Out Cole
Doin' It All for the Cookie
Pages to Fold
Introducing Ask Torontoist
A Trash Bin Quandary
Last Friday, Torontoist published an article about Posterchild's latest project––fake subway fliers. On Sunday, the Sun published an article about the same topic, with a paragraph that was identical to a portion of Torontoist's article.
The Sun today (Monday) issued this correction and apology: "A story in the Sunday Sun about a local guerilla artist known as Posterchild contained a paragraph which was not attributed to torontoist.com. The Sun apologizes for the error." That apology has been published online, and will be printed in tomorrow's (Tuesday) paper.
In an addendum to Sunday's post, we promised that we would issue a full apology to Jenny Yuen, the writer of the Sun's article, if she was not responsible for copying the paragraph from Torontoist that appeared in her article. (At the time, we were concerned––as many of our readers were––that there was a possibility that the paragraph in the article may have been added by an editor or copy editor.) After dialogue today with the Sun, we've determined that an apology is not necessary.
Today, we offered Jenny Yuen an opportunity to issue a statement, which we would publish, unedited, with this post. On Sunday, she claimed in an e-mail to us that the paragraph in her article was not copied from Torontoist, but she declined to comment today and instead directed all questions to the Sun.
We understand that this is a very serious matter––plagiarism and accusations of it always are. We are satisfied with the Sun's statement, and Torontoist now considers the matter closed.
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
email this
add to facebook
add to del.icio.us
I registered because this disturbed me enough to do so. It's great the Sun apologized, but the victory for you is so awfully soiled by the muck and hubris that you have spun. It's great you consider it closed -- as a reader (and I know you have invited me to "stop reading anytime") your behavior, your drooling zeal in this matter of 30 words, is such an absolute turn off that it isn't as closed for me.
What is this blog about? Just being adolescents? Somebody in the other post, early on, posted your words that you were above calling anybody out, and then the display we've all seen. It's like there's no foundation, you flit from one opinion to another, just as long as it's snarky.
Plagiarism is bad, being a jerk and unprofessional is also bad. But yes, thank you for giving me that option of never coming back.
How hilarious that you evoke the royal "Torontoist", why not phrase it as "I"?
Are the other people who post here in agreement with your attention-seeking?
Are you going to provide Jenny with any compensation or comfort as part of your attempt to become famous?
Also: People at all levels at the Sun are worried about their jobs, the whole enterprise is on shaky ground. So, it wouldn't be surprising if even the highest editor would rather play your games than have to worry about being dragged into this. You realize they're laughing at your assoholic sermon here, I hope.
(link to the comments thread)
This is, no pun intended, good news!
wow... David... why is everyone ratting on you for this? I mean come on people.
As the Ed-in-chief, David has to look out and protect Torontoist's name and reputation and I admire that he has gone through all this to get the much deserved apology from the sun. Like he said in the other article; Plagiarism is serious, people get kicked out of universities for that stuff
And tired69.. come on.. Please... I guess you must not be a frequent reader.. (maybe you're one of Jenny "the thief" Yuen's friend, if she even has any) It doesn't take more than an average IQ and having read more than a couple of articles on torontoist to figure out the comon trend: NONE of the writers use the "I"; they always refer to themselves collectively as "we" or "us" or "torontoist" .
Anyway....
How can anyone who is not partisan dispute the Torontoists concerns about being plagiarized. They have every right to be concerned. I wonder if you now go back over her work if you would find other examples of it? This should raise the alarm on the ethical standards of this writer, it is a serious matter and although the Torontoist has let it go, I don't think any of her employers should.
And so, with no doubt a fair amount of backchannel conversation, we have a resolution that supposedly closes the matter.
1) the apology from the sun does so only for the error of non-attribution and does not admit plagiarism - basically they're saying they made a typo.
2) today's post dances around who was actually responsible. If Jenny had nothing to do with it, then say so. If she did, then say so. if it was an editor's fault, then say so. The post says nothing.
So what's the real story here?
I think the Sun's management doesn't need a legal hassle in the press but they also fully realize that they could probably squash this like a bug in the courts if they had to. So they're giving David his day 'in the Sun' and leaving it at that. It'll be interesting to see what happens with Jenny at the Sun. Will she continue to post articles for them? Or has her career been ruined by something she hasn't actually admitted to or been found publically guilty of?
How exactly would the Sun "squash this like a bug in the courts if they had to"? I'm curious.
#6: You're right, it's up to the rest of "we" or "us" or "torontoist" to decide whether or not they want to be held to this same standard, where life-ruining humiliation for copying a few bland facts is right around the corner.
is an apology from gothamist coming? for forcing torontoist readers to endure a painfully immature and egotistical editor for so long?
regime change, please.
A lot of drama from the Jenny defenders...I'm glad that the Sun did the right thing and apologized for what happened. Bloggers are fighting an important fight when they insist on being given credit for what they've written, and not rolling over and letting other large media outlets take it just 'cuz we're online and obviously working without a big-ass legal department. Bottom line is, if you care about your own career, you don't steal from someone else to build it. It's not anybody's responsibility to protect the person who's stolen from them once they've gone ahead and shown the disrespect to do such a thing in the first place.
OMG. people, get your head out of your asses. try to be somewhat adults over this whole dumb thing.
are they the same words? YES.
does that make it plagiarism? YES.
read it over again though. in all seriousness, is this worth making a federal case over? NO.
it's a reiteration of a few bland facts without any stylistic merit (apologies, but seriously, you don't need a creative writing degree to have written that sentence). it ain't the gettysburg address, folks.
yes, the Sun was in the wrong here, but the level of snark on this site is 5th-grade.
think about this also: out of the whole article, why is that short snip the only thing word-for-word? do you really think that she thought "whew, i've got the whole article written except those few words. well, guess i'll just crib it from Torontoist.com!"
and just because i'm not completely above snark: it is The Sun after all ... (they kinda need the attention).
Yeah, Torontoist should be concerned about not having other people stealing their work, but does this much grandstanding make up for it? Would any paper (even the Sun) publish an article saying that someone else stole from them without crediting it?
Sometimes you have to learn to deal with this stuff behind closed doors. Cutting the third and fourth paragraphs would've ended this matter with more class.
What is abundantly clear from this thread is that most people simply do not understand what plagiarism is in the first place.
It might be legit to argue that The Royal We should have gone to The Sun first before "ruining" someone's reputation but the Sun apology shows that this was a cut and paste from Torontoist.
I'd like to lay out a challenge for those who believe it's no big deal because "it's a reiteration of a few bland facts without any stylistic merit."
If you are of university age I implore you to, in your next essay, copy "a few bland facts without any stylistic merit" from a source without citing it. Then, once you have had the essay returned with your usual A+, tell your professor what you've done. Try to phrase it by saying something like, "one of the paragraphs in my article is a verbatim text from another book but I didn't cite it and I won't tell you which one it is. It's nothing huge - just a reiteration of a few bland facts. Gotcha!"
Then, please, come back here and tell us what the process of getting kicked out of university was like. I think it would be awfully fascinating to hear about in the first person.
It's a big deal because David Topping thinks he's a big deal. That's all.
Because a university and a newspaper, an editor and a professor, a journalist and a student, and an article and an essay, are the same things and context doesn't matter. Might as well challenge musicians to copy a few bland chord progressions without any stylistic merit without citing them.
So, basically, because you are not issuing your apology to Ms. Yuen are the readers of this debacle to assume that she is at fault, that this was a deliberate act of plagiarism? Why are you satisfied and consider the matter closed? Because the institution apologized, even though you have determined you do not need to issue an apology to a journalist who's reputation you have challenged? Can you legally state whether or not Ms Yuen is at fault? Did she forget? Was it malicious? Was it an errant copy editor? I've followed her articles in NOW magazine and I am remain impressed at her writing and reporting, so I'd like to know when I continue to read her work whether or not this episode is one that should cast doubt on her reporting or whether I should disregard it as error and misfortune. I should add, further resolution will change my assessment of Torontoist as a source of reliable information about Toronto. I'm sure I'm not alone.
I wholeheartedly agree with you David F - I spent four, long, tortourous years writing essays, carefully avoiding plagarism like it was the Bubonic Plague. It's a serious offence, regardless of the mangitude, for anyone who puts a pen to the page.
'Nuf said.
Now, I didn't go to no fancy J-school, but I remember people being kicked out of university for plagiarism during my undergrad. I can only imagine the stigma of plagiarism would be worse for those who are trained as journalists. Why would a writer flirt with danger by doing anything that even resembled plagiarism?
As any semi-professional blogger can understand, it's frustrating when we do so much hard work for pennies while major media outlets pay an actual living wage to writers who just rip off our stuff. What happened here was indisputably plagiarism, and that kind of thing gets you kicked out of the business. What are we still arguing about?
And that's your problem, Karen, you think you deserve something just because you inherited this site and the audience that went with it.
If a Rosie DiManno even gave you three seconds of attention, you would instantly become her biggest fan, which would show you for what you are.
Since you're not going get that, so ruining someone's life while they give publicity to this site at the same time is a-ok.
"Because a university and a newspaper, an editor and a professor, a journalist and a student, and an article and an essay, are the same things and context doesn't matter."
Exactly, Andrew! It is ALWAYS wrong.
Why don't you take a Shakespeare sonnet, put it on a card, hand it to your girlfriend but pretend you wrote it?
Why don't you take some of your favourite paragraphs from Winston Churchill's speeches and use them yourself when you run for public office?
Based on the comments here, perhaps only professional writers understand why this is a big deal but let me assure you - no matter what your feelings about the matter are - it is as a big a deal as there is in this industry. Your words are your own and all facts must be attributed. Kinda the same way bank tellers aren't allowed to pocket some cash, even if it's only a few bucks, even if their mom is sick or whatever other "context" you'd like to introduce. It's Rule 101.
Even if the "Ordinary Joes" here don't know that, I assure you everyone working in journalism (even blogs) does. Including the reporters and editors at The Sun.
I'm going to warrant a guess that Jenny had her article almost written, save for a short summary of the week's fliers.
She probably googled the info, and copy and pasted the info into her article. It was basic info, and that was the nuts and bolts of whatever she was trying to say. As a writer, I've done that before, and then rewrote it myself.
Maybe she had meant to change the words around, but a hungry cat/Obama-Hillary debate/anxious editor distracted her and she hit send before doing a final readthrough. Maybe she didn't think she would get caught for a small, basic paragraph. Maybe a plagiarism troll snuck in and tossed that paragraph in while she wasn't looking?
Whatever happened, it ended up that she plagiarised David's article. Whether she meant it or not, it was the theft of David's words.
Can we at least, all agree, on that bit?
So what if David called her out on it? Blogs are stolen from time and time again, because people assume that because we're small and poor that we don't have huge lawyers like the Star or the Globe, or that we're so busy working our day jobs that we won't notice. All we have to fight with are our words sometimes, and calling someone out with our words means that they have nowhere to hide. An e-mail could go unanswered, a phone call shuffled around until you get some nameless voicemail box. A 'real' media outlet wouldn't have to call her out because they have lawyers, they have clout, they have power to make people listen.
This is how David got them to listen, and got results.
Her life isn't ruined, it's not like she's become the new Jayson Blair or something. And hell, at least he got a movie deal out of it. There was a shitstorm when someone claimed that they invented the term Giambroneys for the new TTC token, when someone else had in fact come up with the term. Does anyone remember the guilty party? No, because in the spectrum of the internet, memory is fleeting, and Jenny will go on journalising, having learned a valuable lesson to check her work, no matter what the distraction.
This main issue I (and many, it seems) have is how it was handled (not that Torontoist is "right" or "wrong"), and here it was handled in the manner of a snarky, truculent teenager with a big pulpit but not much class. The initial post cranked it up to a personal attack immediately, inviting some intrepid and idle readers to find the writers personal pages, comments that were allowed to stay up. You had the opportunity to set the level of discourse much higher, but did not.
As an occasional reader, I'm accustomed to the dumbass snark around here, and while useless and irritating, there are a some good writers whose pieces rise above the low bar set by the Editors on this particular 'ist (those old-time ad pieces, some of the reviews). Now they have a harder time of rising about this high-profile fit.
The approach used by this editor (or "Torontoist" since it went back to that convention once the Sun apologized, strangely) evaporated whatever moral authority you had and sympathy I (and I suspect many others) had initially. What a mess, and now complete silence because "the matter is closed."
This is a big pooh-brown spot on Torontoist's reputation, not the small victory it could have been. Other city blogs have been plagiarized much deeper and more seriously, yet behaved like adults and maintained public support and sympathy. As a blog reader, I hope people don't see this and assume this is how all blogs behave, because they don't, thankfully. Old media stealing from blogs is serious, but you treated it like a schoolyard, and that only diminished support for blogs in general with your behavior. You placed a bright spotlight on Torontoist practices by acting in this way. Not just on the insufferable surfeit of snark, but now everything that is written here.
So I suppose, thank you for this insight into how you work. Happily there are choices in Toronto, and the head of this blog has invited us to stop reading and check them out. Thank you.
The whole journalist-vs-hobbyist angle on this thing is mind-boggling. Not being paid or not paid well for the effort you put in doesn't make (alleged) plagiarism worse, or the accused obviously guilty, or rule out any of the reasons for why/how it happened.
Until an explanation for why the paragraph appeared without attribution is given, and that seems unlikely at this point, calling it plagiarism and branding Yuen as a "thief" is still unprofessional and possibly libellous.
Accused but unproven plagiarist, or known libeller, I know which I'd hire over the other.
This is so weird. I am still looking for anything remotely "snarky," "self-aggrandizing" and/or "attacking" in the original post or subsequent follow-ups.
Nope. Don't see it. It's actually surprisingly, even disappointingly bland, mannered and professional for the most part. Most blogs, lad mags and college or alternative newspapers would not cut the Sun nearly as much slack as the Torontoist did here. I have actually earned a lot of respect for David Topping throughout the course of this debacle, while losing (even more) respect for many of its readers, who seem to get offended easier than Oprah fans after a fat joke.
I honestly don't understand where this need to shield the reporter like an abandoned orphan here. She is an experienced professional and she can speak for herself. And ragging on Mr. Topping with overblown, utterly misguided attacks isn't going to help her cause either way.
hey DavidF, i finished with uni awhile ago and never plagiarised anything. i understand waht it means too. i can send you some copies of my scientific publications if you wish, including my pub in Science, and you can run the references.
"Might as well challenge musicians to copy a few bland chord progressions without any stylistic merit without citing them." uhh, yeh, that's pretty much most of the early Blues...
all of that said, yes, i do agree it is a serious issue, but my chief problem is the way it was handled. the issue should have been kept professional until all the facts were in. the only fact that was known were the words in print.
i think LadyFromToronto's comments are hitting the nail on the head here. and you, tyrannosaurus_rek.
i've gone back and re-read some of David Topping's comments on the issue at hand. respect to David for handling the fallout very professionally.
most of my bad attitude was directed at other commentators on here...
I wasn't aware of this situation until right now when I read this summary of the resolution. I'm glad Torontoist acted to assert its right not to be plagiarised. Bloggers may not be paid for what we do but that doesn't mean our work is without value. For someone else to get paid for the work of another, particularly without attribution, is immoral and unprofessional.
This reminds me of a similar occurrence involving a radio DJ ripping off the blog of Maddox. Maddox found out, contacted the radio station, and resolved the matter in a gentlemanly fashion. Go bloggers.
http://maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=radio_hack
The whole journalist-vs-hobbyist angle on this thing is mind-boggling. Not being paid or not paid well for the effort you put in doesn't make (alleged) plagiarism worse, or the accused obviously guilty, or rule out any of the reasons for why/how it happened.
Is there a journalist vs hobbyist angle on this thing? There shouldn't be. This is a dispute between two commercial enterprises.
David F is totally and absolutely right. There's no "good" plagiarism and "bad" plagiarism. Plagiarism is plagiarism.
I think it's pretty clear from Topping's article that The Sun has stated that it was not a copy editor or editor who inserted the 30 words in question. Yuen continues to deny it, which doesn't exactly prove her innocence. If her employers aren't willing to stick up for her, then who else did this? As someone else said, the plagiarism troll?
Just because she's scared for her own reputation and sticking her head in the sand saying NO I DIDNT DO IT NO I DIDNT DO IT NO I DIDNT DO IT doesn't mean she didn't do it. The refusal of any public statement again suggests that she's just in denial mode. What a shame.
from what i've heard, Dubya cribbed that phrase from someone else ....
To echo Skippy, I don't see how the original post "cranked it up to a personal attack immediately." The post notes the indisputable fact that the text has been copied (now admitted by the Sun), identifies the author and publication, and asks for a response. That's it. The over-the-top vitriol is in the comments, mostly from people looking for Topping's head because he had the nerve to speak up.
The web and the videophone have brought us transparency - high school kids know it, politicians know it, big corporations know it. Journalists, above all, should know it since it's changed the face of the profession. Even if David had waited on resolution before going public, or had never gone public at all, do you think the case wouldn't have attracted attention? That a public apology in the Sun wouldn't have piqued the interest of local bloggers? Welcome to the 21st century people - if you do something stupid, you'd better get ready to be called out on it.
"respect to David for handling the fallout very professionally."
Putting on a fake headmaster tone isn't professional.
Diisparishun - There is a fair amount of journalist-vs-hobbyist spin in the comments.
Antiboy - You're reading into the Sun's article what you want to read. All it says is that the paragraph wasn't attributed to this blog; it says nothing about how it got there in that state or who put it there. And denying you did something isn't evidence that you did it.
AnarchX - Handling it professionally would mean contacting the accused in private, not publicly declaring someone a plagiarist and leaving it up to them to make contact and ask to be "absolved".
I'm disappointed by how it was handled, and another debacle like it will be enough for me to follow Mr Topping's advice and stop reading Torontoist.
antiboy: Just for the sake of accuracy, Yuen doesn't "continue" to deny it; she denied that the passage was copied in an email on Sunday, but when the Sun correction was issued yesterday, she had no further comment. The issue is closed for Torontoist because it is no longer our issue.
"do you think the case wouldn't have attracted attention? That a public apology in the Sun wouldn't have piqued the interest of local bloggers?"
No one would have noticed/cared. Dozens of corrections run in every publication every day--and the one from the Sun in this case reads like any other. (and really, how many local bloggers are reading the Sun's correction pages ever day, other than this guy)
Who DID notice the "plagiarism" in the first place, anyway?
I have a feeling that extra, EXTRA scrutiny was taken while reading the article about something David/Torontoist feels they uncovered. Had an article taken a paragraph from a TOist post about something generic, it probably would have gone unnoticed.
Isn't the guy a personal pal of Topping's to begin with? Another annoying attention whore. Like me!
tyrannosaurus_rek: i was referring to some of his later responses/comments, and not the initial broohaha.
I don't know, if you deny it on Sunday and then refuse to deny or not deny a couple days later, doesn't the initial response stand?
Whatever, she's still digging herself a hole here.
I'm surprised that readers of Torontoist are mad at the Torontoist for being not too happy that the Sun stole content from the Torontoist!
If you read the Torontoist, chances are you probably don't read the Sun. I mean, come on. A commenter said David T. was being childish, adolescent and snarky... have these people ever read the first 15 pages of the Sun during an election!?!?
I have a feeling some of these negative comments are coming from Jenny's friends and family. I'd love to see the IP addresses and see how many are coming from the same house or building.
Bottom line, The Sun stole content from Torontoist. FACT
The Sun, likely Jenny, likely stole the idea for the story from Torontoist to begin with. Which is probably why David T. is a little pissed, since it's bad enough that Jenny (or "The Sun") can't come up with her own story ideas and steal them from a local blog (while she used to work for a competitor) but she also stole the actual content!
Chances are that this is not the first time Jenny (or "The Sun") have done this, just the first time in awhile either one got caught, and called out on it.
And good for Torontoist for doing so.
If you don't like this Blog or this Blog's editor. STOP READING. I mean, there is always a paper version of the Torontoist that is David Topping free that comes out a few days later... just read Jenny in the Sun. :)
"If you don't like this Blog or this Blog's editor. STOP READING"
yes, any time we dislike something, instead of discussing it and what is right/wrong with it, you know, as we do in our democratic society and especially as we do on a public forum such a blog with an open comments secetion, we should simply ignore it and let it continue unquestioned.
i really dislike when people use this comeback as a form of argument.
"The Sun, likely Jenny, likely stole the idea for the story from Torontoist to begin with. Which is probably why David T. is a little pissed, since it's bad enough that Jenny (or "The Sun") can't come up with her own story ideas and steal them from a local blog (while she used to work for a competitor) but she also stole the actual content!"
Can you please fuck off forever? And make sure to take Topping down with you.
For those not keeping track "acer" was the same one who was showing off that he could find Jenny's MySpace page.
and since your last comment was just telling me off I bet you would fall into the "friend of Jenny" catogory.
Calling someone out publically is not the professional way to do it. Imagine how nicely a properly worded email to the writer and her editors could work.
Just because you come across a newsworthy item first doesn't make it yours forever and ever into eternity.
Yes, the plagiarism was wrong. But chastising a media outlet for picking up on a story that you wrote about first? Puh-lease.
There is no such thing as "stealing an idea" in the media. There's always a race to see who can get the "scoop" out first.
It's obvious to anyone that looks at the dates that yours was published first. That should be satisfaction enough for you.
No matter what you think of how this was all played out, I bet this is the last time someone plagiarizes Torontoist.
Screw that! I'm going to plagiarize Torontoist tomorrow! Maybe then I can be #1 in Google like I've always dreamed of! :P
i'm going to plagiarize carrie's comment today, scoop all of you, and win some sort of baudrillard award for being meta.
@28: I read the page, and Maddox says he posted a response on his webpage and his fans flooding the station prompted the DJ to issue an apology on the air. Although he did have an exchange with the DJ AFTERWARDS, it looks like his approach was no more "gentlemanly" than Torontoist's.
dude! if anything Maddox is NOT gentlemenly!
From the Ryerson Journalism blog:
How Not To Accuse Someone Of Plagiarism
January 24, 2008
Hey, it happens sometimes. That dreaded ten-letter "P" word. The one you'll wear like a scarlet letter for the rest of your career (if you're lucky enough to have one after it). Sometimes it's an honest mistake; sometimes it's far from it. When a paragraph from Jenny Yuen's Toronto Sun profile on a local guerilla artist resembled, with near-verbatim similarity, a section of a Torontoist.com blog entry from several days prior, it did seem fishy enough for the blog post's author David Topping to investigate. So he posted a very public protest, outing the Sun writer for her journalistic no-no. Fair enough: the blogosphere has a hard enough time fighting for their legitimacy, and here was a chance to show the world (and mainstream media) that the little guy matters.
But I can only imagine Topping's rant, including a bold accusation that Yuen had copied his work, blew up in his face. He later had to issue a retraction on his blog, apologizing for assuming it was the 26-year-old Yuen behind the copycat move. Calling someone a plagiarist, before it can proven he or she is, could qualify as libel. Talk about putting a damper on your own parade -- here's a great blog (and I mean great; Torontoist is consistently ahead of the game as far as Toronto pop cultural news goes) and they fumbled the ball right before the end zone.
Edit: The Sun did end up apologizing to Topping on Monday, and Torontoist now considers the matter resolved.
Posted by Canice Leung at 12:14 AM | Comments (0)