What Will Google Announce Next Week?
Facebook Forced To Let You Vote On Privacy Changes
Wired Editor Cribs From Wikipedia in New Book
A drama has been playing out on the Web involving Wikipedia and Chris Anderson, Wired's editor-in-chief and author of the book 'Free: The Future of a Radical Price.' Anderson's book doesn't hit store shelves until July 7th, but copies have already landed on the desks of reviewers at several publications.
| Yes | |
|---|---|
| No | |
| I'm not sure. |
One of them, the Virginia Quarterly Review, published an article on June 23 revealing roughly a dozen passages in 'Free' that are uncredited excerpts from other sources, primarily Wikipedia. One particularly blatant example -- discussing the origins of the phrase "there's no such thing as a free lunch" -- reproduced a Wikipedia entry that itself included uncredited quotations from the New York Times.
In response to these charges of plagiarism, Anderson explained to the Virginia Quarterly Review that citations were lost in a last-minute reformatting, or 'write-through,' of the book that ditched footnotes in favor of in-text citations. He took responsibility for the mistake stating, "All those are my screwups... I should have had a better process to make sure the write-through covered all the text that was not directly sourced."
Chris Dannen at Fast Company was less disturbed by the possible plagiarism than by Anderson's reliance on Wikipedia. He argued that Wikipedia isn't even appropriate for "middle-school book-reports" and suggested that Anderson should have used "more credible reference books like the Oxford English Dictionary."
It's debatable what reference books are "more credible." We've already seen a study suggesting that Wikipedia is just accurate as the Encyclopedia Britannica, for example. The bigger question is: Should a professional journalist, who heads a publication as respected as Wired, be relying on reference-book articles at all?
[From: Virginia Quarterly Review and Fast Company]
Limited-Edition Game Consoles
Xbox's unveiling of its new, red 'Resident Evil' console is the most recent in a line of limited edition consoles designed to tap in to the "collector" market. While some of the limited edition consoles were released with a specific target audience in mind, others appeal to the sensibilities of all gamers. You can check out some other recent limited edition consoles in the following pages:
Metal Gear Solid 4 Limited Edition PS3:
This bundle not only included a gunmetal gray PS3 with matching wireless controller, but also the MGS4: Guns of the Patriot Limited Edition game.
Nintendo Pokemon DS Lite:
At the forefront of limited edition sales, Nintendo offered this yellow DS complete with Pikachu etching.
Guitar Hero: On Tour DS Bundle:
Nintendo offered fans of this franchise a special silver and black DS featuring a fiery Guitar Hero logo on the cover.
Lilac PSP:
It's not difficult to discern the target audience for this console set to be released with the $199 Hannah Montana Entertainment Pack.
Nintendo Pink Ribbon DS
Nintendo not only pledged five dollars from every purchase of these $129.99 consoles to the Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation, but that they would also donate at least $100,000 in total.
-- Warren Baines
40 Years Later 'Napalm Girl' Tells Her Story
Disney World Scammers Scored Four Years of Free Vacations
Lost Dr. Seuss Cartoons Show Another Side Of The Author
Stranger's Kiss Keeps 16-Year-Old From Committing Suicide
Rookie Cop Reportedly Berated, Called 'A Rat' For Arresting Off-Duty Officer
Chain Food Showdown: The Best & Worst Buffalo Wings
Walmart Ending Membership in Conservative Group
How I Went Bankrupt at 23
PHOTOS: Charlize Theron's Short And Shoulder-Baring Style
Can a New Guy Save Best Buy?
Woman Claims Kangaroo Stalked Her for 2 Days, Then Attacked
Disturbing Video Allegedly Shows Montreal Torso Suspect Murdering Victim
Pete Cosey Dead: Chicago Guitar Great and Miles Davis Collaborator Dies at 68
Facebook, Week Two: Fortunes Made and Fortunes Lost (Mostly Lost)
Heidi Klum's Sexiest (And Scariest) Outfits
A Journey To The Hottest Place On Earth: Dallol Ethiopia
Student Ate Roommate's Brain And Heart, Cops Say
Kansas Police Search For 12-Year-Old Girl Who Disappeared With Canadian She Met Online
Zhang Ziyi Slams Prostitution Allegations
George Zimmerman's Bond Revoked
Witherspoon Bigamy Case Heats Up
Is Kate Walsh Leaving 'Private Practice' Next Season?
New Discovery Sheds Light On Amelia Earhart Mystery
LOOK: Photos Of Military Moms Breastfeeding In Uniform Cause Controversy
Space Agency Predicts Date Of World-Ending Galactic Smash-Up
Calif. Man Becomes Internet Sensation In China For Random Act Of Kindness
See Kim Without Her Wig On 'Don't Be Tardy For The Wedding'
Maine Police Believe Ayla Reynolds Is Dead
Porn Actor Mailed Murder Victim's Body Parts To Canada's Top Political Parties: Cops
PHOTOS: This Month's Biggest Photoshop Fails
New Video Shows Face-Eating Attack Lasted 18 Minutes
Divers To Plunge To The Depths Of Baltic Sea To Examine Mystery Object
Comments
52
Subscribe to commentsMereJun 26th 2009 3:39PM
The little poll "Do you trust Wikipedia?" is revelatory. I expected the "No" response to far outweigh the other options. Instead it carries about 50% of the vote, while the other 50% is carried by those who trust Wikipedia or are not sure. How can anyone not be sure about this? Worse, how can anyone who knows how Wikipedia is cobbled together trust it to be factual? I agree with Kathleen that when you know absolutely nothing about a subject, Wikipedia is a good place to start. One can get a general overview and some broad parameters there, but one must go elsewhere for verifiable sources. In that sense, I am not surprised that Chris Anderson did NOT cite his source -- who would want to admit that he is relying on Wikipedia?
JRMJun 26th 2009 3:44PM
plagierism is one of the worst offenses in news reporting/journalism. fire his ass and then let him take a job watching over all the little kids in day camp-days, and then sweeping the floors and cleaning the toilets at the mall-nights.
Tom HolzelJun 26th 2009 4:17PM
If you want to see how "accurate" Wikipedia is, just check out the bio of someone who is "controversial."
Check out David Irving's bio, for example. Not only is it a masterful hatchet job (there being hardly a single unvarnished compliment) but the entire thrust of it is first to promote the religious claims of the Jewish zelots who guard his entry, and only second to mention in passing that he is a WW-II historian and author of THIRTY books on the subject.
As proof, try to make a SINGLE change, such as adding in the box that Irving is an historian, and not only a holocaust denier.
THE NEXT DAY that entry will be deleted and the original verswion restored.
thomasecwJun 26th 2009 4:23PM
When will Maureen Dowd, writer for the NY Times, be taken to task for her consistent plagerism? She has been caught on numerous occasions with no consequences. Apparently her job is safe as long as she continues to attack President George W. Bush. She, like most writers, must not be aware that GWB is no longer president. Bottom line, she is a plagerist. My local paper, the "Orlando Sentinel" continues to carry her columns; enough of a reason to cancel my subscription.
Mandi PinniJun 26th 2009 4:36PM
This is sad, sad, sad. Journalism isn't what it used to be. Writing isn't what it used to be. PR isn't what it used to be. Advertising isn't what is used to be and Editors aren't what THEY used to be. So here's a solution for the new young Journalists and writers out there who still think "sampling" is orginality and plagerism is an old folks term. Time to go "back to school". Editors, et al. should NOT allow/publish any pieces in their papers, books, periodicals, etc. unless it has been reviewed by turn it in dot com for matching source content. There. Back to journalistic kindergarten we go.
wongtpaJun 26th 2009 4:41PM
He must have been a liberal democrat or Kearns-Goodwin!
CharlieJun 26th 2009 4:51PM
And NO mention about Joe Biden and his plagerism exploits in speeches, books and appearances. The only things original to "Xerox" Joe are his "foot-in-the-mouth-gaffes" he is quite prone to make.
gcan407Jun 26th 2009 4:50PM
The credo of the "neo journalist"? "Why write it when you can steal it?"
EkulrengawJun 26th 2009 4:58PM
Take from one source and it is called plagiarizing. Take from more than one and it is called research.
whal711Jun 26th 2009 5:28PM
As the Author of the new religious thriller “The Prophecy of Zechariah,” I can say that everything has been written somewhere throughout time. It is hard to write two words together that have not been written in the same order before. However, I write fiction and not non-fiction. Yet I at least sight used phrases when I can. So if I can sight my references than why can’t a reporter who claims to write non-fiction.
AHGJun 26th 2009 7:25PM
I've been out of touch for a few days. This is appalling. Has Anderson been fired yet? If not, why not????
ggreyspyJun 26th 2009 9:50PM
Well, at least that somebody caught him and for that, thank you. Other than that, I'm impressed with this discovery. Interesting article.