Today is the Fourth of July, Independence Day for the United States of America. We celebrate the country's Declaration of Independence. In addition to the Declaration of Independence, I also think about our Constitution and its Bill of Rights along with other Constitutional amendments that make our country great.
Today, as I write this Roland Hansen Commentary, I am thinking of the First Amendment which amongst other things provides for a free press. And my thoughts evolve into the following commentary.
I found The Blade article in regards to the Toledo Free Press to be quite interesting. Click on the embedded link so that you may read for yourself the article Plagiarism at weekly used as teaching tool from toledoblade.com.
The major thrust of the article revolves around a fellow by the name of Gregg Schwartz who had written a monthly column for the Toledo Free Press from sometime in 2007 up until April 2009. Apparently, Mr. Schwartz did not totally use his own words in the columns carried by the Toledo Free Press. It appears Gregg Schwartz may have used the works of others without attribution in the writings he had submitted as his own to the Toledo Free Press and that they had been published by the Toledo Free Press as the works of Mr. Schwartz.
First off, for the record, I do not question the concerted efforts by the Toledo Free Press to provide adequate and proper attributions, to eliminate plagiarism, and to assure the veracity of the facts contained within its articles.
However, I do have several areas of concern regarding several items that are contained in the preceding referenced article, if indeed, those items have been reported accurately.
If you have read The Blade article or if you go back and read it now, you will note that there are several statements or reported references to statements that have been attributed to University of Toledo associate Professor Mary Lineham. I am focusing on two of those which I have copied and pasted as follows:
"She wrote a letter to Tom Pounds, the weekly's publisher and president, dated April 23, and included at least a half-dozen examples from a one-year span of Mr. Schwartz's work highlighting portions of his columns that were lifted without attributions from other publications." to which it is also being reported that "Ms Lineham said she did not receive a reply to her letter to Mr. Pounds and it wasn't published in the Free Press with other letters to the editor."
and
'What really makes some furious and angry and outraged and makes me feel threatened as an individual is that the Free Press would give Gregg my letter without bothering to answer it and send him on his way to hassle me,' "she said"
In addition to those items, there is another thing that causes me to raise my eyebrows in curious wonderment..The eyebrow raising is my reaction to The Blade statement that "Mr. Pounds did not return calls from The Blade seeking comment, and Michael Miller, editor-in-chief of the weekly, refused to answer specific questions about the allegations of plagiarism from The Blade, ... "
That sure seems to me like "the pot calling the kettle black" if my recollection of past events is correct. Unless I am mistaken. I seem to recall that Tom Pounds and Michael Miller have used the Toledo Free Press in the past as a means to attack the Blade and its publisher and editor for questionable practices and for not responding to inquiries from representatives of the Toledo Free Press.
This current situation as reported by The Blade gives me the distinct impression that there appears to me to be a "double-standard" on the part of Toledo Free Press. After all, if my memory is correct and if the Blade report is correct in that neither the publisher nor the editor of the Toledo Free Press have responded to inquiries from The Blade, then why has the Toledo Free Press in the past made negative remarks about The Blade not being responsive to inquiries from the Toledo Free Press.
Then there is the matter that causes me to think that there may be some serious concerns regarding Michael Miller in the area of ethics and possible conflict of interest. Of course, I may be totally off base in my thinking; perhaps I should not even think that there is any such possibility of a breach of ethics or that there might have been a possible conflict of interest. However, I cannot help but wonder when I read that portion of the article that states "And Mr. Miller has revealed publicly that he was once a client of Mr. Schwartz, writing in a September, 2007, column that he was trying to get in shape and that effort included strength training with Mr. Schwartz."
With all due respect, the bottom line for me is that it appears that the publisher and editor of the Toledo Free Press are exhibiting the very same characteristics of which they have been critical of the Blade publisher and editor.
10 comments:
Roland,
Events may have transpired as claimed, or maybe not.
I'm going to wait and what develops over time before making any final judgment.
That said, with me the Blah has more to prove than the Freep...
But that's just my never humble opinion.
Dave,
I thought I made my perspective on the Blade account clear when I wrote ... if indeed, those items have been reported accurately.
Based on some feedback I have gotten "off blog" it appears I have not clearly conveyed my thoughts.
Let me try to generalize my overall thoughts.
1. In the past, the Toledo Free Press has brought up concerns in my mind about The Blade, its publisher, and its editor.
2. In the article that I have referenced, The Blade has now brought up some concerns in my mind about the Free Press, its publisher, and its editor.
3. I do not give a rat's 'behind' whether some people like one publication over another or whether some people like the people associated with one or the other publication.
4. Pot - Kettle - Black. PERIOD!!!
5. To me, it is all about responsibility, responsiveness, and accountability.
I will not, WILL NOT, let my personal preferences, likes or dislikes, prejudices, preconceived opinions, inclinations or disinclinations, or any other external influences stifle me or muzzle me from voicing my concerns about any public person or entity in regards to responsibility, responsiveness, and accountability.
There is no higher order of proof for one over another in my mind's eye of the world. The standards are the same for all, whether I disagree with them or agree with them, whether I dislike them or like like them.
Unless and until, the Toledo Free Press, its publisher, and its editor provide what I consider appropriate, adequate, sufficient, and complete explanations to the concerns I have raised in my commentary, I will continue to have those concerns.
Roland,
I understand the five points that you have laid out, all I'm trying to say is that the truth of the allegations will come out in time.
In the mean time, I can only gather my impressions from a historical viewpoint, ergo:
On the one hand we have the older allegedly more mature “daily” newspaper, suffering from a declining subscribership, and facing financial challenges. They allege that the young pup snapping at their heels isn't paying attention to them, and they feel well, offended.
On the other hand we have a quite young and energetic new (relatively speaking) weekly paper that has been struggling of late with exactly what the “daily” has accused them of, and they have been very open and above board about it to boot.
Right now, to me it seems quite clear that the weekly is and retroactively has done a complete, thorough and open about their recent troubles and may feel that they are being attacked by their competition, which they may at this time to be unnecessary.
At least, that's what I get out of it..., so far.
I'm just waiting for both shoes to drop and the dust to settle, which I expect they will. . .
... we have a quite young and energetic new (relatively speaking) weekly paper ... they have been very open and above board about it
That does not fit in with The Blade allegation that "Mr. Pounds did not return calls from The Blade seeking comment, and Michael Miller, editor-in-chief of the weekly, refused to answer specific questions about the allegations of plagiarism from The Blade, ... "
Roland,
"That does not fit in with The Blade allegation that "Mr. Pounds did not return calls from The Blade seeking comment, and Michael Miller, editor-in-chief of the weekly, refused to answer specific questions about the allegations of plagiarism from The Blade, ... "
Your point was well made and well understood, but for a moment consider:
It seems to me that Messrs. Pounds' and Miller's recent actions have addressed "The Blah's/Blade's/Bland's questions/allegations BEFORE the questions/allegations were raised.
The Blah/Blade/Bland has an annoying habit, much like that of a pit bull, of grabbing onto a bit of old news and shaking it to death over and over and over again, ad nauseum; it's one of their more disgusting eccentricities...
(reference: the Tom Noe conduits, "Coingate," etc.)
Surely you have been following the Freep's efforts to stamp out plagiarism, give proper attribution, filter both past and future submissions to make sure that proper attribution had and will be given, no?
Can you say the same of "The Blah/Blade/Bland?"
I can't.
I can give attribution/credit to "The Blah/Blade/Bland" though for their nauseating penchant for continuous and constant regurgitation of well known facts, as if it were still news though.
But hey, that's just me ;-)
[Not to make light of, or to belittle your point.]
Comment:
Seems king of odd that you and I are the only ones who appear interested in this, doesn't it?
Another way to answer the question you raised:
Why should the Freep answer (again) a question that has already been answered, just because it is being asked (again) by the "high and mighty daily loco?"
Roland,
Just another thought:
Perhaps the "Daily Loco" should do some research, such as reading the last few issues of the weekly that they are trying to disparage and enlighten themselves.
Isn't that what a GOOD newspaper would do? Research, I mean. . .
Dave,
You say The Blah/Blade/Bland has an annoying habit, much like that of a pit bull, of grabbing onto a bit of old news and shaking it to death over and over and over again, ad nauseum; it's one of their more disgusting eccentricities.
I have to say that the same has been said by some folks of me!
You have asked:
Surely you have been following the Freep's efforts to stamp out plagiarism, give proper attribution, filter both past and future submissions to make sure that proper attribution had and will be given, no?
To that, I respond:
Yes, I have. However, that is not the point of my concerns as I have stated in my commentary.
You also asked:
Isn't that what a GOOD newspaper would do? Research, I mean. . .
That brought about an immediate and succinct thought in my mind which is:
Don't forget OBJECTIVITY, of which neither The Blade nor the Toledo Free Press have been adherents, in my opinion.
HT The Blah/Blade/Bland has an annoying habit, much like that of a pit bull, of grabbing onto a bit of old news and shaking it to death over and over and over again, ad nauseum; it's one of their more disgusting eccentricities.
RH ”I have to say that the same has been said by some folks of me!”
True enough, but what was the end result? You and I (as well as another select few) both know the answer to that..., and only you and I can laugh about that.
RH ”You have asked:”
HT ”Surely you have been following the Freep's efforts to stamp out plagiarism, give proper attribution, filter both past and future submissions to make sure that proper attribution had and will be given, no?”
RH ”To that, I respond:
Yes, I have. However, that is not the point of my concerns as I have stated in my commentary.
You also asked:
Isn't that what a GOOD newspaper would do? Research, I mean. . .
That brought about an immediate and succinct thought in my mind which is:
Don't forget OBJECTIVITY, of which neither The Blade nor the Toledo Free Press have been adherents, in my opinion.“
To which I can only add, Your point on objectivity is well taken.
But, I hasten to reiterate that a little research would have gone a very long way in educating the powers that be at the Daily Loco that the redundant questions seem petty and foolish, when asked so closely upon a very public and thorough airing of the topic of plagiarism and how the Freep has and will continue to handle the issue.
And, I refer back to this line in my original post:
Events may have transpired as claimed, or maybe not.
Time will tell all my friend, time will tell...
AND I refer back to these lines in my original posted commentary:
"First off, for the record, I do not question the concerted efforts" (note: emphasis now added) "by the Toledo Free Press to provide adequate and proper attributions, to eliminate plagiarism, and to assure the veracity of the facts contained within its articles."
"However, I do have several areas of concern regarding several items that are contained in the preceding referenced article, if indeed, those items have been reported accurately." (note: emphasis now added)
"With all due respect, the bottom line for me" (note: emphasis now added) "is that it appears that the publisher and editor of the Toledo Free Press are exhibiting the very same characteristics of which they have been critical of the Blade publisher and editor."
Roland,
Your post was understood and appreciated from the very beginning, especially this part:
""With all due respect, the bottom line for me" (note: emphasis now added) "is that it appears that the publisher and editor of the Toledo Free Press are exhibiting the very same characteristics of which they have been critical of the Blade publisher and editor.""
While "The Blah/Blade Bland" continues (almost stubbornly) to remain oblivious to the Freep's efforts at expunging any traces of plagiarism past present and future, the Freep (equally stubbornly) refuses to re-answer the old charges yet again.
Kinda reminds me a bit of a couple of kids holding a pissing match in a downpour ;-)
Post a Comment