Why We Should All Want Politicians Who Plagiarize
from the it's-called-learning-from-others dept
There's been a rather bizarre debate about plagiarism kicked off by charges from Hillary Clinton's campaign that Barack Obama has "plagiarized" some of his speeches. This isn't a political blog, and I won't get into the politics of this, but we do talk about plagiarism here, and it's a ridiculous claim. In the past, we've noted that it's time to rethink the concept of plagiarism, and even pointed to Jonathan Lethem's fantastic defense of plagiarism, which was entirely plagiarized itself. Many people wrongly confuse copyright and plagiarism -- even though they are two separate things. Copyright has nothing to do with making sure someone gets credit for their work. What some people want to call plagiarism, others are realizing is actually a form of collaboration. Ideas and words do not come to us uniquely as a burst of inspiration -- but are built on what we have all learned from others. When anyone speaks, they are "plagiarizing" others in some form or another. Name a political candidate who has only uttered his or her own words, not taking anything from anyone else and improving on it in their own way.Thankfully, various speechwriters have come forward to ridicule the charges of plagiarism, noting that all political speeches pull from others, and when is the last time you heard a politician credit his or her own speechwriter for a speech he or she had just given? Copyright expert William Patry has blasted the charges as well. In fact, most of the commentary seems to be about what a lame tactic it is. Most amusing of all, perhaps, are the false claims by one news organization that it broke the story. Think about that for a second: a news organization is demanding undeserved credit for breaking a story on a politician who, by omission, failed to credit where his ideas came from. Which is worse? Claiming credit for something you did not do, or failing to credit a friend and advisor who provided you with an idea you built on?
But the key point here is that I want a politician who plagiarizes. I want a politician who takes the ideas of others, mixes them around and comes out with something better. I want a politician who doesn't think that all good ideas spring from his or her head alone, but knows that by listening to others, and by internalizing those ideas, remixing those ideas and building on top of those ideas something better, something more profound, something more meaningful can be produced. Any politician who chooses not to build on the ideas of others and who insists that only he or she creates the speeches and policies put forth is not a politician worth following.
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
Filed Under: barack obama, hillary clinton, plagiarism, politics, speeches
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's not a legal or moral issue. No one (and I'm a Republican, mind you) really thinks it was WRONG to use those words.
The problem with it is that it reeks of the same old crap. Obama has made a very big deal of claiming that he's different....and this is same old same old. People shut down Romney not so much because he waffled on some issues but because of what that implied.....that he was fake, that he was simply willing to say whatever it took, that he was treating the campaign like a corporate marketing effort. Clinton gives much the same Vibe, which is part of why her negatives are so high.
I had noticed that Obama was making very similar moves and striking the same tone that Deval Patrick's Campaign had (I live in Boston), I just hadn't realized it was literally the saem thing until it was pointed out.
So here's Obama, and it looks like he's been essentially borrowing a winning playbook. Just saying what it took, essentially. And that's why it's so bad, cuz people really thought he was different. It made up for the fact he was so inexperienced. And now maybe he's not so different, and maybe it doesn't make up for it anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Obama plagarized
Obama lifted rhetoric and passed it off as his own. Obama plagarized, but Duval has covered for him as a crony. Obama lied to his audience; he perpetuated a fraud on them. He also lied about rudely snubbing Hillary Clinton at the SOTU. He lifted from her economic solution. He has shown a pattern of lying showing he cannot be trusted on his word. He has the character flaw of dishonesty of a corrupt politician.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Obama plagarized
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf
Then come back and talk to us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Obama plagarized
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Obama plagarized
So what you're saying is.... you didn't read the document... right? You can go ahead and cop out if you want to...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Obama plagarized
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Obama plagarized
Don't get me wrong... Clinton isn't BAD... she's just not THE candidate. As far as I am concerned, out of EVERYONE that is running-- the only one that has actually worked for CHANGE-- is Obama. He's proven it time and time again.
Getting bills passed is tough. And even though some of his bills didn't make it, you only have to look at them to notice that he wants (and has wanted) real change for a long time, and has worked for it long before he was a candidate.
It's easy to parrot something you've heard someone else say or something you read somewhere else or whatever... but when you take the time to sit down and go over their voting habits and look over the bills they have written, one candidate truly starts to shine. And that's why I support Obama.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Obama plagarized
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It'd make my life a hell of a lot easier.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Matt Bennett's comment
There's merit in your observation that this looks to be part of a playbook -- then again, ALL campaigns are based on playbooks, and those are based in large part on the collective experience of those managing the campaign. For example, just at the moment, it appears that Senator Clinton's campaign tried out some plays in Wisconsin (perhaps because they were fairly sure they'd lose anyway, so it made a safe testing area) and are now choosing among those to see which will work in Ohio and Texas. (I don't mean to single her campaign out: everyone does this at all levels of politics. It's just that this example is timely and easy to observe.)
I'll argue, though, that the we the voting public have brought this upon ourselves: we are presented with this because it works. Look at how much press coverage has been expended on McCain's younger wife or Edwards' haircut or Clinton's tears or Obama's wife's comments or other essentially meaningless trivia, compared to substantive coverage of tough issues like "how the heck are we going to fix the broken economy?" All of these things garner TV ratings and sell newspapers and boost candidates -- because we make them do so. If we'd stop paying attention to them, stop responding to them, then maybe we could get a sober discussion of various economic proposals -- boring, lengthy, and wonky, but vitally important and something we should be paying close attention to.
I'm not concerned about this plagiarism non-issue. I recognize that clever lines (such as Senator Obama's "Washington is where good ideas go to die" line from Tuesday night) are often derivative -- for instance, that's similar to my own "Paper is where data goes to die" which I turn got from someone else's "X is where Y goes to die" whose origin I've long since forgotten. Memes like this are everywhere, and it'd be too much to expect everyone to come up with new ones every time they give a speech. I'm far more concerned about the concepts beyond the words -- what those saying them actually plan to do should they be given the opportunity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Matt Bennett's comment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Matt Bennett's comment
I likewise agree that the media preys on our baser instincts cuz it works. Foxnews.com has a "most read" listing on the right, and it's usually a story about Britney Spears going crazy that wins. I die a little inside each time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
comments on plagiarism
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cutter892
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hillary's campaign
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
TechDirt about politics...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Plagiarize
Start from there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Plagiarize
goodness sakes these people look like kids telling grandma someone stole their sweets. enough Clinton camp.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"But the key point here is that I want a politician who plagiarizes. I want a politician who takes the ideas of others, mixes them around and comes out with something better. I want a politician who doesn't think that all good ideas spring from his or her head alone, but knows that by listening to others, and by internalizing those ideas, remixing those ideas and building on top of those ideas something better, something more profound, something more meaningful can be produced. Any politician who chooses not to build on the ideas of others and who insists that only he or she creates the speeches and policies put forth is not a politician worth following."
As for Hillary Clinton, I feel she is weak. Her husband cheated on her, made a fool of her. She laid down and took it.
If he was my husband his A$$ would be grass and everyone would know about it.
She apparently has no real passion for her life if she would allow that fool to do that to her and never publicly humiliate him.
You can hate what I said or like it. This is true, she is weak!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Click to read more on Personal Loans
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
In responce
Thanks for taking the time to read my responce
Jason
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
plagiarism checking
Plagiarism is a growing problem in academia and the work place. The internet has made it easy for nearly anyone to copy written material and pass it off as their own work. Because of the legal and ethical dilemmas associated with plagiarism, plagiarism checking software is now readily available. With so many online plagiarism detectors, choosing one may seem like an overwhelming task, but it can be easy if you know what you're looking for.
Extensive Plagiarism Checking Software
An online service that can check for plagiarism is a good place to start. A good plagiarism service won't just run through a few well-known plagiarism sites looking for copied work. Instead, the better plagiarism checking software programs will also compare work published through magazines, academic journals, books and billions of academic papers. The most advanced programs will also check message boards, blogs and other forms of casual internet communication.
Because not all plagiarism is copied word for word, a service that compares sentence structure and searches for papers with different synonyms is important. This means that someone submitting a paper as their own won't be able to simply use a thesaurus to change a few key words.
You can also find more details and services about plagiarism at here:
In depth plagiarism checking service
Thanks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]