a Published Document
Is it legal for someone to put your name as author on a large number of documents which were originally written by someone else, with which you yourself are totally unfamiliar, and to do this behind your back, WITHOUT YOUR KNOWLEDGE OR CONSENT?

These documents are subsequently published in the internal knowledge-base of our large international corporation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]