- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Update on NYT coverage of plagiarism: "expert" says Times didn't give him the whole story
Posted on 10/16/24 at 8:04 am
Posted on 10/16/24 at 8:04 am
Worth reading his explanation and the replies contained in his X post linked below.
Thank God for Elon Musk's purchase of Twitter. Without it, imagine how much easier it would be for the gaslighting of regime media to go unchecked.
Thank God for Elon Musk's purchase of Twitter. Without it, imagine how much easier it would be for the gaslighting of regime media to go unchecked.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.This post was edited on 10/16/24 at 8:06 am
6
Posted on 10/16/24 at 8:07 am to IvoryBillMatt
New York Times: All the news we deem fit to print.
Posted on 10/16/24 at 8:10 am to IvoryBillMatt
Sure bro we believe ya
Posted on 10/16/24 at 8:22 am to IvoryBillMatt
What was the NYT story about? I’m not giving them clicks.
Posted on 10/16/24 at 8:26 am to TheHarahanian
quote:
What was the NYT story about? I’m not giving them clicks.
Kamala didn't plagiarize anything and it's racist to notice that she did.
This guy was just one of the academic "experts" the NYT calls to shine up whatever bullshite they are pushing at the moment; in this case though they couldn't even get one of those to say what they wanted without carefully managing the info they gave him.
Posted on 10/16/24 at 8:27 am to IvoryBillMatt
It was nice of him to put his professional reputation on the line based on a "trust me bro" from the reporter.
Posted on 10/16/24 at 8:41 am to armtackledawg
I don't buy it. Unless he had a relationship with a reporter and the person never screwed him over.
They screwed him over this time. As stated, he is likely a shill for the democrats.
A less likely possibility is that he was mislead.
Prove it's the latter and you can have your cred back.
They screwed him over this time. As stated, he is likely a shill for the democrats.
A less likely possibility is that he was mislead.
Prove it's the latter and you can have your cred back.
Posted on 10/16/24 at 8:53 am to thetempleowl
quote:
Prove it's the latter and you can have your cred back.
If he is a testifying expert witness, and he almost surely is, that walk back tweet will be Exhibit A on every cross-examination for the rest of his career. Bad, bad move on his part.
Posted on 10/16/24 at 10:31 am to IvoryBillMatt
What exactly did he say the first time?
Posted on 10/16/24 at 10:35 am to Corso
This Fox News article summarizes it well:
LINK
"In a review of the book, The New York Times found that none of the passages in question took the ideas or thoughts of another writer, which is considered the most serious form of plagiarism. Instead, the sentences copy descriptions of programs or statistical information that appear elsewhere," the article read.
It also cited a plagiarism consultant, Jonathan Bailey, who said Rufo had taken minor infractions and tried to "make a big deal of it." Bailey wrote on X on Monday that he had not performed a full analysis of Harris' book.
LINK
"In a review of the book, The New York Times found that none of the passages in question took the ideas or thoughts of another writer, which is considered the most serious form of plagiarism. Instead, the sentences copy descriptions of programs or statistical information that appear elsewhere," the article read.
It also cited a plagiarism consultant, Jonathan Bailey, who said Rufo had taken minor infractions and tried to "make a big deal of it." Bailey wrote on X on Monday that he had not performed a full analysis of Harris' book.
Posted on 10/16/24 at 2:14 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
"In a review of the book, The New York Times found that none of the passages in question took the ideas or thoughts of another writer, which is considered the most serious form of plagiarism. Instead, the sentences copy descriptions of programs or statistical information that appear elsewhere," the article read.
Ah so just a handful of plagiarism
Posted on 10/16/24 at 2:27 pm to IvoryBillMatt
Don't they have really good plagiarism software programs that do a pretty good job? My understanding is the she lifted stuff right out of wiki. I thought this was pretty easily determined now. Don't they use on most dissertations that are submitted for doctorate or post doctorates?
Posted on 10/16/24 at 2:29 pm to IvoryBillMatt
quote:
the sentences copy descriptions of programs or statistical information that appear elsewhere,"
Then book note it and move on.
Posted on 10/16/24 at 2:31 pm to Diamondawg
quote:
Don't they have really good plagiarism software programs that do a pretty good job? My understanding is the she lifted stuff right out of wiki. I thought this was pretty easily determined now. Don't they use on most dissertations that are submitted for doctorate or post doctorates?
Allegedly, they were cited in the reference section in the back, but not in the paragraphs where the exact language was used.
NYT says that's not the bad kind of plagiarism.
Posted on 10/16/24 at 2:46 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:Sort of like there were just a few apartment complexes taken over by Venezuelans.
NYT says that's not the bad kind of plagiarism.
Posted on 10/16/24 at 3:22 pm to Corso
A few apartment buildings
Not much election fraud
No one in combat zones
Not much election fraud
No one in combat zones
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News