# data[].attributes.headline
- Katie Couric was an American journalist, presenter, producer, and author.                                                      - Katie Couric plagiarized a a line and mini story by Jeffrey Zaslow in her commentary 'Katie's Notebook' back in 2007.                                          - The repercussions were for CBS to apologize for not acknowledging the piece was from someone else   - The writers for Katie's piece plagiarized because it was to add an apparent childhood experience Katie had to get personal with readers                                                     - The writers for Katie's Notebook could have prevented this problem by acknowledging this story was sampled or either came from the original writer                                         - Source - The Guardian - DB

# data[].attributes.subject
- Katie Couric was an American journalist, presenter, producer, and author.                                                      - Katie Couric plagiarized a a line and mini story by Jeffrey Zaslow in her commentary 'Katie's Notebook' back in 2007.                                          - The repercussions were for CBS to apologize for not acknowledging the piece was from someone else   - The writers for Katie's piece plagiarized because it was to add an apparent childhood experience Katie had to get personal with readers                                                     - The writers for Katie's Notebook could have prevented this problem by acknowledging this story was sampled or either came from the original writer                                         - Source - The Guardian - DB

# data[].attributes.body
Blair was an American Journalist who worked for The New York Times but resigned in 2003 after he was caught plagiarizing work of different reporters. He also made up lies to cover up previous misleading information in his publications. The repercussions against Blair were The New York Times publishing a punishing report of Blair's actions. Two others at The Times also retired after the publication. When asked why he did it, Blair said "There's not one real, solid reason... it was a perfect storm of events." Blair was in publications for the right reasons, but did it the wrong way. He did not want to be famous, yet he cared about the work he was doing, and any impact he had on people. This could have been prevented by Blair doing this work himself, and finding the information himself. Or he could have wrote his own articles, and included the work of others to still make an impact. Adair, B. (2016, August 2). Why he did it: Jayson Blair opens up about his plagiarism and fabrication at the New York Times. Duke Reporters' Lab. Retrieved September 19, 2022, from https://reporterslab.org/jayson-blair-opens-past/ - GO

# data[].attributes.body
Jayson Blair advanced quickly during his tenure at The New York Times, where he was hired as a full-time staff writer after his internship there and others at The Boston Globe and The Washington Post. On April 28, 2003, Blair received a call from Times national editor James Roberts asking him about similarities between a story he had written two days earlier and one published April 18 by San Antonio Express-News reporter Macarena Hernandez. The resulting inquiry led to the discovery of fabrication and plagiarism in a number of articles written by Blair.Some fabrications include Blair's claims to have traveled to the city mentioned in the dateline, when in fact he did not. Jonathan Landman, Blair's editor, told the Siegal committee he felt that Blair's being black played a large part in the younger man's initial promotion in 2001 to full-time staffer. "I think race was the decisive factor in his promotion," he said. "I thought then and I think now that it was the wrong decision."
From: https://www.spj.org/ecs13.asp

# data[].attributes.body
Kaavya Viswanathan was a Harvard sophomore when she was accused of plagiarizing from author Megan McCafferty’s “Sloppy Firsts" and "Second Helpings” in her 2006 novel, “How Opal Mehta Got Kissed, Got Wild and Got a Life." Viswanathan said she was a huge fan of McCafferty’s work and she read the two books she was accused of plagiarizing in high school. According to her, the inspiration for “Opal” was born out of her own high school experiences. Viswanathan claimed that "’the central stories of [her] book and [McCafferty’s] are completely different'” (Smith 2006) although the central storyline is very similar and there are at least 29 similar passages to McCafferty’s work. She stated she “‘wasn't aware of how much [she] may have internalized Ms. McCafferty's words’” (Smith 2006). It seems as though there wasn’t a large legal battle but was rather resolved in a more low-key manner, as McCafferty's publisher, Little, Brown, noted that “Viswanathan planned to add an acknowledgment to Ms. McCafferty in future printings of the book” (Smith 2006) and future printings of “Opal” would “eliminate any inappropriate similarities" (Smith 2006). Although she claims it was unintentional, Viswanathan, being a “big fan” of McCafferty’s books, should’ve realized the extreme similarities.

Smith, Dinitia. (2006, April 25). Harvard Novelist Says Copying Was Unintentional. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/25/books/harvard-novelist-says-copying-was-unintentional.html

# data[].attributes.headline
My plagiarists are Katie Couric she's an American journalist and has her own media company and was formerly a Yahoo global news anchor from 2013 to 2017. She was found to be plagiarizing when producing video essays on libraries and it was similarly related to a Wall Street Journal. She was fired from CBS News for the plagiarism. It is unsure why she did so because she was being paid for original work, she could have prevented it by doing the work.

# data[].attributes.subject
My plagiarists are Katie Couric she's an American journalist and has her own media company and was formerly a Yahoo global news anchor from 2013 to 2017. She was found to be plagiarizing when producing video essays on libraries and it was similarly related to a Wall Street Journal. She was fired from CBS News for the plagiarism. It is unsure why she did so because she was being paid for original work, she could have prevented it by doing the work.

# data[].attributes.body
- Irma Accius

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I'm hardly the first to point out the risible irony in CBS News firing Web producer Melissa McNamara for passing off as her own work a commentary she ghosted for Katie Couric that borrowed extensively from a March 15 Wall Street Journal column by Jeffrey Zaslow. From a strictly narrow perspective, of course, CBS was justified in firing McNamara. The network paid her to write original essays for Katie Couric to read in video and audio clips made available on its Web site and to CBS-owned radio stations. McNamara deceived CBS by plagiarizing the Journal. But CBS News wronged visitors to its Web site by inviting them to think that the opinions Couric expressed in these commentaries were her own. It's no special knock on Couric; before Couric, Dan Rather regularly recited commentaries on the radio that were written by others, and Walter Cronkite did the same before him.

The deception was a little more conspicuous in this instance, at least retrospectively, because it began with a personal memory: "I still remember when I first got my library card." That sentence was not lifted from the Zaslow column, but it's actually more fake than anything else in the commentary because it purports to be a personal recollection. In fact, however, it is McNamara remembering on Couric's behalf the time she toddled up to the library, filled out a form, and was handed her very own library card. It's a safe counterfeit because every kid gets a library card. Getting one is a rite of passage, and therefore everybody ends up remembering it. Or so it is presumed. I was an enthusiastic reader as a child, but I can't say that I remember getting my first library card. My undying library memory from youth is that the prudish matron behind the checkout desk wouldn't let me take out books that weren't in the children's section, even after my mother told her that she'd given me permission to use her library card. To borrow the books I wanted (we're talking racy stuff like The Mouse That Roared), I had to get my mother to come down to the library and check them out herself. For many years thereafter, I disliked on sight every librarian I encountered.

A counterfeit memory like "I still remember when I first got my library card" can easily be assigned to someone else. A real memory like my long-held prejudice against all librarians and the petty tyranny that led me to it cannot. This leads us to the deeper phoniness that hobbles the assembly-line anchorperson-commentary racket CBS News has been running for decades. If person A is going to express a personal memory or opinion on behalf of person B, and person B is not someone who identifies publicly with specific positions on matters of public debate-something network news anchors (outside of Fox, anyway) are discouraged from doing-then person A will hew carefully to anodyne sentiment. The result is commentary devoid of any substance or interest. If you think I'm being unfair, click here for Couric on the dirtiness of desks, here for Couric on the need to teach English to immigrants, and here for Couric expressing the desire that the public judge political candidates fairly. Couric is a superb journalist, but you'd never guess that from this pap. It was the same with her predecessors. Do you remember, even once in your life, anybody ever saying, "I heard Katie Couric/Dan Rather/Walter Cronkite make a really interesting point today in her/his daily commentary?" Of course you don't. This blather isn't meant to be remembered. It's merely meant to extend, in some intangible way, the brand.

Peggy Noonan, a columnist and former Reagan speechwriter, began her career writing commentaries for Dan Rather. In her memoir, What I Saw at the Revolution, she recalls one instance where she wrote something for Rather that actually rocked the boat a little bit. A radio editor expressed his disapproval by saying it was "more like an editorial than a commentary." This was, of course, another way of saying that commentaries weren't supposed to say anything more controversial than, say, that public libraries sure are swell.

Interestingly, even this risqué commentary/editorial that Noonan fashioned for Rather was a little bit phony. The commentary was about the jury verdict finding President Reagan's would-be assassin, John Hinckley, not guilty by reason of insanity. The point Noonan persuaded Rather to make was that this was a miscarriage of justice; the verdict showed you could "buy your way out" of an attempted-murder rap "with clever lawyers and expensive psychiatrists." A defensible position, but the phoniness didn't reside in the opinion itself. It lay in the scene-setting way Noonan/Rather began. "There was a dreamlike quality to what happened in the courtroom yesterday," Noonan wrote. Only Noonan hadn't been there, and neither had Rather. Noonan/Rather described spectators who "look at each other in astonishment and turn to each other with words, and the judge snaps, 'There will be order here!' " Noonan/Rather hadn't been present to see spectators look at each other in astonishment and turn to each other with words, and although it's possible Noonan got the judge's call for order from a transcript or from a CBS producer who was there, I'm going to guess she made the quote up. These details were written in to make the commentary more vivid. But they couldn't be so vivid that they might run the risk of being provably untrue. That was the essence of their phoniness.

The apparent ease with which McNamara helped herself to Zaslow's Wall Street Journal column isn't particularly flattering to Zaslow. Zaslow has a flair for writing quirky, vivid journalism, but that wasn't on display in this instance. If it had been, McNamara would have had a harder time shoplifting the column, because it would have expressed too obviously the sensibility of someone who clearly was neither McNamara nor Couric. Zaslow's library column was a bland public service announcement. It was sanctimonious, memorable, and essentially fake, not in the sense that it was untrue-hey, I love libraries, too-but rather in the sense that it bore no mark of original thought or genuine feeling. We journalists produce more of this crap than we'd usually like to admit.

Expressing truth is hard work. There's a story, probably apocryphal, about Pablo Picasso visiting the home of a wealthy art collector. The collector proudly displays to the artist a Picasso painting he purchased at great cost some years before. Picasso scrutinizes the painting for a moment and then pronounces: "It's a fake."

"You mean, you never painted it?" the collector sputters.

"No, I painted it," Picasso answers. "But it's a fake. I often paint fakes."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The deeper fakery of Katie Couric's plagiarized commentary.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I'm hardly the first to point out the risible irony in CBS News firing Web producer Melissa McNamara for passing off as her own work a commentary she ghosted for Katie Couric that borrowed extensively from a March 15 Wall Street Journal column by Jeffrey Zaslow.

# data[].attributes.body
Johnny Cash was a country singer/songwriter, whose trademark all black stage outfits nicknamed him "The Man in Black". In 1955, the song "Folsom Prison Blues" was recorded by Cash and instantly became a popular hit, but it had taken the lyrics and melody from another song called "Crescent City Blues" by Gordon Jenkins. Because of this plagiarism, Cash quickly paid $75000 to Jenkins, which today would have been equivalent to $660000 today. Even though this act of plagarism could have taken down Cash's already popular career, it seems to have been swept under the rug and forgotten about.

# data[].attributes.body
Jayson Blair advanced quickly during his tenure at The New York Times, where he was hired as a full-time staff writer after his internship there and others at The Boston Globe and The Washington Post. On April 28, 2003, Blair received a call from Times national editor James Roberts asking him about similarities between a story he had written two days earlier and one published April 18 by San Antonio Express-News reporter Macarena Hernandez. The resulting inquiry led to the discovery of fabrication and plagiarism in a number of articles written by Blair.Some fabrications include Blair's claims to have traveled to the city mentioned in the dateline, when in fact he did not. Jonathan Landman, Blair's editor, told the Siegal committee he felt that Blair's being black played a large part in the younger man's initial promotion in 2001 to full-time staffer. "I think race was the decisive factor in his promotion," he said. "I thought then and I think now that it was the wrong decision."

Source: Ethics Case Studies - Society of Professional Journalists (spj.org)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Question: How does the WHAT: Jayson Blair advanced quickly during his tenure at The New York Times, where he was hired as a full-time staff writer after his internship there and others at The Boston Globe and The Washington Post. Even accusations of inaccuracy and a series of corrections to his reports on Washington, D.C.-area sniper attacks did not stop Blair from moving on to national coverage of the war in Iraq. But when suspicions arose over his reports on military families, an internal review found that he was fabricating material and communicating with editors from his Brooklyn apartment — or within the Times building — rather than from outside New York.

Some Times staffers, opposed to what they viewed as favoritism by Executive Editor Howell Raines, blamed a star system that allowed Blair to advance unusually fast in an extremely competitive, mostly veteran environment. Blair's former boss, Jonathan Landman, said race played a large part in the African American writer's ascendancy.

The findings of a 25-member committee headed by Allan Siegal, an assistant managing editor, led to the appointment of a public editor and stricter editorial policies. But staffing changes and higher standards could not change what happened: The Times's reputation was deeply tarnished. Raines and Managing Editor Gerald Boyd resigned in a cloud of mismanagement. Journalism, in general, suffered perhaps the biggest blow to its credibility in U.S. history.

Times investigate problems and correct policies that allowed the Blair scandal to happen?

WHO: The consequences of Blair's actions are so broad that it is important to have representatives from all staff levels, as well as journalists outside the Times staff, weigh in on corrective steps. Leading this group should be one or several highly ethical consensus-builders who can solicit and synthesize ideas from throughout the profession.

In the case of the Times, stakeholders range from the humble retiree who simply reads his paper in the morning to the power-wielding diplomat who relies on foreign-policy reports to inform her decisions. Journalists, too, lose ground when a colleague lowers the public's value of their work. As a group, biggest stakeholders are citizens of democracies, which depend on journalists to grow trust in readers with accurate reporting.

WHY: The Blair case raises questions about hiring, management and overall editorial policy.

First, there is the issue of relative inexperience in a super-high-stakes newsroom. Is it fair to senior staffers to allow a fresh-out-of-college writer to step into the ranks? More importantly, is it fair to expect such an inexperienced writer, however talented, to produce reporting as sharp as that of a decorated correspondent? While a pure meritocracy allows an individual of any experience level to fill any role, talent in the absence of experience could lead to diminished professionalism: Blair's ability to impress editors with his writing may have led to him feeling that facts are less important than prose.

Second, there is the question of who is responsible for letting Blair go so far. Is it the editor who hired him straight from the University of Maryland? How bout successive editors, who, despite their mediocre evaluations, did not object loudly enough to Blair's promotions? Could the executive and managing editors, with their big-picture roles and busy days, truly be responsible for one staffer's malfeasance?

Third, there must be a better way. Is it enough to know what went wrong and tighten the reigns on practices such as anonymous sources? Or does the Times need an auditor, someone it pays for a scolding? Why should an outsider be allowed to make recommendations on better internal practices? Then again, how could an insider, in earshot of the mess itself, lead the committee to fix things?

HOW: The Times decided that to remedy the nasty ramifications of the Blair scandal, it would commission an insider, along with others in and outside the Times newsroom, to investigate problems and suggest changes. The insider, Siegal, decided the Times should hire an outsider (who would be former Life magazine editor Daniel Okrent) to suggest further improvements. And Times editorial policy changed to reflect a much more cautious, conservative atmosphere concerning staff promotions and, especially, verification of reporting. A notable example of the latter aspect regards anonymous sources. In terms of staffing, the Times went so far as to require written evaluations for any candidates transferring between posts.

A particularly difficult aspect of the fallout, although one welcome by staffers who felt marginalized, was the dual resignation of Raines and Boyd. That development, at least in the view of Publisher Arthur Sulzberger, was for the greater good of the Times. Symbolically, their departures made it possible for observers to view the Times as a reformed institution.

— By Adrian Uribarri, SPJ Ethics Committee

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ethics Case Studies - Society of Professional Journalists

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Question: How does the WHAT: Jayson Blair advanced quickly during his tenure at The New York Times, where he was hired as a full-time staff writer after his internship there and others at The Boston Globe and The Washington Post.

# data[].attributes.body
In 2007 Katie Couric got caught up in a plagiarism incident. An online video essay read by Couric closely resembled a column in the Wall Street Journal. The essay was prepared by a producer and resulted in the producer being fired. This could have been prevented by acknowledging where the material came from. https://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3031455&page=1
MB

# data[].attributes.body
Katherine Anne Couric is an American journalist, presenter, producer, and author. She plagiarized an online video essay read by Couric closely resembled a column in the Wall Street Journal about the fading appeal of library books. This was in the year 2007. She got fired for her actions from CBS news.

-"Noah, T. (2007, April 12). The deeper fakery of Katie Couric's plagiarized commentary. Slate Magazine. Retrieved September 20, 2022, from https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2007/04/the-deeper-fakery-of-katie-couric-s-plagiarized-commentary.html"

# data[].attributes.body
Johnny Cash was primarily an American singer, songwriter, and musician credited as one of the "biggest names in music history" [1] and an inductee into a multitude of music hall of fames. In 1955 while serving in the U.S Airforce, wrote "Folsom Prison Blues" which was evidently similar to Gordon Jenkin's "Crescent City Blues"[2]. Due to the strikingly similar melody and lyrics, Cash was ordered to pay $75,000 as a result of the settlement of the plagiarism lawsuit brought against him. There is little information as to why Cash plagiarized, however, based on the popularity of the song, one can infer cash found the song and admired it and wanted to change it to fit his style. This is evident in his attempt to change some of the lyrics and meaning behind the song from "hoping to get out of a small town... to regret and imprisonment" [1]. Cash could have prevented this by buying the rights to use the melody, lyrics or the song entirely. Cash could have also received permission to use the material if he asked.

[1] J O h n n y c a SH - BCBE. https://www.bcbe.org/cms/lib/AL01901374/Centricity/Domain/739/Johnny%20Cash.pdf.

[2]“Johnny Cash, Gordon Jenkins Settled Dispute over 'Folsom Prison Blues'.” MPR News, MPR News, 14 July 2019, https://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/12/15/johnny-cash-gordon-jenkins-dispute-folsom-prison-blues.

# data[].attributes.body
Olivia Rodrigo was an American pop singer most known for her song "Good 4 U", which blew up overnight and landed on the Billboard top 30 tracks at number 2. Following the song's release, Olivia faced a handful of backlash regarding plagiarism on the track.  Olivia was accused of using a guitar riff from Elvis Costello's song "Pump it Up." Costello tweeted about the situation and cleared any concern by saying it's how rock and roll works. In late June, Rodrigo was also accused of stealing Courtney Love's album artwork. Love came out by asking her fans to spot the difference between her and Rodrigo's album, then proceeded to say it was rude of her but has been happening all her life. A similar instance occurred with the PomPom squad. There were a handful of conversations on Twitter but nothing too bad occurred. It seems to me that Rodrigo didn't mean to aggressively copy these songs and covers but did at the end of the day not ask for permission and didn't go about it the proper way. If she asked these artists for permission to use certain samples or artwork designs this could've all been avoided.

Kim, S. (2021, December 23). Every artist Olivia Rodrigo has been accused of copying on "sour". Newsweek. Retrieved September 20, 2022, from https://www.newsweek.com/olivia-rodrigo-sour-album-plagiarism-paramore-taylor-swift-courtney-love-elvis-costello-1623251

# data[].attributes.body
Olivia Rodrigo is a Actress and Songwriter. She rose to fame starting as a child actor in "High School Musical: The Musical: The Series" and "Bizaardvark". She then launched her music career which is where her plagiarism accusations originate from. She was accused of stealing from multiple artists including Taylor Swift, Elvis Costello and a number of other artists, to form her album "Sour". Other than countless online arguments, no serious repercussions have been ensued on Rodrigo. However, credit has been given to the songs that she had been accused of plagiarizing from. Rodrigo has put out a statement where she stands by that her music is original, but also made the statement that all music is inspired by other music. Nowadays, making completely original music is very difficult and no matter what artist do in their song, I'm sure there are comparisons that can be made to other songs. So overall I think Olivia Rodrigo handled the situation well and her music is enjoyable whether or not it was plagiarized.

Biography. “Olivia Rodrigo.” Biography, 4 Apr. 2022, www.biography.com/musician/olivia-rodrigo#citation.

Kim, Soo. “Every Artist Olivia Rodrigo Has Been Accused of Copying on ‘Sour.’” Newsweek, 23 Dec. 2021, www.newsweek.com/olivia-rodrigo-sour-album-plagiarism-paramore-taylor-swift-courtney-love-elvis-costello-1623251.

Attention Required! | Cloudflare. www.papermag.com/olivia-rodrigo-sour-plagiarism-claims-2655251859.html?rebelltitem=15#rebelltitem15. Accessed 20 Sept. 2022.

# data[].attributes.body
Jason Blair advanced quickly at his job in the New York times, he was hired as a full time staff writer and advance quickly in a field that was competitive. He faced accusations of plagiarism from the beginning and even so, still did pieces on the war on Iraq. He ascended due to his natural talent for writing, and according to Jonathan Landman who felt that he was promoted for being black. The ramifications  of his plaigiarism and fabrication are diminished trust for the times and of his coworkers.
https://www.spj.org/ecs13.asp

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Question: How does the WHAT: Jayson Blair advanced quickly during his tenure at The New York Times, where he was hired as a full-time staff writer after his internship there and others at The Boston Globe and The Washington Post. Even accusations of inaccuracy and a series of corrections to his reports on Washington, D.C.-area sniper attacks did not stop Blair from moving on to national coverage of the war in Iraq. But when suspicions arose over his reports on military families, an internal review found that he was fabricating material and communicating with editors from his Brooklyn apartment — or within the Times building — rather than from outside New York.

Some Times staffers, opposed to what they viewed as favoritism by Executive Editor Howell Raines, blamed a star system that allowed Blair to advance unusually fast in an extremely competitive, mostly veteran environment. Blair's former boss, Jonathan Landman, said race played a large part in the African American writer's ascendancy.

The findings of a 25-member committee headed by Allan Siegal, an assistant managing editor, led to the appointment of a public editor and stricter editorial policies. But staffing changes and higher standards could not change what happened: The Times's reputation was deeply tarnished. Raines and Managing Editor Gerald Boyd resigned in a cloud of mismanagement. Journalism, in general, suffered perhaps the biggest blow to its credibility in U.S. history.

Times investigate problems and correct policies that allowed the Blair scandal to happen?

WHO: The consequences of Blair's actions are so broad that it is important to have representatives from all staff levels, as well as journalists outside the Times staff, weigh in on corrective steps. Leading this group should be one or several highly ethical consensus-builders who can solicit and synthesize ideas from throughout the profession.

In the case of the Times, stakeholders range from the humble retiree who simply reads his paper in the morning to the power-wielding diplomat who relies on foreign-policy reports to inform her decisions. Journalists, too, lose ground when a colleague lowers the public's value of their work. As a group, biggest stakeholders are citizens of democracies, which depend on journalists to grow trust in readers with accurate reporting.

WHY: The Blair case raises questions about hiring, management and overall editorial policy.

First, there is the issue of relative inexperience in a super-high-stakes newsroom. Is it fair to senior staffers to allow a fresh-out-of-college writer to step into the ranks? More importantly, is it fair to expect such an inexperienced writer, however talented, to produce reporting as sharp as that of a decorated correspondent? While a pure meritocracy allows an individual of any experience level to fill any role, talent in the absence of experience could lead to diminished professionalism: Blair's ability to impress editors with his writing may have led to him feeling that facts are less important than prose.

Second, there is the question of who is responsible for letting Blair go so far. Is it the editor who hired him straight from the University of Maryland? How bout successive editors, who, despite their mediocre evaluations, did not object loudly enough to Blair's promotions? Could the executive and managing editors, with their big-picture roles and busy days, truly be responsible for one staffer's malfeasance?

Third, there must be a better way. Is it enough to know what went wrong and tighten the reigns on practices such as anonymous sources? Or does the Times need an auditor, someone it pays for a scolding? Why should an outsider be allowed to make recommendations on better internal practices? Then again, how could an insider, in earshot of the mess itself, lead the committee to fix things?

HOW: The Times decided that to remedy the nasty ramifications of the Blair scandal, it would commission an insider, along with others in and outside the Times newsroom, to investigate problems and suggest changes. The insider, Siegal, decided the Times should hire an outsider (who would be former Life magazine editor Daniel Okrent) to suggest further improvements. And Times editorial policy changed to reflect a much more cautious, conservative atmosphere concerning staff promotions and, especially, verification of reporting. A notable example of the latter aspect regards anonymous sources. In terms of staffing, the Times went so far as to require written evaluations for any candidates transferring between posts.

A particularly difficult aspect of the fallout, although one welcome by staffers who felt marginalized, was the dual resignation of Raines and Boyd. That development, at least in the view of Publisher Arthur Sulzberger, was for the greater good of the Times. Symbolically, their departures made it possible for observers to view the Times as a reformed institution.

— By Adrian Uribarri, SPJ Ethics Committee

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ethics Case Studies - Society of Professional Journalists

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Question: How does the WHAT: Jayson Blair advanced quickly during his tenure at The New York Times, where he was hired as a full-time staff writer after his internship there and others at The Boston Globe and The Washington Post.

# data[].attributes.body
Shia LaBeouf is an American actor that has played in many hit movies including the Transformer movie series. LaBeouf has been accused of plagiarizing throughout his career in many ways. His biggest incident was when he made a short film called "HowardCantour.com" which copied a noval called "Justin M. Damiano" by Daniel Clowe, in 2013. they claimed the story line was identical to Clowes' book. Its not certain why he plagiarized but they think its because he liked the story and didn't think anyone would notice it wasn't till after he was sued for around $150,000, that he said it was a different artistic take and it was art expression and open to interpretation. this could of been prevented if he gave credit to the author of the story line originally the first time he posted the short fill.

Work cited:

Greengerg Glusker LLP. (2013, December 23). Shia LaBeouf and the case for copyright infringement. JD Supra. Retrieved September 20, 2022, from https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/shia-labeouf-and-the-case-for-copyright-02908/

# data[].attributes.body
Shia Labeouf is a well known actor who grew up on Disney but quickly made his way into much larger roles. As it turns out, there have been a number of times in which Labeouf has plagiarized in his career. On multiple occassions, Labeouf has been in scenarios that require apologies; each time he's apologized for something, it has been stolen from somewhere else. Shia Labeouf has a history of apologizing for plagiarism with more plagiarism. Often times, his material does not give credit to the original author or thought. Labeouf's run-ins with plagiarism have all been online issues. His apologies for plagiarizing are far from genuine when he continues to plagiarize them as well. These situations could have easily been avoided if Shia Labeouf had simply given credit for the quotes he uses.

Stampler, L. (2014, February 10). Shia labeouf plagiarism scandal: How many times has he done it? Time. Retrieved September 20, 2022, from https://time.com/6094/shia-labeouf-plagiarism-scandal/

# data[].attributes.body
Kaavya Viswanathan was accused of plagiarism in her sophomore year at Harvard. She was accused of plagiarizing parts her "recently published chick-lit novel" from author Megan McCafferty. Viswanathan was accused of borrowing from, "Sloppy Firsts" and "Second Helpings." There were similarities founds between the passages that were easily caught onto. The outcome was never solidified but according to Harvard they "expect Harvard students to conduct themselves with integrity and honesty at all times." Although, it is made clear that Viswanathan is a "big fan" of McCafferty's book she should've been more cautious with the language she chose to use.

Smith, D. (2006, April 25). Harvard novelist says copying was unintentional. The New York Times. Retrieved September 20, 2022, from https://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/25/books/harvard-novelist-says-copying-was-unintentional.html

# data[].attributes.body
Jayson Blair was a journalist who worked at the New York Times in the early 2000's. But in 2003 Blair was caught for plagiarizing fellow journalists and implementing fabricated details of many other stories in his articles for the New York Times. While Blair suffered with several illnesses such as bipolar disorder, he says it's no excuse for what he did. Shortly after Blair resigned, the Times then published a detailed report about about the fraud and breakdown of how it happened. The report described his actions as "a profound betrayal of trust". This dilemma could have been prevented simply if he found his own way to get information and using only his own. AC
https://reporterslab.org/jayson-blair-opens-past/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jayson Blair, a former New York Times reporter who is famous for the wrong reasons, stood in front of a class of Duke undergraduates Monday.

"There are no real ground rules," he said. "You can ask me anything you want."

There was an awkward pause. The students looked at each other, waiting for someone else to go first. A student in the front raised her hand and blurted out the first question.

"So why did you do it?"

She was referring to the 2003 scandal that seismically rocked the journalism world: the revelation that Blair had plagiarized and fabricated many of the stories he had written as a staff reporter for the New York Times. He had copied passages from other publications, conjured up fake quotations and lied repeatedly to cover up his misdeeds.

Blair resigned, and the Times published a punishing, lengthy report investigating Blair's journalistic fraud and the newsroom breakdowns that had let him slip through the cracks. According to the report, Blair's actions were "a profound betrayal of trust." A month later, Executive Editor Howell Raines and managing editor Gerald Boyd turned in their own resignations.

Blair's response to the student's question was measured and thoughtful. It is, after all, a question that he has been asked - by editors, journalists, readers - for 13 years.

"There's not one real, solid reason... it was a perfect storm of events."

He got into journalism for noble reasons, he said. "I really cared about the profession and the impact, I didn't really care about the fame and glory." That didn't stop him, however, from fabricating quotes and stories, decisions he now attributes to "a combination of deep-seated character flaws."

Blair was suffering from undiagnosed bipolar disorder and recovering from severe drug and alcohol addiction - which added fuel to an up-and-down cycle of plagiarizing and fabricating.

But Blair doesn't believe his mental state is an excuse for what he did. "There are plenty of mentally-ill writers out there who don't do similar things." Instead, he emphasized, it was his character that was at the core of the problem.

Despite the scathing report about his journalistic sins, many people at the Times responded with humanity and compassion. The higher-ups at the newspaperultimately put Blair in touch with the psychiatrists that helped him treat his bipolar disorder, he said.

In the class, Professor Bill Adair's News as a Moral Battleground, students peppered him with questions. Does he have advice for his younger self? When did he begin fabricating? Was it the system or himself? Blair begins fidgeting with a piece of blue cloth from his pocket as he tackles each one.

"I was too arrogant. That arrogance blinded me to a lot of my weaknesses."

It began small, Blair remembered. His first instance of plagiarism was an unattributed quote taken from the Associated Press in an interview - one he was sure his editors would catch. But no one did.

"Once you do something that crosses any ethical line... it is easy to go back and do it over and over," he said. "I danced around it and then crossed it and had a real hard time coming back."

Is he sorry for what he did?

"Absolutely" he said without hesitation. Although he is not sorry for himself - it made him more humble, he believes, which strengthened his character - he is sorry for the colleagues he betrayed, the family he worried, and the damage he caused to journalism's reputation. "I feel a lot of sadness. I handed people who didn't want to believe journalists a great case for why they shouldn't trust things. That hits me."

Blair now lives in Northern Virginia, close to the family and friends he grew up with. After starting support groups in his area, he began working in mental health and currently runs his own life coaching practice. Although he wrote a book in 2004 about his experience, Burning Down my Masters' House, he says he regrets writing it so soon after the scandal. It took him, he estimates, eight years to truly gain perspective on what happened. "I'm gonna burn all the copies!" he joked.

He isn't seeking to return to journalism, he said, because he understands why he'd never be hired. "Once you've done something that leads people to question your trust, your effectiveness in the field becomes limited. You don't have the right to go back."

"I still love journalism. I miss it. (But) it just doesn't work without the trust."
Isabella Kwai is a Duke senior and a student in the class.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why he did it: Jayson Blair opens up about his plagiarism and fabrication at the New York Times - Duke Reporters' Lab

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Jayson Blair, a former New York Times reporter who is famous for the wrong reasons, stood in front of a class of Duke undergraduates Monday. "There are no real ground rules," he said. "You can ask me anything you want." There was an awkward pause.