When it comes to doling out child-rearing advice in his popular syndicated parenting column, John Rosemond takes a hard line, no-nonsense approach. This week, Rosemond found himself on the receiving end of some tough love when The Charlotte Observer reported that he recycled about 20 old columns almost verbatim but presented them as new ones.
The Observer’s investigation also found that Rosemond occasionally presented questions as coming from a specific reader, when they were actually a composite of questions sent in by several readers. Even more troubling is Rosemond’s admission that he has sometimes given fictional characteristics to readers or their situation to protect their identity.
Rosemond has apologized and promised to devote more time to future columns. Rather than changing details about the people who send in questions, he will use fewer details so their questions won’t be recognized by friends and family members.
He told editors at the Observer that family illnesses and deaths contributed to his decision to use old columns, mostly in late 2005 and early this year. He also said that he mistakenly thought an editor there had told him years ago that it was OK to repeat material on occasion. The editor in question didn’t recall that conversation, according to the Observer’s report.
For now, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution plans to continue running Rosemond’s columns on Saturdays, though we will monitor them closely. A review of our archives found that we’d published the same Rosemond column about a teenager with older friends in February 2005, July 2004 and February 1999 with very slight changes. We’ve also published recycled columns on at least 10 other occasions in recent years, including one in which Rosemond updated his age from 51 to 57 in a reference to himself.
Such misleading tactics aren’t taken lightly. Columnists and other journalists may choose to write about the same topic on more than one occasion, but editors expect writers to produce original work that doesn’t include fictional details.
If Rosemond was going to reuse columns, he should have informed his syndicate, Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service, and labeled them as such. In his line of work, I’m sure he gets asked the same questions often, but it’s not unreasonable for his clients to expect fresh answers, even if they are similar to past ones.
The practice was discovered last month by an AJC copy editor. While editing Rosemond’s column for use in this newspaper, she was stopped by his use of the word “dysgraphia” to describe a 6-year-old’s illegible handwriting. She checked the newspaper’s archives to see if we’d used the word in the past. That’s when she found an identical column written by Rosemond in 1999.
Editors at the AJC pulled the recycled column and notified KRT, which distributes Rosemond’s column, which runs in about 100 newspapers. KRT notified Charlotte, which edits Rosemond’s column. They launched an investigation into his work and the syndicate only recently began sending the column again (that’s why it didn’t run for several weeks).
The Observer has edited the column since Rosemond began writing for the newspaper on a free-lance basis 28 years ago. Since then, the family psychologist’s columns, books and speaking engagements have become enormously popular. When the AJC decided to replace his column with another parenting column in 2003, readers protested loudly and the column was quickly restored.
At least one newspaper, The Fresno (Calif.) Bee, has decided to drop the column because of this week’s revelations. “If one of our staff writers at The Bee had committed similar infractions, we’d deal with the situation harshly because it goes to the most fundamental of all journalistic values: honesty,” said editor Betsy Lumbye in a story The Bee published Wednesday.
When I reached Rosemond by telephone this week, he said every situation has consequences. “I have taken complete responsibility. I’m not going to try to pass it off on any other situation or any other person. This came as somewhat of a surprise . . . I’m a psychologist, not a journalist. I’m obligated to protect the identities of people who write me. I’ve been doing this for as long as I’ve been writing the column and no one has ever said anything about it. I am now corrected and I will do things differently.”
Rosemond’s syndicate has no plans to drop the column. Rick Thames, editor of the Charlotte Observer, also plans to continue running the column. “I talked to a number of people I trust in the industry and they don’t see it as a fatal mistake, but it’s a serious blow. It’s not that he plagiarized, he recycled.”
Thames said the newspaper has received about 20 e-mails since his column about Rosemond appeared Tuesday. “They’ve been almost perfectly split between people who say, ‘Get rid of the guy’ or people who say, ‘Why are you making a big deal about it?’ ” said Thames. “As a columnist, he can be fairly polarizing, and the split reflects that.”
As we continue to learn more about this situation, I’d like to hear from you about the AJC’s decision to keep running Rosemond’s column. The newspaper expects staff members and freelancers to abide by its standards and the industry’s standards.
Because Rosemond isn’t a trained journalist, it’s possible that he wasn’t aware of the practices journalists must adhere to. It’s important that newspapers clearly communicate those standards to everyone who writes for them.
