The Unwritten Rules

There are many different types of bloggers in the blogosphere, particularly the J-blogosphere. Some people are funny, some are intellectual; some are serious, some are personal. Some are writers, some are pundits; some are original, some are linkers. I like to think that this blog is a combination of many types of blogs, but of all the types, I tend to be a linker. As many have noted over the past couple of days, as Jews we like to say:

Kol hamoer davar b'shem amro mevi geulah l'olam - All who say a matter in the name of the one who said it brings redemption to the world. (Megillah 15a - thanks to Ariella and Robert)

For whatever reason, I have always felt that this was one of the more important ideals in life. If a person is the originator of a thought or idea, it is only right to accord them the credit they are due. More importantly, it is disingenous to present an idea as if it is one's own... when in fact, the idea was taken from another. It is a plea for respect which one does not deserve.

In high school and in college, I would often run into a problem with my teachers. They would inform me that my extensive quoting of others was unacceptable, and that I needed to have more original material on my papers. I felt that the authors and writers had already said perfectly that which I would have liked to say, and there was no need to add to it; but the teachers felt I needed to do more of my 'own work'. I slowly learned to cut down on the quantity of material I was citing, and to expound in my own words on the ideas they presented - or even my own. This has manifested itself nicely on this blog, where I often cite a few lines from other bloggers or articles and then give my own take on the issues at hand.

This week was a dark one for the J-blogosphere. A noted anonymous J-blogger, DovBear, was found to have plagiarized a number of articles by another anonymous blogger going by the name DovWeasel. DovWeasel sent an e-mail to 53 e-mail addresses, including some 40 bloggers or so (some names, such as my own, were listed under 2 e-mail accounts). DovBear sent an apology to those bloggers within a few hours. The following is a list of some of the posts and events that took place in the days following, for those who wish to understand the full background:

• DovWeasel's first post. His blog.
• CWY notes the story, as does Canonist.
• DovBear's first apology, posted by CWY.
• I wrote a purposely vague post on plagiarism when I finally saw what was going on.
• JewishBlogMeister notes DovBear's second apology e-mail.
• DovBear posts his mea culpa.
• Pajamas Media catches the story.
• David Bogner feels that there are some positive reactions, at least.
• Mobius defends DovBear at Jewschool; DovBear sends in a note which is added to the post.
  
• Still Wonderin' has the funniest post on the subject.
  
• AirTime says it is 'reader beware'.
  
• Robert Avrech gives an onymous writer's perspective.
  

Plagiarism is terrible and inexcusable. If an onymous blogger such as myself or many others would do such a thing, we would be risking our jobs. A college student would be failed or expelled. My friend was in a class last summer, and related a story to me. In his class, his professor announced that she would allow all those who plagiarized for their paper an opportunity to walk out of the class and drop it, or she would fail them. If I recall correctly, the first week, seven of twenty students were failed. The next week, four students walked out.

As bloggers, we do not have such stringent standards. Nobody's actions in the J-blogosphere have a terribly far-reaching impact in the real world. Nevertheless, we must have standards. Plagiarism cannot be accepted, it cannot be merely shrugged off. We cannot excuse or minimize deplorable acts of dishonesty that bespeak a lack of integrity. Our standards should be - nay, must be - much, much higher.*

One of the most troubling aspects of this incident were the responses that were seen across the J-blogosphere. Commenters all over, both on DovBear's blog and others, rallied not only to support DovBear but to go a step beyond even the forgiveness he asked for, actually minimizing what had been done and shrugging it off as if nothing had happened. Some went so far as to claim that there was no problem with his actions whatsoever, and attacked DovWeasel for bringing the charges to light in the first place.

These reactions are mind-boggling and saddening. While it is obvious to most reasonable bloggers and readers that plagiarism is terrible, it seems to be less obvious to some that obfusication, hypocrisy, and minimization are horrible as well. This is not something that can merely be shrugged off. This is not something that we just turn the other cheek to and pretend it never happened. As a community, we must both look out for each other and help keep an eye out both on and for one another.

"Forgive and forget", people like to say. We can always forgive, as long as a person is truly remorseful and is sure to never make the same mistake again. But we must never forget. We must always be aware of what we do and what goes on around us, and ensure that some things never happen again. We can forgive. But we cannot ever forget.

* Thanks to all those who helped with the writing of this post, including I'm Ha'aretz, PhD for that line specifically.

Plagiarism

Lest it be unclear, I am of the opinion that plagiarism is always wrong. It doesn't matter if someone is doing so for a paper, for a blog, or whatever - if you take someone else's words and/or ideas and copy them, then you better properly hattip or attribute what you have taken. I do not like unsubstantiated claims of plagiarism, or accusations when someone comes up with the same examples that are obvious, etc. As for anonymous blogging... well, it has its problems (and positives) as well. This is just one more reason - as others have noted - not to give too much credence to something you read on a blog, particularly an anonymous one, or to the people behind anonymous blogs.

If you don't know what I'm talking about, you're probably better off.

Have a wonderful Shabbos Chanuka, everybody!

Plagiarism in the (Frum) Press

UPDATED:

Please see updates at the bottom.

**the following post was not written by Stam. It was written by a blogger who wishes to remain anonymous and who does not have posting privileges on SerandEz :)**

My first taste of Internet plagiarism came in a bittersweet form.

It started out in my email inbox, with the subject line "FWD: fwd: fwd: FWD: fwd: very funny!! MUST READ!!!!!" Needless to say, I was hardly intrigued. I started to read, and the words looked very familiar.

As you may have guessed, I'd written the email. Not as an email, but as a post on my blog. My first thought was "cool, people like my blog posts enough to send them around as email forwards." But as my eyes scanned the email for the credit for this "must read, very funny" email, I was exceedingly disappointed. No name, no link, nothing.

You know those famous emails that are credit "author unknown?" Well now I know how they start.

My second taste also came in the form of an email, but this one was a link to a "frum" forum, where some poster was reaping compliments off of a post...copied directly from my blog. This time it hurt a little more than it felt nice. Someone was gaining off of my writing (even something as minor as a compliment), and it wasn't me. How is that fair?

When asked by my friend if I was going to complain, my response was simple. "It doesn't pay. It's not as if they are making money off of me or my writing."

But what if they were? What if a magazine published my writing, but sent a check to somebody else?

Sounds crazy? I thought so too.

Then I opened up the Ami Magazine. I love to cook and bake, so naturally, I turned straight to the recipes section. One of the recipes really popped out, and not because of it's mouthwatering picture, or the delicious sounding idea. No, this one stuck out because it made me feel a strong sense of deja vu.

"I've seen this before," I thought to myself, quickly opening my favorite baking blog. And I wasn't wrong. I had seen it before, almost word for word the same. The name was almost the same, as was the picture. I looked at the page of the magazine, then again. No credit, no "reprinted with permission." Just the misleading impression that the columnist had come up with this recipe on her own.

Doesn't this seem wrong? How can a Frum magazine lift a recipe directly off a website and expect no repercussions? "Be dan lekaf zechus," my friends warned. So I was. I assumed that Ami wasn't aware that they had printed a stolen recipe. So I sought out the editor on twitter, and received the following (mocking) responses:

"There's nothing new under the sun." And "don't go nuts."

If I were an honest magazine editor who had just discovered I published a stolen recipe, I would be the one going nuts.


Here's the link to the original recipe and the page in Ami:



If you think this is wrong, please let the Ami know.
Call them at 718.534.8800
Email info@amimagazine.org or the editor-in-chief directly: rechy@amimagazine.org
Or tweet the editor @victoriadwek.
Or let them know how you feel on Facebook.
If you're a blogger, please spread the word.
Together, we can teach the Frum publishing world that plagiarism isn't going to be tolerated.

**this post was not written by Stam. It was written by a blogger who wishes to remain anonymous and who does not have posting privileges on SerandEz :)**

UPDATE 1 (by Ezzie):


The chief editor of Ami responded immediately to an e-mail asking about the incident:

I will check this out [...] and get back to you. One thing I can tell you now. Ami magazine does not want to plagiarize. And if that happened we will make amends

They told another e-mailer (via the comments section here) as well:

This was brought to my attention yesterday.
As I told the writer of that e-mail, Ami certainly does not want to plagiarize.

I will get back to you as soon as I get in touch with the person who wrote the recipe for us and understand what is going on here.
Thanks

So far, the response has been quick and appropriate; we'll see what reply is given later.


UPDATE 2 (by Ezzie):


After no further response, I e-mailed the chief editor again. I have yet to receive a reply (it has been a number of hours).


On Friday I was told that the writer was upset and felt she was misunderstood and wanted me to e-mail her. I noted that she could e-mail me herself directly if she wished, but have yet to receive an e-mail from her.

**this post was not written by Stam. It was written by a blogger who wishes to remain anonymous and who does not have posting privileges on SerandEz :)**

Quite the J-Blogging Day...

Wow. From almost no posts earlier in the week to an incredible amount today... the J-blogosphere is one sporadic place. Before y'all get overwhelmed, most of these posts are good, quick reads. The others are just really, really good - trust me, I have no attention span to read long posts unless they're really worthwhile (and even then I have trouble sometimes). So, sit back, relax, and enjoy some of the best of today's J-blogosphere:

New blogger Rivka has a great post on depression, her struggles with it, and what's not being done by the people who deal with it:

My answer so far has been to share my feelings with my husband and my counselor. And now, my blog. To the rest of the world, I'm intelligent and competent and respectful and considerate and empathetic and all those things that are moral and valued and not associated with depression. Were you to meet me in real life, you would probably never know the pain I hide.

Because sometimes it's just safer that way.

Canonist writes a good piece on the plagiarism issue:

Yeah, DovBear has only been shown to have stolen maybe a couple dozen times (of course a true analysis could reveal more), but that doesn’t make the act less reprehensible. And obviously DovBear’s accuser certainly seems to carry some truck for opposing political opinions, but that doesn’t change any of the facts. Excusing DovBear’s conduct is working to make that conduct acceptable, and if that conduct’s acceptable to someone, we all have good reason to think that the excuse-makers are willing to do the same as DovBear.

Via a comment on Harry Maryles' blog, watch this video about Crack Square.

Chana weighs truth and happiness. (Sigh... don't we all?) Her post on the subject, which focuses somewhat on religion, is excellent:

But suppose we all agree there is a basic modicum of factual information that must be provided to all. And suppose we agree that living behind walls, in ghettos, that sheltered communities, in other words, where people deliberately block this flow of information- well, this cannot be right. And in these cases, we feel justified in providing such information. We feel justified in giving these people the tools to choose, not merely to be candidates for a brainwashing process.

Okay. So very good. But let’s take it further.

Cross-Currents puts up back-to-back posts by Jonathan Rosenblum and R' Yitzchak Adlerstein that are simply top-notch. Rosenblum on shidduchim:

Already a half century ago, the Chazon Ish felt that the most important question was too often left out of shidduchim investigations. [...] “Did you ask if he would make a good husband? If that quality is lacking, it is not a good match, no matter how many other positive qualities he possesses.” [...]

Commitments made in the flush of youthful idealism may have little to do with subsequent reality. Not all those who undertook to support a husband in learning and raise a family at the same time find that they are capable of doing so ten years later, any more than every young man who expressed a desire to learn “forever” is able to keep learning with bren after a decade in kollel.

R' Adlerstein on the recent education edicts:

One hopes that the recent Bais Yaakov edicts will not have a spillover effect upon American shores, further eroding the legacy of Rav Yaakov that has come under increased attack. It is not a good bet, however. Like fashion trends moving from Paris to New York, there is a tendency in Torah matters (lehavdil) for Bene Brak to call the shots even when they do not intend to.

This is not the way it always was. Some people think that it is one of the most unhealthy developments in Torah life in our times. While Rav Moshe and Rav Yaakov were both alive, American haredim turned primarily to them for leadership. People did not regard this as a slight to Torah luminaries in Israel. Rather, they recognized that not only did Torah leaders in America have a better grasp of local realities, but that HKBH Himself had different plans for, and different expectations of, communities in Israel and America. Forcing square pegs into round spiritual holes was not going to get people very far.

Elsewhere:

• TownCrier and others find that GoogleEarth is... anti-Israel?
• Daled Amos is one of many to note that 14 more people quit the Carter Center over ex-President Carter's anti-Israel book, along with a scathing letter.
• Jake's Comedy Corner takes some fun digs at the charedi women/education issue.
• Ariella and Krum both discuss the 5 Towns Jewish Times editorial about Orthomom, Krum, and other J-bloggers.
• Krum also wonders - with good reason - why R' Weinreb seems to be getting pushed out of the OU.
• Jameel notes that affirmative action has reared its ugly head in Israel... for a major ministry.
• ElderofZiyon has a great expose by NBC about the US not doing what it should for its troops - which is to get Israeli technology.
  

Tags: Depression, plagiarism, shidduchim, drugs, truth, happiness, education, Israel, US, Trophy, Five Towns, Jewish, Carter, apartheid, charedi, OU.

Conservative More Honest?

(Hat tip: Holy Hyrax) Note: After taking a test Moshe sent me yesterday, I discovered I'm a "conservative-leaning centrist", despite being a registered Democrat. So I might be biased, but Pew isn't:

Is it OK to cheat on your taxes? A total of 57 percent of those who described themselves as “very liberal” said yes in response to the World Values Survey, compared with only 20 percent of those who are “very conservative.” When Pew Research asked whether it was “morally wrong” to cheat Uncle Sam, 86 percent of conservatives agreed, compared with only 68 percent of liberals.

Ponder this scenario, offered by the National Cultural Values Survey: “You lose your job. Your friend’s company is looking for someone to do temporary work. They are willing to pay the person in cash to avoid taxes and allow the person to still collect unemployment. What would you do?”

Almost half, or 49 percent, of self-described progressives would go along with the scheme, but only 21 percent of conservatives said they would.

It's an interesting piece; I think another excerpt shows the reason for this well:

Those with a “liberal outlook” who “reject the idea of absolute truth” were more accepting of cheating at school, according to another study, involving 291 students and published in the Journal of Education for Business.

A study in the Journal of Business Ethics involving 392 college students found that stronger beliefs toward “conservatism” translated into “higher levels of ethical values.” And academics concluded in the Journal of Psychology that there was a link between “political liberalism” and “lying in your own self-interest,” based on a study involving 156 adults.

Liberals were more willing to “let others take the blame” for their own ethical lapses, “copy a published article” and pass it off as their own, and were more accepting of “cheating on an exam,” according to still another study in the Journal of Business Ethics.

I think we've seen evidence of these ideas all over, including the J-blogosphere and the media in general. When people don't believe that absolute truth exists, it makes it much easier to rationalize certain actions - much more of an "ends justify the means" approach. This is true from waving off plagiarism as not a big deal to the major news media organizations justifying false stories because "the points the stories made are still important/true". Certainly one could argue that there are instances where believing in absolute truth can have negative consequences, but it does not take away from the idea that not doing so results in dishonesty, cheating, and the like. Again, it's an interesting piece, check it out.

Busted

It's always funny in a way when major media outlets (or even bloggers) are caught plagiarizing from one another or from blogs. One of the supposed advantages that the press has over bloggers is credibility, though that has been severely diminished over the last number of years - not because blogs have found greater credibility, but because the press has lost whatever semblance it had.

While today's story is a much smaller version of this, it's still interesting because of how it was done and how it was caught. DealBreaker, an independent blog which comments (quite mockingly) on Wall Street news and rumors, published an internal memo at Citi discussing its possible merger with Morgan Stanley. Later, the New York Times own Wall Street blog, DealBook, published the same memo. Well, okay, big deal, right? They could both have gotten the same memo from different sources.

Except DealBreaker's memo had been altered from the original - they had changed the name of the person sending it from just his first name to his full name and position. Interestingly, the DealBook version had the same alteration. As DealBreaker notes, sure, it's a logical alteration to make to give context, so that could be explained. But DealBreaker has also altered the time of the e-mail, just in case they'd get ripped off. Whoops. Now, DealBook is clearly busted... and after DealBreaker's post on it and numerous comments challenging them, they added (DealBreaker broke news on the memo Monday morning.) to their post, as they should have had originally.

The real question is - would they would have copped to ripping off DealBreaker had the bust not been so obvious? Was there intent to credit DealBreaker, but it was forgotten (doubtful)? Would DealBreaker have been credited if they hadn't pointed it out (also doubtful)? Yes - the New York Times blogs are not the paper, though they have close affiliation. They certainly aren't expected to have journalistic standards, and are not treated as journalism. But they should still be held to certain basic ethical standards like any of us would be, and plagiarizing is simply wrong.

(Previous posts discussing plagiarism.)

So Much...

...to blog, so little time. So a little taste of things to come, and some fun for now...

• Our trip to Cleveland was great, and we had an awesome time - and took plenty of great pictures, mostly of Elianna.
  
• I'm shocked and dismayed that there are so many people - particularly bloggers and blog readers - who think that plagiarism on a blog isn't a big deal, and/or think that a simple (and weak) apology means that it is something to forgive and forget. In the specific case I'm referring to, there are factors that make it so many times worse that it is mind-boggling that they do, though I'll grant that many likely don't know some of those factors.
• Check out the World Dreidel Tour! It's hilarious. (Hat tip: Hootie)
• A "weird" meme.
  

And much, much more. Meanwhile, I'm catching up on my blog-reading.