Examples of plagiarism experiences included in responses illustrated some illustrative issues for consideration. Data revealed the following:
The copying of ideas: usually, newspaper stories being followed up by television or radio, using the same angle and interview subjects as the print medium. Wrote one: “I have had several instances where stories I have written for newspapers or magazines have been followed up by television – often interviewing the same people … I wouldn’t mind if they found a new angle, but using the same angle is a bit of a cheek.” Though clearly irking some reporters, this does not appear to fit plagiarism models applicable to journalism plagiarism which does not extend to the theft of ideas.
Errors carried forward: reporters repeating material published elsewhere without checking that it is correct and, inadvertently, perpetuating errors. A response: “The worrying trend is reporters repeating what is published in, say, a newspaper, without checking that it is correct. That happens because of laziness, time constraints … and because it’s often difficult to confirm information early in the mornings, late at night and weekends.” The degree of potential for error is highlighted in other responses that refer to situations where sections of material are taken from a mainstream news source, appear unattributed on the internet, then are re-lifted by another mainstream news source (“this can lead to further plagiarism, as some reporters will take
unattributed material that may have been lifted from another news source and placed on a website, and use it in their stories”.
Insufficient and/or unclear attribution: news agencies only attaching attributions to a paragraph of a pulled story, when the whole story or a large part of the story, has been pulled, leaving confusion about who is responsible for writing which parts. A
attributes the end of the third paragraph – yet the entire story is pulled from our work.” This response dovetails with another’s observation of confusions when a single NZPA byline At the bottom of a story masks input from several newspapers sometimes carried to NZPA via several agencies.
Shyness/lack of confidence: plagiarism arising because reporters have felt awkward about asking questions of someone already interviewed and reported by others. This reaction could also be linked to laziness but, interestingly, seems to imply a diffidence among some journalists about, perhaps, looking silly. One response: “Reporters who don’t want to ask a person the same questions they have already [answered
elsewhere].” Another observed that journalists sometimes take copy but don’t do the necessary re-interviewing to make the story their own because they lack confidence in their own abilities.
Reluctance/refusal to attribute: websites, including by Internet bloggers, plucking mainstream content without attribution; and mainstream plucking material and ideas from websites. A response: “There is a need for even the print media to provide immediate news, and this means picking up facts and details wherever possible. At times this leads to whole quotes being lifted, rather than just details.” The implication here seems to be that a publication’s face or mana is diminished by even legitimate use of others’ copy. This grouping can be extended to include cynical, deliberate withholding of attribution, refusing to acknowledge other media’s contributions. There was also perceived to be a widespread print news media unwillingness to acknowledge multiple story sources, where responsibility for the work was often increasingly blurred. Such difficulties were said to notably emerge where subeditors cobbled together stories from international websites.
Group economising: notably radio and television, desperate for local news, find it more financially viable to lift from local and community newspapers than employ more staff in the regions. Community and student radio stations are also identified as frequent thieves. “Radio and TV have always used community papers as a major source of stories. Often they will follow up the idea themselves. Increasingly they
tend not to plagiarise, perhaps because print is a more tangible record and they’re more likely to get caught.”
Homogenisation of the news media: a perception that, along with shrinking
ownership, all news media organisations are losing local identity, chasing the same stories, using the same angles, and producing the same work. This perception was supported by the identification of a practice within some large groups of sharing of stories, without author or paper attribution, among their member organisations. Business interests taking precedence: a perception that a growing business intent— over ideology—of news media organisations is subsuming journalism standards, raising ethical questions about whether editorial standards were slipping.
The above responses covered the issue of freedom of ideas, the identification of some unwanted effects of plagiarism, expression of some confusion about right and wrong practices, and some broad-brush issues of slipping or changing standards over which the news media is often taken to task. More clearly described and developed reasons given for plagiarism are contained in 6.2.8 below.