http://www.nypost.com/news/national...rs_prose__pro_nationalnews_philip_recchia.htm July 2, 2006 -- Conservative scribe Ann Coulter cribbed liberally in her latest book, "Godless," according to a plagiarism expert. John Barrie, the creator of a leading plagiarism-recognition system, claimed he found at least three instances of what he calls "textbook plagiarism" in the leggy blond pundit's "Godless: the Church of Liberalism" after he ran the book's text through the company's digital iThenticate program. He also says he discovered verbatim lifts in Coulter's weekly column, which is syndicated to more than 100 newspapers, including the Fort Lauderdale (Fla.) Sun-Sentinel and Augusta (Ga.) Chronicle. Barrie, CEO of iParadigms, told The Post that one 25-word passage from the "Godless" chapter titled "The Holiest Sacrament: Abortion" appears to have been lifted nearly word for word from Planned Parenthood literature published at least 18 months before Coulter's 281-page book was released. A separate, 24-word string from the chapter "The Creation Myth" appeared about a year earlier in the San Francisco Chronicle with just one word change - "stacked" was changed to "piled." Another 33-word passage that appears five pages into "Godless" allegedly comes from a 1999 article in the Portland (Maine) Press Herald. Meanwhile, many of the 344 citations Coulter includes in "Godless" "are very misleading," said Barrie, who holds a Ph.D. from the University of California at Berkeley, where he specialized in pattern recognition. "They're used purely to try and give the book a higher level of credibility - as if it's an academic work. But her sloppiness in failing to properly attribute many other passages strips it of nearly all its academic merits," he told The Post. Barrie says he also ran Coulter's Universal Press columns from the past 12 months through iThenticate and found similar patterns of cribbing. Her Aug. 3, 2005, column, "Read My Lips: No New Liberals," about U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter, includes six passages, ranging from 10 to 48 words each, that appeared 15 years earlier in the same order in an L.A. Times article, headlined "Liberals Leery as New Clues Surface on Souter's Views." But nowhere in that column does she mention the L.A. Times or the story's writer, David G. Savage. Her June 29, 2005, column, "Thou Shalt Not Commit Religion," incorporates 10 facts on National Endowment for the Arts-funded work that originally appeared in the same order in a 1991 Heritage Foundation report, "The National Endowment for the Arts: Misusing Taxpayers' Money." But again, the Heritage Foundation isn't credited. "Just as Coulter plays free and loose with her citations in 'Godless,' she obviously does the same in her columns," Barrie said. Coulter did not respond to requests for comment.
Doris Kearns Goodwin, a liberal historian who appears constantly on PBS, was accused similarly of having plagerized extensively in one of her "academic" books. Since she is a liberal, the media quickly dropped the story and she still is a regular on PBS. Some of the claims against Coulter seem a bit thin. She used the same "facts?" Her citations are misleading? Sounds more like someone disagrees with her opinions. Of course, i can't imagine a Berkely professor would have any arguments with Ann.
Ah, I see... so Coulter's plagiarism isn't an issue because of the media!! AAA, you seem to have a really really big problem with the media, because everything seems to be the media's fault in your view. Did we read the same post by the thread starter here? The post I read suggests that she is guilty of direct plagiarism. Let's go to the tape, shall we? "Her Aug. 3, 2005, column, "Read My Lips: No New Liberals," about U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter, includes six passages, ranging from 10 to 48 words each, that appeared 15 years earlier in the same order in an L.A. Times article" "A separate, 24-word string from the chapter 'The Creation Myth' appeared about a year earlier in the San Francisco Chronicle with just one word change - 'stacked' was changed to 'piled.' " "Another 33-word passage that appears five pages into "Godless" allegedly comes from a 1999 article in the Portland (Maine) Press Herald." So these three passages lead you to believe that the problem is that someone disagrees with her opinion?????????? Is that what you are saying, man? Gee, AAA... I hate to say this, but I generally expect this kind of thing out of only one member of ET. I am trying to speak to you respectfully these days but this is his modus operandi exactly - pure assertion. Doesn't surprise me in the least that Ann is caught. I always suspected the pseudo-intellectuality of her pronouncements. Views like hers obviously can't be supported by the facts. It's disappointing to know that she didn't even have enough smarts to make up her own inflammatory-rhetoric-designed-to-sell her-personal-brand.
Nik, the jury is still out on this isn't it? Having said that, if she's guilty, she deserves as much scorn and penalties as every plagiarist.
Hi hap I only saw the word 'allegedly' once in there, out of four examples cited. The rest seem pretty straightforward, at least they're made to sound that way That's not to mention the other charges re: sloppy and/or missing attributions, which have yet to be proven. Again, we have to ask - would these high profile academicians put their reputations on the line by making up these charges simply because they dislike Ms. Coulter's politics? Also, this guy is trying to run a business - is he likely to alienate an entire section of his potential customer base for the same reason? More likely that he wants to show how good his program is. It goes to the same point I was making with AAA. Is the explanation always a leftist media plot against the right? On these boards, it seems that there are a lot of conspiracy theories re: the left-lovers in the media.
Hi Nik, You make good points, and I reiterate that if she's guilty then she deserves what she gets. As for moi, I don't think it's "always" a case of a leftist media plot against the right, but those situations definitely exist, IMO the NY Times being a prime example. As for conspiracy theories from the Left, Chit Chat is rife with them, including that the Bush administration planned and executed 9/11. But that's for another thread (or 10)!
Hi Hap Yes, I guess I'm guilty of disguising my editorial comments to other members as replies to your posts With regard to the idea that the Bush family planned 9/11... yes, well, there are maniacs everywhere. I believe that if this story has any legs, we will be hearing a lot more about it. There are enough lefties out there with a pathological loathing for Ms. Coulter, and this kind of bait would send them into a frenzy for sure.
Nik, you said it right that there are maniacs everywhere, including millions in the Middle East that would like to see this country turned to rubble, and millions more in America who don't understand that. As for lefties having a pathological loathing for Ms. Coulter, the frenzy has already begun on ET and will undoubtedly spiral out of control when more details emerge.
Plagarism in an academic work is serious, Ann Coulter is not posing as an academic, is there really any penalty for plagarization or misquotes or misrepresentations? Anything goes in the political arena really. What would be the punishment, she would owe us an apology? I am sure she would apologize and get some digs in on the liberals at the same time. I want to see her apology actually, it is bound to be entertaining. She could straight face it long enough to turn her little apology session into a standup act.