Sunday, July 09, 2006
Coulter Copying Continued
Today Newsweek checks in:
I posted an article last year here about the absence of media attention after the first time RP and I fingered Coulter for liberal lifting...but what the hey...I think I'll repost it again, since the coverage in my opinion should still be wider.
More On Coulter's 'Copy & Paste' Column
So what do you know.
The mainstream media has yet to make any mention of the plagiarism committed by Ann Coulter in a June 29th column, first uncovered by The Rude Pundit, and followed up by this O.W.P.B. (Obsessed With Plagiarism Blogger) at Raw Story and here.
I can't say that I'm surprised.
But the Ann Coulter plagiarism has been noted in the alternative press; Walt Nett, the Media Watch columnist at Tuscon Weekly, wrote about it the other day in a piece entitled "Coulter: Plagio, ergo sum?."
Before I quote from Nett's article I'd like to re-run the most grievous examples of plagiarism that we uncovered in Coulter's articles for the benefit of the naysayers, on the right and left, who believe we were overreaching:
Coulter: "inserting a speculum into her vagina and inviting audience members on stage to view her cervix with a flashlight."
Counterpoint: "inserting a speculum into her vagina, invites members on stage to view her cervix with a flashlight."
Coulter: "...the sexual molestation of a group of 10 children in a pedophile's garage, including acts of bestiality, with the children commenting on how much they enjoyed the pedophilia."
Counterpoint: "...the sexual molestation of 10 children in a pedophile's garage, including acts of bestiality, and how much they enjoyed the pedophile's games."
Some right wingers who left comments at The Raw Story article defended Coulter by claiming that she was only presenting a list in bullet paragraphs, but since she reused much of the same language that doesn't excuse her as any third grade english teacher can tell you.
Not citing your sources is freakin' plagiarism. End of debate.
Back to Nett:
"As of this writing, the mainstream media still hasn't picked up on the latest credibility controversy surrounding conservative columnist Ann Coulter--that several chunks of her June 29 column appear to be lifted from sources as much as 20 years old."
"The story has been bounding through the political blogosphere since mid-July. And the similarities between Coulter's column and previously published works are pretty damning."
Nett gives a fews examples, with links to Raw Story and The Rude Pundit (but not me...waaaah!), and then reveals that he called Coulter's boss about it:
"We sent a note last week to Greg Melvin, Coulter's handler at Universal Press Syndicate, asking if he or she or Universal Press had any comments on the current controversy. No answer."
I betcha Universal Press wouldn't ignore similiar accusations if they were directed at Ted Rall, for instance.
Nett ends his article with this:
"It will be interesting to see what Universal Press, the Star and the other newspapers that buy Coulter's column do about this, assuming anyone in the mainstream looks into the June 29 plagiarism allegations."
This O.W.P.B. certainly won't be holding his breath, that's for sure.
Although, I was awfully surprised that Bill O'Reilly didn't mention it in his argument with Coulter the other night (check out the Crooks and Liars video). I thought for sure that O'Reilly had my blog bookmarked since I'm one of the few left-leaning bloggers who never brought up loofahs and falafels (whoops...I did now).
(Hat Tip to EZsuds81 for linking to my blog at Goaz.com and mentioning the Tucson Weekly article which I found through Google)