-
It's that time of year again - our ISP is asking for money. If you have some spare change, please click the Donate link... Thanks!
- About Us
- Search
- Need Help?
- Donate
- Login/Register
Latest Entries
Actions Menu
Blog Roll
- 4F Facebook Page
- Turn Up The Night with Kenny Pick
- Stephanie Miller Show
- The Tim Corrimal Show
- The Rachel Maddow Show
- Angry Americans with Paul Rieckhoff
- Thom Hartmann Program
- Turnips! Fans of Turn Up the Night Facebook Page
- Snopes.com
- Factcheck.org
- Official White House Page, if you must.
- The Brad Blog / Green News Report
- The Poorly Written Political Blog (Joe Santorsa)
Don't Quote Me
Author: BobR
Date: 2013-11-07 11:56:53
Most people know what plagarism is. Way back in high school, the lesson was pretty clear: do your research, but use your own words. The rationale was that you needed to show you understood the sources you were using. The lesson was that you shouldn't take credit for someone else's work.
It would be easy to forgive a high school drop out for not understanding the concept, but a high school graduate should understand. A college graduate definitely should understand. When you quote someone else's words, you make it clear that you're quoting, and you give attribution.
This is what makes it so hard to believe that Rand Paul doesn't get it. The issue of theft of "intellectual property" is something that strikes near and dear to me. As author of hundreds of articles on this site, as author of numerous songs, as author of hundreds of thousands of lines of software code (including the code to this website), I know I would be extremely irritated if someone used my work without asking, especially if they were making money off of it.
Rand Paul, on the other hand, figures the best defense is a strong offense:
(see what I did there Senator Paul? I provided a link as attribution and made it clear I was quoting. How hard is that?)
Just how bad is it? Bad enough that he felt the need to challenge Rachel Maddow to a duel. Buzzfeed has been all over this, so I did a quick search there for Rand Paul's name and got these hits:
What's amusing about all this is that his father (Rep Ron Paul) had the opposite problem. In his case, he claimed that the words published under his name were not actually his. Both the father and the son have controversies for initially claiming credit for writings that they may not - or did not - actually write. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree apparently.
But don't quote me on that.
It would be easy to forgive a high school drop out for not understanding the concept, but a high school graduate should understand. A college graduate definitely should understand. When you quote someone else's words, you make it clear that you're quoting, and you give attribution.
This is what makes it so hard to believe that Rand Paul doesn't get it. The issue of theft of "intellectual property" is something that strikes near and dear to me. As author of hundreds of articles on this site, as author of numerous songs, as author of hundreds of thousands of lines of software code (including the code to this website), I know I would be extremely irritated if someone used my work without asking, especially if they were making money off of it.
Rand Paul, on the other hand, figures the best defense is a strong offense:
Sen. Rand Paul shifted his tone from apology to condemnation Wednesday as he continued to face fallout from alleged plagiarism in numerous speeches and articles.
Last week, the Kentucky Republican chalked up accusations that he had improperly lifted passages from Wikipedia to a misunderstanding about attribution practices and the malicious intent of “haters.” But as more suspiciously similar passages emerged, including one in a September Washington Times column that prompted the paper to suspend Paul’s weekly contributions, Paul has been forced to go on the offensive.
“What makes me mad about the whole thing is that I believe there is a difference between errors of omission and errors of intention. We aren’t perfect and we have made errors of omission, but we never intended to mislead anybody,” Paul told the Review’s Robert Costa, saying the whole situation has been blown out of proportion.
(see what I did there Senator Paul? I provided a link as attribution and made it clear I was quoting. How hard is that?)
Just how bad is it? Bad enough that he felt the need to challenge Rachel Maddow to a duel. Buzzfeed has been all over this, so I did a quick search there for Rand Paul's name and got these hits:
- Three Pages Of Rand Paul's Book Were Plagiarized From Think Tanks
- Sections Of Rand Paul's Op-Ed On Drug Sentencing Plagiarized From Article Week Earlier
- Section Of Rand Paul’s Book Plagiarized Forbes Article
- Rachel Maddow: Rand Paul Plagiarized "Gattaca's" Wikipedia Page
- Rand Paul Has Given Speeches Plagiarized From Wikipedia Before
What's amusing about all this is that his father (Rep Ron Paul) had the opposite problem. In his case, he claimed that the words published under his name were not actually his. Both the father and the son have controversies for initially claiming credit for writings that they may not - or did not - actually write. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree apparently.
But don't quote me on that.
