Michael Gaynor
The Ann Coulter as plagiarist charge: Contemptible canard
By Michael Gaynor
Plagiarize: "to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own; use (a created production) without crediting the source"; "commit literary theft: present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existed source."
Blow out of all proportion: pretend that something trivial is significant. Example: the claim that Ann Coulter plagiarized from Maine's Portland-Press Herald.
Fantasy: "the power or process of creating esp. unrealistic or improbable mental images in response to psychological need." Example: the claim that Ann Coulter plagiarized from a Los Angeles Times. article
Ann Coulter's enemies do not want to debate the merits of her latest bestseller, Godless: The Church of Liberalism. So they are trying to discredit the book by discrediting the writer of the book. Crown Publishing Group, the book's publisher has examined the plagiarism allegations and "found them to be as trivial and meritless as they are irresponsible."
Herewith "evidence" of plagiarism (reported by Associated Press):
Ann, in Godless: "The massive Dickey-Lincoln Dam, a $227 million hydroelectric project proposed on upper St. John River in Maine, was halted by the discovery of the Furbish lousewort, a plant previously believed to be extinct."
1999 article in Maine's Portland-Press Herald: "The massive Dickey-Lincoln Dam, a $227 million hydroelectric project proposed on upper St. John River, is halted by the discovery of the Furbish lousewort, a plant believed to be extinct."
The difference: "was" instead of "is."
The context: One descriptive sentence in a 281 page is essentially the same as one descriptive sentence in a 1999 Portland-Press Herald article.
Purpose of the sentences: to set forth concisely the basic facts about the halting of a big dam project.
Distinctiveness of the sentences: none.
Memorability of the sentences: none.
Likelihood the Ann deliberately lifted a straightforward, but hardly distinctively Coulteresque sentence and decided to deny the Maine newspaper credit, in the hope that she could pass it off as her work: Nil.
Ann, in a 2005 column: "As New Hampshire attorney general in 1977, [now Associate United Supreme Court Justice] Souter opposed the repeal of an 1848 state law that made abortion a crime even though Roe v. Wade had made it irrelevant, predicting that if the law were repealed, New Hampshire 'would become the abortion mill of the United States.'"
1990 Los Angeles Times article: "In 1977, Souter as state attorney general spoke out against a proposed repeal of an 1848 state law that made abortion a crime — even though the measure had been largely invalidated by the Supreme Court in Roe. vs. Wade."
Is this plagiarism?
Of course not. It is, at most, two barely similar, straightforward, indistinctive and unmemorable sentences about the same subject matter, a matter of public interest.
The brazen plagiarism charge may be the first shot in a campaign by her political enemies to discredit Ann, because Godless is that good, that persuasive, that pro-life, that pro-God and traditional family values.
For Ann's sake, hopefully it is their best shot. It's a dud. It discredits the ones making the charge, not Ann.
© Michael Gaynor
Plagiarize: "to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own; use (a created production) without crediting the source"; "commit literary theft: present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existed source."
Blow out of all proportion: pretend that something trivial is significant. Example: the claim that Ann Coulter plagiarized from Maine's Portland-Press Herald.
Fantasy: "the power or process of creating esp. unrealistic or improbable mental images in response to psychological need." Example: the claim that Ann Coulter plagiarized from a Los Angeles Times. article
Ann Coulter's enemies do not want to debate the merits of her latest bestseller, Godless: The Church of Liberalism. So they are trying to discredit the book by discrediting the writer of the book. Crown Publishing Group, the book's publisher has examined the plagiarism allegations and "found them to be as trivial and meritless as they are irresponsible."
Herewith "evidence" of plagiarism (reported by Associated Press):
Ann, in Godless: "The massive Dickey-Lincoln Dam, a $227 million hydroelectric project proposed on upper St. John River in Maine, was halted by the discovery of the Furbish lousewort, a plant previously believed to be extinct."
1999 article in Maine's Portland-Press Herald: "The massive Dickey-Lincoln Dam, a $227 million hydroelectric project proposed on upper St. John River, is halted by the discovery of the Furbish lousewort, a plant believed to be extinct."
The difference: "was" instead of "is."
The context: One descriptive sentence in a 281 page is essentially the same as one descriptive sentence in a 1999 Portland-Press Herald article.
Purpose of the sentences: to set forth concisely the basic facts about the halting of a big dam project.
Distinctiveness of the sentences: none.
Memorability of the sentences: none.
Likelihood the Ann deliberately lifted a straightforward, but hardly distinctively Coulteresque sentence and decided to deny the Maine newspaper credit, in the hope that she could pass it off as her work: Nil.
Ann, in a 2005 column: "As New Hampshire attorney general in 1977, [now Associate United Supreme Court Justice] Souter opposed the repeal of an 1848 state law that made abortion a crime even though Roe v. Wade had made it irrelevant, predicting that if the law were repealed, New Hampshire 'would become the abortion mill of the United States.'"
1990 Los Angeles Times article: "In 1977, Souter as state attorney general spoke out against a proposed repeal of an 1848 state law that made abortion a crime — even though the measure had been largely invalidated by the Supreme Court in Roe. vs. Wade."
Is this plagiarism?
Of course not. It is, at most, two barely similar, straightforward, indistinctive and unmemorable sentences about the same subject matter, a matter of public interest.
The brazen plagiarism charge may be the first shot in a campaign by her political enemies to discredit Ann, because Godless is that good, that persuasive, that pro-life, that pro-God and traditional family values.
For Ann's sake, hopefully it is their best shot. It's a dud. It discredits the ones making the charge, not Ann.
© Michael Gaynor
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
