Slog Comments

 

Comments (9) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
He's not JUST a plagiarist. He made stuff up, too.
Posted by IslandGuy on February 14, 2013 at 2:35 PM · Report this
Fnarf 2
Especially when he basically says he's too dumb to be expected to police himself, or do proper journalism, or refrain from lying his ass off, and it's his editors who are to blame for not doing his job for him. He's a putz.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on February 14, 2013 at 2:46 PM · Report this
Will in Seattle 3
So, wait, are you saying George Bush and Dick Cheney shouldn't be paid the same thing for telling lies?
Posted by Will in Seattle http://www.facebook.com/WillSeattle on February 14, 2013 at 2:50 PM · Report this
Sean Kinney 4
Does it matter that he was offered a speaking fee? Really?

Posted by Sean Kinney http:// on February 14, 2013 at 2:56 PM · Report this
5
@#4
Doesn't it? A once-prominent journalist and bestselling author exposed as a plagiarist and fabulist (and as someone who re-sells identical work to new publishers, which has been called "self-plagiarism" but might perhaps be considered a sort of fraud or embezzling against the business of publishing) definitely has a perspective that would be of interest to a meeting convened by a foundation that purports to contemplate the ideals and future of journalism. But to pay him for his appearance - and to pay him handsomely; I'm guessing $20K is months of pay, possibly many months, for a Stranger writer - is to reward his misdeeds, not merely recognize him as a relevant curiosity. When did "disgraced" become a term of approbation, anyway?
Posted by Warren Terra on February 14, 2013 at 3:27 PM · Report this
Sean Kinney 6
@5 - sure. I'm am curious about the source of righteous indignation that Paul and many others offer. Fidelity to sources and an accurate portrayal of utterances (in time, space, and context) are both a best practice and an ethical good-in-itself. This is all true. But is Journalism able to withstand a hearing from someone who violated it tenets? I think so.

Jonah Lehrer violated his explicit or implicit commitment to a well-developed set of professional ethics. But this is about Jonah Lehrer violating his readers' trust. We want to cast him away as we would cast away a partner who has committed sexual infidelities, and Paul's venom has a distinctly Puritanical character.

Posted by Sean Kinney http:// on February 14, 2013 at 3:58 PM · Report this
Sean Kinney 7
And the Knight Foundation was not mistaken, I believe, to present a forum for someone who has violated Journalism's standards. Those standards stand as just a set dogmas if they can withstand or survive the personal narrative, the delusions, and the selfish, unethical, and unprofessional deeds of one practitioner.
Posted by Sean Kinney http:// on February 14, 2013 at 4:13 PM · Report this
8
@#6,7
The question isn't whether his experience makes him someone worth contemplating, and listening to, as you debate the future of journalism. The question is whether it's right to pay him $20,000 as a reward for his transgressions.
Posted by Warren Terra on February 14, 2013 at 6:18 PM · Report this
GeneStoner 9
This is from their mission statement:

"Knight Foundation supports transformational (read Liberal) ideas that promote quality (Liberal) journalism, advance media innovation, engage (ignorant) communities and foster the arts. We believe that democracy thrives when people and communities are informed (only about Liberal causes) and engaged."

And that is the problem. Knight is promoting a liberal plagiarist, in order to fulfill their agenda. This does not "sustain democracy" folks. You need to hear the other side of the story to be truly well-informed.
Then, make your decision after that.
Posted by GeneStoner on February 15, 2013 at 9:43 AM · Report this

Add a comment