海角大神

Fareed Zakaria, the host of the CNN news show GPS and a Washington Post columnist, is on the hot seat for the second time in two years for allegations that he plagiarized material for use in his written work. Some of you will recall that in August 2010 Mr. Zakaria was briefly suspended for posting a passage in his Time magazine column that bore a close resemblance to a passage written by Jill Lepore in her New Yorker article on the same topic. Zakaria admitted that the event was a 鈥渢errible mistake鈥� and was briefly suspended, but was reinstated after his editors deemed it a one-time event. At the time the original accusation occurred, I posted this response that, while not necessarily defending Zakaria, certainly expressed some empathy for how that mistake could occur, since I had nearly made a similar mistake myself.

Now, however, two anonymous bloggers at the Our Bad Media website are claiming that Zakaria 鈥渉as a history of lifting material in his work across several major publications 鈥� despite public assurances from his employers that a previous plagiarism scandal was only an isolated incident.鈥� This is the same duo who accused Buzzfeed鈥檚 Benny Johnson of multiple instances of copying material verbatim from various online sources. Mr. Johnson was subsequently fired.

It is not clear that Zakaria is even guilty of the charges, never mind that he might suffer Johnson鈥檚 fate. In a communication sent to Politico he vigorously denied the accusations, arguing that he did in fact cite sources and otherwise drew on material that was clearly part of the public record. Here is part of his defense:

Fred Hiatt, Zakaria鈥檚 boss at the Washington Post has already dismissed the one case cited by the bloggers that involved a Zakaria column for that paper. As I noted in my earlier post on this topic, I鈥檓 not completely objective here, but I find some of the latest claims against Zakaria to stretch the meaning of the term plagiarism as I understand it. However, I鈥檒l let you be the judge.

So why take up this topic in a blog devoted to analyzing the presidency and American politics, if not to debate Zakaria鈥檚 guilt or innocence?聽 One reason is that this topic is increasingly relevant to those of us who blog 鈥� and to those who read our blogs. The charges against Zakaria are likely to resurrect an earlier debate triggered by the Johnson case regarding what constitutes plagiarism in the digital age. While some participants dismissed Johnson鈥檚 actions as a trivial copying of fluffy material, the New York Times鈥�' public editor Margaret Sullivan did not: 鈥淚t鈥檚 pretty simple, at BuzzFeed or at The New York Times: Write your own stuff; when you can鈥檛 or won鈥檛, make sure you attribute and link. Use multiple sources; compare, contrast, verify.鈥� She went on to point out that with the availability of online search programs, it is becoming increasingly easy to catch cases of plagiarism.

The flip side of that, however, is that in the digital age, the temptation to cut and paste, or more typically to closely paraphrase on-line sources, is all the greater. Anyone who blogs frequently, as I do, is aware of this. As I noted in my earlier post on Zakaria鈥檚 initial plagiarism charge, 鈥渢he proliferation of news aggregators has made it easier to justify using other writers鈥� material without attribution. I am not immune to this temptation. Almost every day I post an 800-1,500 word comment that more often than not is based in part on someone else鈥檚 research and/or insights. I work without an editor, and although I am careful to follow journalistic norms by citing others' work (thanks to my year as a cub reporter for a daily paper, I have some journalistic training), I live in constant fear that I will have forgotten a link or dropped a reference such as 鈥淎s so-and-so said鈥� in my blog post. And once I hit the send button, it鈥檚 very hard to make corrections.鈥�

Those fears have, if anything, become slightly more magnified now that I鈥檓 posting almost daily at 海角大神 and weekly at U.S. News. I appreciate the broader audience, and I would not be able to produce material on an almost daily basis for their consumption were it not for the fact we live in the digital age, where a world of information is available at a keystroke 鈥� even here, in God鈥檚 Green Hills, where woodchucks outnumber people. But it鈥檚 not just bloggers who have to remain vigilant against falling into sloppy attribution practices. My students are returning to campus, and if the past is any guide, more than one of them is going to wrestle this year with the issues that have gotten Zakaria in hot water. So that I might prevent a trip before the judicial board (never mind Our Bad Media!), let me reiterate some simple but important guidelines that students might find helpful as they navigate through the Brave New Digital world.

• When I directly quote anything, I put it in quotations marks and cite the source. Even if I paraphrase, my general rule is to err on the side of caution and cite the source if this can be even remotely construed as someone else鈥檚 material.聽 You are never going to get in trouble by crediting someone else for inspiring what you wrote, no matter how trivial the material.

• When I come up with a wonderful idea (say, the special theory of relativity) but am vaguely aware that someone else might have discussed this too (that Al guy?), my default option is to be generous and cite the previous work. I鈥檓 cognizant that my 鈥渙riginal鈥� idea might in fact owe something to someone else鈥檚 research. Moreover, citing related work helps situate my argument in the broader literature, and gives reader a way to assess the intellectual background associated with the particular topic.

I鈥檓 acutely aware that the pressure to publish regularly, and to drive audiences to one鈥檚 site can tempt one to take shortcuts when it comes to citing sources for ideas and information. 鈥淚 was first!鈥� is an emotion that dates back to kindergarten, if not earlier. I suspect those pressures are magnified as one moves up the media food chain. However, I know from experience that my students feel similar pressure when they realize that the five-page paper analyzing Obama鈥檚 sources of power is due the next morning. My advice under those circumstances is to be magnanimous 鈥� cite your sources, no matter how tangential to your argument. You鈥檒l be glad you did. And it just might keep you from becoming the inspiration for the new website Our Bad Student.

Matthew Dickinson publishes his Presidential Power blog at http://sites.middlebury.edu/presidentialpower/.