Journalistic fraud at the New York Times prompted Ray Harris to ask why the Star never acknowledged in print its own plagiarism that he brought to Star editors’ attention in 2001.
“I tried for two years to get the editors to fess up to their own plagiarism and they just repeatedly blew me off,” said Harris.
At issue is an April 25, 2001, editorial about a uranium waste dump near the Colorado River at Moab, Utah. Six sentences are nearly identical to a CNN.com story by Environmental News Network staff in 2000.
Editorial Editor Jim Kiser said he became aware of the problem shortly after the editorial ran. He investigated and then consulted with Editor and Publisher Jane Amari on the appropriate discipline.
“I was then and still am convinced that the plagiarism was inadvertent and not deliberate,” said Kiser. “However, that makes it no less a journalistic offense.”
Plagiarism, passing off someone else’s work as your own, is a nearly unforgivable sin in journalism.
Amari blamed poor follow-through for the plagiarism’s never being acknowledged publicly. The Star owes readers a public explanation when their trust is violated, Amari said.
Last Sunday on Page A5, a New York Times article detailed fabrications, plagiarism and factual errors in 36 of reporter Jayson Blair’s stories. Blair resigned
May 1.
The Star corrects mistakes under a “Corrections” headline on A2 each day. Blair’s false work that appeared in the Star was corrected there Thursday.
The Star’s own plagiarism should have been acknowledged there in a timely fashion and will be if it occurs again, Amari said.
Journalism is an industry that runs on trust. Reporters are responsible for checking their own facts and getting the story right.
It’s people speaking out, calling the paper to say “I didn’t say that” or “I read that on ENN/CNN” as Harris did, that forces newspapers to investigate themselves and to reflect.
Readers are the critical link that keeps the Star fair and honest. Anytime you see something you think is wrong, call me. I will see that it is investigated.
Vendor story
South Side housewife Erica Romero called Monday’s story and photos of street vendors unfair.
The front page picture showed a woman picking up trash near a South Side mobile taco vendor, whose name was readable in the photo. The inside photo featured a North Side vendor, but did not show the name.
Romero said it was inappropriate to single out one business and show its name in a story in which that particular vendor is not mentioned. “It’s not right” to show that business in a story largely critical of street vendors, because “It’s very clean,” she said.
Romero called the story bad publicity for “little people.” “Why don’t you write about youth who are pushing drugs instead of those families selling food items trying to make an honest living?”
The story also quoted police as saying that acts of violence occur around vendor sites. An officer gave an example of occupants of two vehicles who got into a verbal spat, then pulled over at a taco stand and fired shots.
Local businessman Richard Ferguson said the altercation could have occurred just as easily outside the Arizona Daily Star, but that doesn’t make the Star a magnet for violence.
“I know the stigma that various kinds of jobs have, like mechanics,” he said, referring to a years-ago TV special on auto repair ripoffs. “I’ve run a professional mechanics service for five years, without complaint.” Yet, stories like this “stick in people’s minds and taints everyone in one brush.”
