Skip to comments.Ben Domenech Resigns
Posted on 03/24/2006 10:47:49 AM PST by RWR8189
In the past 24 hours, we learned of allegations that Ben Domenech plagiarized material that appeared under his byline in various publications prior to washingtonpost.com contracting with him to write a blog that launched Tuesday.
An investigation into these allegations was ongoing, and in the interim, Domenech has resigned, effective immediately.
When we hired Domenech, we were not aware of any allegations that he had plagiarized any of his past writings. In any cases where allegations such as these are made, we will continue to investigate those charges thoroughly in order to maintain our journalistic integrity.
Plagiarism is perhaps the most serious offense that a writer can commit or be accused of. Washingtonpost.com will do everything in its power to verify that its news and opinion content is sourced completely and accurately at all times.
(Excerpt) Read more at blog.washingtonpost.com ...
Yes... anyone who is caught plagarising should be fired.
Isn't that right Senator Biden?
Golly, I don't know about that. Two words: Walter Duranty.
Perhaps I'm confused, but how is it "plagiarism" if you recycle your own stuff?
Most serious? How about putting Judith Miller and Armstrong Williams as worse.
Good. Now how many others at the Post will have the same amount of class and do the same. As well as the NY Slimes.
I think they mean "if any of his past writings were plagiarized".
I'll bet you can count them on the fingers of one foot.
It's not even in the top three.
1. Undermining national security.
2. Causing disrespect in our country and around the world for America, American leaders and military.
3. Continually publishing biased news articles and mindless editorials to try to shift public opinion to the Left, rather than trying to report the truth.
The Washington Post should fire itself.
It should be noted that, so far as I can tell, NOBODY has actually accused Ben of plagerizing THEIR work.
All the charges are based on finding copied work that does not contain attribution.
But there is no way to tell if Ben had permission to use the works without attribution. Until a writer comes forward and actually says that something Ben wrote was taken from him without permission, he has not committed plagerism, he's merely copied stuff without letting us know he copied it.
BTW, we just had an argument in a local blog. The owner of the blog kicked out all his other contributers. In doing so, the software supposedly required that he either delete every threat written by the contributers who were deleted, or to put his name as the "contributer", which is what he did.
But, all the other contributers eventually said they were OK with it.
So while the blogger has his name on stuff he didn't write, he isn't plagerizing or stealing, because he has permission.
Now, those other contributers went off and formed their own blog, and copied over the threads they were most proud of, under their own names.
If in 5 years any of these people come under fire by the left, these old posts will be dug up and the leftists will claim that someone is plagerizing because they are identical articles under different names on different blogs.
And if the other of the pair no longer keeps track of stuff, there may be no way of proving the charges false.
So, while I don't mind Ben resigning (I thought that the whole idea of a conservative blog attached to the post was stupid, Ben could already be read over at red state), I withhold judgement on him until someone makes a specific charge of plagerism of their own work.
I find Michelle Malkin is too quick to rush to judgment in her field, as if she is the arbiter of right and wrong just because she does blogging.
The leftists have no clue to the fact that they've just shot themselves in the foot!
Salon.com has, giving examples here of their pieces which he ripped off. Gotta say, I hoped the kid would have better criteria. I mean, plagiarizing Salon.com? He's poisoning the well!
I read somewhere that Dana Milbank recommended this guy. Do you guys think it was a set-up? There is no shortage of experienced, qualified conservative writers -- why hire an ethically challenged kid instead, unless you are trying to make him look bad? They should be ashamed, and we should be suspicious.
If they decide to no longer have a "conservative" blog, then it would seem they set him up.
If you read the article on Salon that you referenced, it doesn't include any mention of the authors who wrote the copied items.
Salon itself may not have given him permission to copy the stuff, but maybe those authors did. I can't know if he got permission or not, and any of those authors could come forward and say they didn't give him permission.
But why would Salon run an article mentioning passages from two of their writers, and NOT include a statement that their writers did NOT give him permission? Wouldn't they have contacted those authors to ask if he had permission?
So it seems strange that Salon would write this article and NOT include anything from the actual authors complaining about the copying . I believe they are all still alive.
Good point, I forgot that most of Salon's writers are probably freelancers, so we have no way of knowing.
Thankfully, this episode has proven once again that conservatives have principles. If a Leftie were caught in a similar crime, the libs would rally around him and make excuses. I'm figuring Red State will boot him very soon, and the Con Blogs have been brutal this morning. We police our own.
You don't mean the guy that totally fabricated stories in the 1930's about the heavenly bliss that was the USSR, and won a Pulitzer Prize for it?
The Prize the NY Times still keeps active and prominently displayed??
I don't recall Duranty ever being accused of plagiarism. What he did was much worse: he was a stooge for Stalin and even won a Pulitzer (for what that's worth!) for distorting and covering up the Ukranian genocide during the dictator's infamous agrarian 'reforms.' The Times has a long record of liberal shamelessness.
NO, it says that plagarizers should run for president so we can have a lot of fun making fun of them.
How about advocating violence or murder of political figures? This statement smacks loudly of elitism.
I feel like Rip Van Winkle. Who is Ben Domanech?
Without NOTED acknowledgement, what Ben did is plagiarism. Period.
If you quote, you must quote, and cite source. Right there, in the text. There is no such thing as "private" permission.
I do some work with Ben, and have published some of his articles on the website I edit, Boundless.org
I'm planning to chat with him about it within a few days, and will post my findings here.
Let's try to assume that he's innocent until proven guilty.
Yeah, that was my point. I quoted the WaPo piece that said plagiarism was the worst thing a writer could do. Then I cited Walter Duranty as something much worse than plagiarism.
It's identical to the Salon site. And it is simply examples of where his writings were copies of other writings.
This isn't plagerism if he had permission. These weren't things he was REQUIRED to write in his own hand (as a thesis, for example).
Since I'm defending him I better say that I would hope to never do this without mentioning where I got the original from, or at least who the person was, even if I had permission. If I was required to keep anonymous, I would still say it wasn't my own words.
And I don't mind him resigning over this. I'm just saying we shouldn't accuse him of PLAGERISM until we know it's a plagerism case, rather than simply taking credit for stuff you didn't write.
Well, that's an interesting question, but when you recycle PJ O Rourke's stuff, that's definitely plagiarism. Daily Kos and Atrios have accumulated scores of examples of his plagiarism. The only mystery is how he went undetected for so long.
Domenech is a creationist, BTW. I'm not shedding tears over his demise.
You are wrong, because simply writing something doesn't carry a contract that the words were written by the person whose name is on it.
As an obvious example, some "authors" have a ghost writer actually WRITE the books, and never disclose the fact. We don't like it, but it isn't plagerism to have thier name on the book.
Because, they had PRIVATE PERMISSION, and in fact paid money, to put their name on their ghost writer's words.
Hmmmm.... Makes one wonder if the WaPo hired him in order to fire him, eh?
Cheats, liars, and plagiarists have no place in public or professional life. That's why I'm certain that the MSM will be demanding resignations from Joe Biden, Ted Kennedy, and a large number of other 'Rat frauds.
No. It's an embarrassment for the WaPo.
And who are we to complain...? ;-)
Yes, while Dan Blather and Mary Mapes are STILL to this day treated as highly respected (gag) members of the MSM. Nothing wrong with what they did, huh, MSM?
I am glad that conservatives have once again shown we can emphasize principles over individuals and not defend the indefensible just because he is "one of us" or doing work for our cause(s). That's a fundamental difference between the vast majority of conservatives and the vast majority of spineless lying liberals.
Well, every dark cloud has a silver lining!
Then should Senator Biden resign right now?
Not so fast... it appears that RedState is going to the mattresses for this one.
Oh, and if the WaPo does establish such a Blog LINK page, may I be so bold as to recommend the DUmmie FUnnies?
Apologies for my very poor reading skills today. I'm usually more careful. Yes, there are many things worse than simple plagiarism and what Duranty did is a classic example. The partisan crimes of Dan Rather and his dorky producer constitute another.
I am correct. Your example of ghost writing is in a completely different category of publishing law. Use of copyrighted works within any document requires citations and credit. Use of large chunks of copyrighted material also requires permission, which must be acknowledged in print.
I have been in publishing for thirty years. I am now a professional writer well versed in publishing law. In my former position as a senior staff editor at Reader's Digest - a magazine that uses formerly published works as its bread and butter - I was responsible for (among many other things) ensuring all quotes were credited, all credits noted and all permissions acquired and paid for.
This writer is guilty of plagiarism, no ifs, ands, or buts.
Yes, yes, and yes. Too many a student has recieved an F or Incomplete for not following your instructions.
THese aren't documents, they are newspaper articles, opinion columns, and blog entries. I don't know if there is a distinction there, but this isn't a book he wrote.
If I asked for and got your permission, I could take your answer to me, and post it to my blog as if it was my own work.
I have given people permission to lift paragraphs I have written and put them in their own writing, and usually specifically ask NOT with attribution. Surely you are not telling me that it is illegal for these people to honor my wishes? They are my words, if I want to let someone else use them without saying where they came from, I have every right to do so.
I realise that it is unlikely that these real writers told some guy he could reprint their stuff as their own without attribution. I'm just saying that if they did, he would not be plagerizing to do so.
Maybe i'm missing something here, or maybe I'm hung up on the distinction between breaking the law and simply showing a lack of manners.
Yes, you are. You are missing: knowledge, evidence, law, and fact.