Two days in a row (Saturday and Sunday) the Loveland Reporter-Herald has opined on the subject of plagiarism on their editorial page. Both commentaries carry a similar theme – copying the work of others and taking the credit (even with their permission) is wrong. Ironically, Saturday’s opinion piece was copied.
On Saturday, the generic and mislabeled “Reporter-Herald Editorial” took a swipe at the internet for “creating” the copying culture in our society. See the LovelandPolitics article.
The Saturday editorial is identical to the Times-Call of Longmont newspaper Saturday editorial (owned by Lehman Communications as is the Reporter-Herald). Not similar or even customized but a verbatim copy of everything printed in the other newspaper but each pretending to be the “Editorial” of that ‘hometown’ newspaper. We don’t really see any problem in the two publications or their editors sharing editorial content or carrying opinions of the publisher instead of the editor with permission. Perhaps appropriate attribution would be in order next time — especially when that is exactly the point of each ‘hometown’ paper’s supposed original “editorial.”
The Sunday opinion piece strained to connect State House Representative BJ Nichols’ commentary on water with those of a Weld County Commissioner though the two commentaries were similar but not identical. Our complaint is why use such a strained example?
Last October, LovelandPolitics published a web posting exposing then Loveland Mayor Gene Pielin’s “guest commentary” in the Reporter-Herald as a verbatim copy of a public utility’s lobby group editorial that Pielin didn’t add or subtract any content. The Reporter-Herald never acknowledged their part even though our posting provided links to public utilities across the country that published an identical commentary by their utility managers.
Please feel free to post your ORIGINAL opinion here!
We have already received two emails commenting on the picture of Reporter-Herald Editor Ken Amundson on our front page not being a flattering picture. Sorry, we use real news photographs not studio portraits. Catching him with a smile in public would be a tough assignment anyway as the picture only reveals how he viewed our young photographer at a recent council meeting.
Thanks for caring enough about the community newspaper enough to comment on this issue. At various times we have pointed out that the editorial labeled “Our View” is in fact the opinion of the editorial board for the newspaper, which consists of members from both Longmont and Loveland. That group meets to reach a consensus on editorial opinions that will be shared among both newspapers, usually on topics of state and national interest, and on local matters that are addressed individually by each. It has been this way for much longer than I have served as a member of the editorial board.
Had the authors of the water column stated it was the consensus of that group of elected officials, not their personal writings, I believe it would have been received differently. I don’t have direct knowledge of the mayor’s column, so I cannot speak to it.
If anyone ever has a question about the editorial process, feel free to call. You might not agree with us about an issue, but we can discuss our differences in a respectful manner. While my company is a private business, I believe it strives to fill a role in the community as a public conduit of information to the best of its abilities.
Thanks,
Jeff Stahla,
city editor
Loveland Daily Reporter-Herald
“. . .we can discuss our differences in a respectful manner.”
Does that policy include hanging up on people, lying about who you are when asked for your identity, and blocking people’s telephone numbers when they call The RH Line and express opinions which do not support your hatemongering, fearmongering, lies, fraud, fabrications, racism, bigotry, prejudice, and anti-Semitism?
The Reporter-Herald is getting physically smaller each week. It is because, in part, more and more people no longer accept the practices and policies of The Reporter-Herald – which includes not only condoning but practicing plagiarism, and have made their stand known by canceling their subscriptions and advertising with The Reporter-Herald.
Actually, I read the pieces by Nikkel, Rademacher, and Conway and they were nearly identical. See, for example: http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_15527459
Did they plagiarize? According to Websters, the definition of ” plagiarize” is: 1. to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one’s own : 2. To use (another’s production) without crediting the sourceintransitive verb : to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source. I’ll leave it to others to decide whether at least 2 of the 3 politicos were plagiarizing.
Did the Reporter Herald plagiarize in their editorial? I suppose the argument is less clear here. At the least, they should acknowledge that this opinion is that of both newspapers, who have common ownership. In any case, they do occasionally print the same editorial in both papers.
Jeff, thanks for the reply and clarification.
We do care about the community paper and therefore subscribe. The Saturday edition editorial is titled “Reporter Herald Editorial” while failing to mention that the Longmont Times-Call staff contributed.
The internet is an excellent tool for researching which newspapers copy their stories from canned press releases. While this practice also falls under your definition of plagiarism, it was curiously absent from the scathing editorial on Saturday.
Below are some quick examples so you know we are not just picking on our hometown newspaper:
1. On May 12, 2010 the Greeley Tribune copied a Centerra press release (quotes and all) regarding the company Abound Solar leasing additional space. They attributed the article to “staff reports” instead of the true authors.
See Greeley Tribune article
See Centerra press release
2. In 2008 the Rocky Mountain News copied large parts of a Centerra press release regarding vandalism of a statue at Chapungu Park (interview quotes and descriptions) while crediting reporter Tillie Fong.
See news article
See Centerra press release
3. Last month The Coloradoan’s Loveland Connection published a notice about the Loveland Chamber of Commerce’s leadership class that was simply copied from a press release .
See press announcement
See Loveland Connection
In full disclosure, your newspaper didn’t copy the language of the press releases we researched for this response – if you had we would have mentioned it.
The internet didn’t invent the practice of copying the work of others it just made it easier. It also makes catching people who do it a lot easier as well.
It seems to me that newspapers that don’t give the source for their stories are also lying to the public.
Hey, BJ’s article (or whoever the heck wrote the darn thing) is very important to me because we need future water capacity. I keep asking the Reporter-Herald if Rich Ball is for Glade Res. or against it.
Does anyone know?
If your research shows the RH doesn’t copy press releases why don’t you remove the vile comments of that nut job OK “disturbed individual” who posted second on this string? Spare me your typical long winded and overly academic bull. The RH is the only independent media we have in this town. The Loveland Connection is just the club footed off-spring of the liberal Ft. Collins Coloradoan rag sheet so I am not surprised they copy press releases like the Rocky Mountain News and Greeley Tribune.
John
Mr. Stahla,
I am looking right at Saturday’s paper and no where does it say “our view” at the top. It is in the box over just one sentence. The part over the the words, “Web Creates Copying Culture” says Reporter-Herald Editorial. I have also been trying to see it online but your link to editorials is down all day. Any reason for this?
Comments for Jeff -
i have a question. Why would you need “personal knowledge” of the Gene Peilin fake column if these guys already provided links to identical articles in California and other places? I checked it out and thats real. No personal knowledge required from what I saw that “column” Gene claimed he wrote is as phony as a $3 bill. It is identical to the newsletters all over the country signed by other people.
It wasn’t clear to me that our papers editorials might be coming from Longmont’s editor but who really cares about that. Where they lose total credibility is not admitting any knowledge of the pielin thing.
Common guys admit you made a mistake and move on. Continuing to deny that is a little creepy to me because it shows a way too much self-righteousness and that is dangerous.
I know it is a bit off the topic, but like Nancy I am curious about Ball’s stance on the Glade res. Maybe Loveland Politics, or it’s readers, can point out anything they know about the issue.
Again, I thank you all for your concerns — it’s through our conversations with readers that we get better and are able to make informed decisions about how to use our resources.
I am not planning on turning this thread into an ombudsman’s column, but since several of you have questions, I’ll at least respond. Like I said in the original post, you might not like my answer, but I give it to you in good faith. You must realize that I am not a spokesman for my business, and I am closer to the bottom rung than the top. Many of you who work for a company you do not own will see where I’m coming from, I believe.
To NAWtRH: I can count on one hand how many people I’ve hung up on in my 11 years at the RH. All were preceded by curses and uncivil words by the caller. Regarding RH Line, we print a sample of the many calls we get every day. If our private business chooses not to publish a call, it’s not a First Amendment issue; it’s space and in some cases, objectionable content. I’m betting the administrator of this blog also does not print every comment submitted, but I could be wrong.
As for the size of the paper, yes, there are fewer pages. However, more people are reading our content every day than ever before. It’s true across the industry — “liberal,” “conservative” and many other papers across the political spectrum are feeling it.
To Harry: I’ve been thinking about how King Soopers occasionally will have a letter at the front of the store from “management” to customers. If the letter is the same at the 29th Street and Eagle Drive locations, is that plagiarism?
To Admin: I can’t control how our colleagues (or you, for that matter) choose to source the information in their publications. Each has its own standards. I can’t say you’ll never see phrasing in our paper that is from a press release, either. But we try — mainly because the quality of public relations writing is so low these days, too. (snark)
To Nancy: Consider your comments in the context of anonymous sources, too. That’s why we don’t use them for local stories. (The anonymity offered RH Line callers is meant for quick opinions, like talk radio. You won’t see us cite an RH Line caller as a source in a news story, if I can help it.)
To Alex: In the course of redesigns of the page, Our View has become Reporter Herald Editorial. I think we at the paper don’t recognize that not everyone has the same institutional memory we do. Regarding the website, it appears the database failed for Monday’s editorial about voting. As of today, the rest are back online. No conspiracy that I’m aware of.
To August: I’m aware of the issue surrounding Gene’s column. I just don’t have personal knowledge of how the column came to us or any ramifications from after we also discovered its provenance. Politicians have people who write things for them, by people who are paid to put those words in their mouths. If the ability to write an opinion piece were a top skill required to be elected, I’d be getting ready to run for the legislature. Unfortunately, we have to be suspect now of just about any piece of writing that we did not observe. How do you know I wrote this, for instance? One of our challenges for this election season will be making sure each letter writer was the sole author of his or her piece — not some form letter available throughout the Internet. If one slips by, however, it is unlikely we’ll run a lengthy retraction. We’ll likely deal directly with the letter-writer by refusing access to our letters page for some period of time.
If you’ve read this far, thanks. I posted because I felt my business, and thus my credibility, was personally attacked. But I also believe civil discourse can bring the community together. That’s what we try to do at our community newspaper.
Call me if you think we’ve failed in that effort. I doubt I’ll post again on this issue.
Jeff Stahla
city editor
Loveland Daily Reporter-Herald
Thanks for the clarifications.
You are correct, we also delete inappropriate comments even from the person above accusing you of the same. Striking the balance between having a completely open forum while keeping the libelous personal attacks out is never easy as some people walk too closely to the line sometimes without crossing it.
The irony of Saturday’s editorial scolding those who would copy even with permission the work of others — itself not a unique editorial — was an irresistible target we felt compelled to comment on.
Many yrs ago, a friend began referring to RH as the “Repeater Herald”. I thought it was because so much of the reporting was a day late….
Which one is worse: The act of stealing of someone else’s work or the justifying of the act?
As to the number of people looking at the Reporter-Herald web site, according to a web site traffic index: The traffic to that site is down eleven percent per month for the past six months.
Care to restate the previous claim or do you want to just make up a comment in the RH Line blaming George W. Bush, Conservatives, Christians, Catholics, Jews – anyone but yourself?
It’s official: The Reporter-Herald not only hates the United States of America, it hates Americans. All Americans.
Given the editor and the managing editor are Americans – I think – this means they hate themselves.
Insecurity is one thing. Self-loathing is another. This goes to show just how pathetic The Reporter-Herald really is.
When it comes to the alleged story about the dog ban at some reservoirs in the Loveland area by the Colorado Division of Wildlife, which manages the reservoirs, it is worth wondering about and looking into: What’s the real story to this supposed news story?
The so-called nature blogger for The Reporter-Herald, who obviously has an agenda, is not what she seems. And neither is the supposed story she and her cohorts at The Reporter-Herald are trying to sell. One supporter of this agenda piece admits to living near one of the reservoirs for less than two years. And where did both of them come from? Find the truth, the facts, and find the real story.
Because The Reporter-Herald won’t.
I understand a supporter of the nature blogger of The Reporter-Herald threatened the DOW.
I see The Reporter-Herald has introduced another bully pulpit to its arsenal: The Political Notebook, perpetuated by none other than Jeff Stahla.
Because The Reporter-Herald has gone out of its way to be a mouthpiece for the Democratic Party by way of fake comments in the RH-Line, perhaps this effort should counter them with their own political notebook.
Hello. I found this blog by way of a comment I found in an old issue of The Reporter-Herald, the RH Line. There are a lot of things to be said and asked, and not enough time to do so. I am curious – why was it controversial for Ken Amundsen to become the editor of the newspaper?