January 20, 2008
The Sun Plagiarizes Torontoist
Hey! Torontoist just got ripped off by The Sun.
From our article on Posterchild's subway pamphlets, published online here on Friday, January 18:
Posterchild––street artist extraordinaire and our new curator for Vandalist––has taken it on himself to fill the empty hooks of the TTC's subways, streetcars, and buses with new and improved information flyers. For the past week, he's posted details of one flyer a day to his blog: Monday was a subway and streetcar colouring book; Tuesday was tips on how to flirt on the subway (pictured above); Wednesday was a guided graffiti tour along the 510 Spadina streetcar route; Thursday was a cryptogram, maze, connect-the-dots game, and riddles; and today's, Friday, was a claim that the whole system is now free.
From Jenny Yuen's Toronto Sun article on Posterchild's subway pamphlets, published online and on the third page of the print edition on Sunday, January 20:
For each week day, Posterchild made up flyers for commuters and hung them on hooks on subway cars and the 510 Spadina streetcar.Each day had a different theme:
Monday was a subway and streetcar colouring book; Tuesday was tips on how to flirt on the subway; Wednesday was a guided graffiti tour along the 510 Spadina streetcar route; Thursday was a cryptogram, maze, connect-the-dots game, and riddles; and Friday's was a claim that the whole system is now free.
(Italics added in both articles.)
Drawing inspiration from Torontoist is one thing––we're used to it from the mainstream media, even though we rarely get credit when we should––but this is different. It is completely irrefutable that that paragraph was lifted directly from us.
So, Sun, and Jenny––we know that you read Torontoist and that you'll see this––drop me a line at david@torontoist.com. Let's talk.
| ADDENDUM: JANUARY 21, 2008
This article implicated Jenny Yuen as necessarily part of the act of plagiarism that took place in the article published under her name in The Sun before such an accusation could be conclusively proven. Such a presumption of her guilt was premature, unfair, and irresponsible, especially for such a serious accusation. Torontoist sincerely apologizes for deeming her guilty until proven innocent; a more detailed explanation and apology are in the comments. We will follow up on this story as more details about the person or persons responsible become available, and we will issue a full apology to Jenny Yuen if it is proven that she was not one of those people. |
| ADDENDUM: JANUARY 22, 2008
The Sun has issued an apology, and Torontoist has responded to it. We now consider the matter closed. |
|
When you get work lifted by a reputable newspaper, you'll know Torontoist has finally "made it".
Reputable?
Ah, I get it.
Jenny writes for BlogTO...just thought I should point that out :)
Not good. Not good at all.
Wow. That's bad.
In addition to her occasional contributions to blogTO, Jenny Yuen has also written for 24 Hours, NOW, Chart, Canadian Restaurant News, Beach Metro News, Post City Magazines, and more. She's also done TV segments for CityTV and others.
The Sun is not the only one doing this sort of thing. CanWest Global does the same thing.
CanWest doesn't believe in plagiarism. No siree, Bob. Not Elizabeth Nickson and others.
CanWest calls it cross-platform media.
Cross-platform is wonderful if you stick to only one medium like the daily paper. But if you also watch the coroporation's newscast, you get the same thing delivered in their trademark machine-gun delivery.
Imitation is supposedly the sincerest form of flattery. With the likes of the Sun and the National Pest, I'd disagree with that assumption.
Really, how hard would it have been to credit David? Totally unethical! What did they teach her at journalism school?
Then again, I expect this sort of behaviour from The Sun. Pathetic excuse for a newspaper.
David, I am filled with ire over this.
Um, instead of treating them like a commenter who's done you wrong, asking them to email you to talk, why don't you contact them?
Oh, and (http://torontoist.com/2008/01/where_does_eye.php#comment-1272888):
Torontoist has covered plenty of stuff before anyone else in the city, and we are often very explicitly cribbed from from other places (whether they're big or small), but we're not about call anyone out on it––first, because that's lame; and second, because someone could just as easily assemble a few anecdotes that would seem to prove we were cribbing from someone else.
Heh.
Look what I found...
http://www.myspace.com/smuggin
Why wait for her to contact you? Her contact info is posted publicly here:
http://www.tripstar.org/jenny/about.html
It's hard to be too hard on the Sun. They aren't accustomed to using words. Aren't they all pictures and colouring book?
By the way, I'm not condoning what Jenny/The Sun has done, by any means. Hopefully she gets seriously reprimanded for it. However, why is it okay for TOist to condone/celebrate Posterchild's "cribbing" of the TTC logo (which clearly wouldn't have been authorized), yet you feel the need to make a huge post and point out that The Sun cribbed you?
How is this any different?
I'm going to guess that the Posterchild use of the logo is satire, while The Sun article is plain plagiarism.
Yeah, satire completely negates copyright/trademark, right? ;)
Also Post remixed the logo so instead of saying "TTC" It says "PC" (ie: Poster Child), which I think falls more into parody than plagiarism.
using a logo in jest and copying and pasting text from an article and then attaching your name to it are very, very different things. Plus Posterchild does not claim he invented and designed the TTC logo, unlike Jenny who penned her name that that piece. She was so lazy/sloppy/incompetent that she copied not only the idea but the text itself.
I get it...it's more socially acceptable to copy something in jest. When you get right down to it, though, it's the same thing.
For the record, I like the Posterchild pamphlets, they're funny and well done. However, it's still using someone else's logo, even if it is modified ever so slightly.
If Jenny's article was a parody of David Topping, then sure, that'd be fine.
This is no different from someone finding an essay online and submitting it to class as their own. Shame on you, Jenny Yuen.
Why not ask the editor of the Sun if they condone plagiarism? From their site: "If you wish to send a letter to the editor, or inquire about the newspaper's editorial policy, e-mail torsun.editor@sunmedia.ca"
I've failed students for plagiarizing on grade 12 English assignments, I'd hope there would be some kind of repercussion for doing it in such a big way.
"This is no different from someone finding an essay online and submitting it to class as their own."
Actually, it is different. Presumably she was paid to produce the Sun article, which adds another serious wrinkle to the situation.
Wait, doesn't it? Maybe the law is different in Canada, but in US copyright law there is a clause that allows an exemption for works of parody.
That is how Weird Al gets away with sampling other artists, for example, even though some of them do not consent. Coolio did not permit Weird Al to use Gangster's Paradise, but could not take legal action against him.
This is plain plagiarism.
Did PosterBoy by any chance write the plagiarised lines for an interview--did that content come from him, or was it actually something David wrote from a primary source?
What I'm trying to say is, if he was interviewed for both pieces, maybe HE provided the same lines to both writers.
But.. if not, then yes, totally lazy writing. I'm eagerly awaiting the Sun's reply, either way!
Seems to me both stories are completely different, and that the one paragraph in question is a point by point description of what happened on each specific day.
Monday's flyer was a subway and streetcar colouring book, that's what it was called.
Tuesday's flyer was flirting on the subway
Wednesday's was a numbered, point by point guided tour along the 510 spadina streetcar route
etc. etc.
Since the stories are different, I wouldn't call this plagiarism at all, these aren't ideas or opinions or conclusions, these are basic point form facts describing specific things.
What's disturbing to me is the turn this has taken. Absolutely discussion should happen when these things crop up, but when people start posting people's personal myspace pages, as opposed to say someone's Toronto Sun email (since this concerns the Sun), then the whole debate takes on a much more ominous tone, something in the witch hunt area. I say shame on whoever posted that, and extra shame on YOU Torontoist for allowing it to sit there.
Are you implying that the 33 consecutive, unaltered words were written by both writers by coincidence?
I tend to agree with paigesix and andrewryanfox. The Torontoist article was more of a blurb while The Sun article actually had (what I assume was) an interview. True the lines in question are verbatim, but how many ways can they be said?
If it was plagiarism we're sure to find out in due time, and seeing how Posterchild is a contributor to this site I don't see why it isn't sooner rather than later.
I'm not implying, I'm ouright contending, even insisting. I've known Jenny for a very long time, went to journalism school with her, dated her, and absolutely, positively know her to be above reproach. Take that for what you will, but I guarantee this is just that, coincidence.
And I still think it's shitty that someone's personal, non-Toronto-Sun-or-journalism related info has been posted on here and allowed to remain, and furthermore that this whole thing was issued in the form of an immature schoolyard challenge as opposed to her at least being contacted and given a chance to defend herself before this went public online. Careers are destroyed over stuff like this, and even if you're convinced she's guilty, the possibility she isn't should give any high-minded person pause enough to at least give someone the benefit of the doubt and ask them first before publicly accusing them.
Yes, there is enough cause here to ask these questions, but David you should have asked her first instead of posting that on here. It's bad journalism on your part. You bitch about plagiarism? Well what self-respecting publication would print an accusation against someone without at least asking for their side of the story first? Not even your hated Toronto Sun, I would imagine...
so would you rather had her state friday first and then thur wed tue mon???
a respectful editor would take care of this behind the scenes. contact the accused and sort it out privately.
david has an obsession with pointing out all that is wrong with all the other media (rosie at the star).
its no surprise he has posted this goofy "we know that you read Torontoist" call publicly.
how old are you? how long have you been in media?
When I said both writers, I meant to say both outlets. It is possible it was inserted by an editor, and not Jenny herself. I, too, have a great deal of respect for her and believe it could have been a higher-up at the paper, perhaps.
However, the probability of the matching descriptions being penned independently is probably about a million to one, so the Sun, at least, is on the hook.
I'm not sure how else she could have written that information in a significantly different way.
So don't you think then that this maybe should have been brought up with them before possibly ruining someone's livelihood with a public accusation?
(that was in response to Kevin, I forgot to blockquote)
It seems a lot of people have no idea how a newsroom actually works. The morning meetings are usually as follows: editor calls reporters to meeting, where the morning's competing papers are spread out. Editor has marker in hand, circles stories in said competing newspapers, and growls, "Why the f@!k didn't we get this story?" Reporters then look down at their shoes and mumble.
The Toronto Star, The Toronto Sun, The Globe & Mail and, more recently, The National Post, have been "borrowing" one another's stories for years! The Internet is merely an extension of a time-honoured tradition. This is not a case of plagiarism per se.
In the age of the blogosphere, blogging about it seems to be the most appropriate thing to do.
Bullshit. We're not naive people here. You get the stink of plagiarism attached to your name when you're a writer and you can be sunk in a hurry. There is absolutely no defense for this, and defending it as being the world we live in just denigrates the supposed quality of this site. You claim to have respect for Jenny but you don't respect her enough to think she warranted being asked for an explanation. How can you respect someone and not give them that benefit?
Anyway I don't want to debate this anymore. I've said my piece, I don't believe she plagiarized, and I do believe that it sucks, very very hard, to forget that you're talking about a living breathing person here. Torontoist doesn't suffer a whit by any of this, but she sure could. I think this has been handled in a very shameful manner.
No, not being an asshole about it is the most appropriate thing to do. This is someone's career. People make mistakes, and if Jenny did plagiarize, she'll have to deal with her boss about it and deal with the consequences. This should've been dealt with professionally, instead of airing dirty laundry on a blog, especially after David's pious statement about not calling people out on copying.
I'm not sure how else she could have written that information in a significantly different way.
There are plenty of ways she could have written it differently. Even if she wanted to use a list format, it would have been easy enough to choose alternate wordings.
That said, I'm conflicted about the way it was handled. On one hand, yes, it could have been dealt with behind the scenes because it might be pretty damaging to her. On the other hand, the major media outlets seem to think it's ok to rip off bloggers (outright stealing, rather than just "borrowing" - major papers refusing to pay for photos because they were already published on the internet and therefore supposedly fair game or reprinting blog articles verbatim without permission or payment). They need to realize that it's not ok. If shaming them publicly is what gets the point across, then I think it's justifiable.
I'm still waiting for someone at Torontoist to respond to Carrie's very valid point of Topping's sudden change of heart on "calling people out." Lame indeed.
Maybe she should have to wear a scarlet "P" to every journalism job she goes after if she's fired over this because of the accusation that's been made here, whether she's guilty or not. That'll really teach the "major media outlets" a lesson...
A lot of good points made here. The more I think about it, the more I think this post should be removed.
I'm with Andrewryanfox on this one. The article wasn't plagiarized. The only thing they have in common is the damn laundry list. This is over the top.
Carly - Significantly different though? Enough to avoid comparison? The article was going to get Torontoist's attention, and comparisons would be made.
Wanting to teach Old Media a lesson is one thing, but this is irresponsible. Instead of calling Jenny and the Sun out, David should have contacted them and got the whole story before inciting a witch hunt.
hey, i just felt the need to comment.
i work for the sun. when i comment here, i'm not speaking on behalf of the paper. i'm speaking as somebody who works in the media, and who might be able to offer some perspective to temper the reckless, irresponsible posts on this page.
the fact is, sometimes mistakes are made in the editing process in which words, sentences, even paragraghs, are hastily removed when last-minute decisions surrounding space are made. this isn't specific to the sun. this happens at every newspaper, whether it be the globe, post, star, sun, etc.
most reporters with at least a few years of experience have been in situations where attribution has been lost in the often-hectic editing process. but because the reporter's name appears at the top of the story, everybody will conclude they're at fault. when they might not be.
my point is, make sure this possibility has been ruled out before singling out a reporter by name on a very public forum such as this.
we're dealing with reputations here. the law surrounding the internet is sort of cloudy these days, but there's no way any newspaper would be able to print an accusation like this without opening themselves up to a lawsuit.
if i, or any reporter, were to ever write a story that essentially convicts somebody based on unproven allegations, regardless of how things may appear, i would be sued. and rightfully so.
so, before torontoist starts going out all guns ablazing, perhaps some sort of dialogue should've been initiated in a more private forum with the reporter and editors involved. the one thing i've found about reporting is that i'm constantly surprised by the way things never really are the way they might initially appear.
apart from that, the fact that somebody here has posted the reporter's personal myspace page is beyond the pale. it's ridiculous this has been allowed to languish on the page still. what's the point of this?
also, as a disclaimer, a few weeks ago, i wrote about the 'rom fake bomb'. i used a significant amount of info from torontoist's interview with the accused. i spoke to david on the phone and everything was pleasant and respectful. i gave torontoist proper attribution and badgered the editors to make sure they included the torontoist photo credit under a picture of the accused. (i forget his name.) i like to think that everything worked out to everyone's benefit.
so, we've all worked together in the past, and hopefully we'll be able to work with each other in the future. i'm not talking specifically about the sun and torontoist, but about all print and internet reporters.
How about this, everyone who's had it with Mr. Topping's desperate tactics stops commenting here, or even reading?
Seems like good medicine for this attention whore.
Do I now have to worry that the email address I used to register and IP address will be traced?
I'm not going to address every comment one by one, but I will restate this: there is absolutely no way that that paragraph is not plagiarized. Everything in it––save for the (see above) and the reference about that day being Friday––is identical. To say that it was impossible to rewrite my paragraph is simply false.
To address Carrie's point, when I said the comment that she quoted I was referring to being cribbed for ideas, not word-for-word theft (a far more serious crime). In the context of the article I replied to––Eye accusing Toronto Life of stealing very broad, general ideas for articles––it's obvious what I'm talking about.
All of you outraged by this article are all welcome to stop reading. If you look at that article, and those two paragraphs, and don't think that that's plagiarism, you do not know what plagiarism is.
Rest assured that I will be in touch with The Sun and Jenny Yuen over the next few days. Whoever's fault it is––and it is surely someone's fault––is responsible. If it turns out that Jenny Yuen had nothing to do with that article and that someone just shoved it in there, I will write something absolving her and append a note about that absolution to this article.
[standing ovation]How very nice of you to assume her guilt and promise to later "absolve her" after she's proven her innocence, David. Well done (in a poorly cooked steak kind of weay)![/standing ovation]
The funny thing is, David, is the only reason you have this unbearable ego is because of lazy editors giving print space to your TTCtardation. Give it all a rest.
You know, I had a bet with someone that when the grand poobah's response came down, it would lack any sort of apology for the grossly inappropriate way in which this whole issue was handled, and would instead be a half-assed, hackneyed attempt to justify a scathing, possibly career-ending personal attack on someone's credibility without even attempting to contact the other side before doing so. The person I bet with figured the article would be pulled immediately in light of some reasoned reconsideration. I just won $10. You're a scumbag Topping. And in your rush to show the world how all the profane corporate media outlets are just waiting to rip off your genius ideas, you maybe ruined someone's life. And you never even bothered to confront the person without the protective armour of your precious blog. You're a coward, and you suck.
David, you stated "very explicitly cribbing," which is the same as very explicitly stealing. Nowhere does it simply specify ideas.
Regardless, your post was in extreme poor taste and unprofessional, and your reply was even worse. Good job.
Pretty disappointing, David. This is a low for Torontoist and the *ist network as a whole. You're dragging down the brand by not retracting this silly, self-serving mistake of a post and apologizing to at the very least, your readership, if not Jenny and the Sun.
Your lack of professionalism in this situation outweighs the copying of a *list* by a no