James Madison, Fourth President of the United States
As Tim Myers predicted in the comments on yesterday’s post on the Lynn Vakay plagiarism controversy, the Signal swiftly issued an apology and retraction for printing what a noted USC professor characterized as “improper.”
Key developments cited in the Signal article:
- The Signal issues an apology, bans past and future Vakay content.
- Vakay admits no wrongdoing, lashes out at her accuser.
- Dr. Wolfram says he gave Vakay permission to use the ideas from his article.
- Bob Hauter, local Republican committee pres and deputy chief of staff for Congressman Howard “Buck” McKeon, defends Vakay.
- BlazingMonk revealed as Signal letter-writer and Newhall resident Nathan Imhoff.
Since there is obvious politicizing in the comments, let me get this out of the way: Those who have read my comments on this blog know that I am a fiscal conservative. At age 32, I have voted in nearly every election but I have yet to vote for a Democrat for federal office.
What Vakay did, her obvious plagiarizing of Wolfram’s article, was wrong. Her response in the Signal and lack of apology are wrong.
The interesting point (that is completely irrelevant, if not puzzling) is the angle that Dr. Wolfram “doesn’t mind” that Ms. Vakay “borrowed his ideas” (quotes from the Signal article).
1) Plagiarism is not defined by the source giving permission to have material/ideas regurgitated. In fact, most articles that cite sources rarely, if ever, obtain permission to do so.
2) In evaluating a plagiarism case, is “permission to plagiarize” from the source ever a factor in the charge? i.e. if one student gave another a copy of her research paper with the specific consent that it could be used by requesting student, does that make the plagiarism OK ?
3) The fact that Ms. Vakay appears to presently be both an educator and a Master’s College student (as stated in her LinkedIn profile), and that she is plagiarizing a university professor makes the situation even more peculiar.
4) If this isn’t plagiarism, what is?
It’s a shame this debacle has taken center stage versus having a genuine debate about something obviously more important: health care policy. Ms. Vakay, by her actions, distracted the conversation. She could have added to it (in a profound way, IMO) by simply submitting Dr. Wolfram’s article to the Signal with a short introduction.
As James Madison (the prominent subject in Dr. Wolfram’s article) said, “conscience is the most sacred of all property.” Ms. Vakay would do well to issue a clear and focused apology; it would be the right thing do do, “right now!”
Comments (49)