So how are we doing with the Gray Lady’s latest plagiarism scandal? Well, for starters, they’re now calling it plagiarism. The facts-and-only-the-facts (but really no facts at all) New York Times account reports:
The New York Times is looking into the work of one its reporters following accusations that he plagiarized from The Wall Street Journal and other sources.
The paper published an editor’s note online Sunday and in papers Monday that said reporter Zachery Kouwe ”appears to have improperly appropriated wording and passages published by other news organizations.”
Yeah, that was cheesy calling it “appropriated wording and passages,” wasn’t it?
So what’s going on? They won’t really say: “Kouwe declined to comment on Tuesday. … The Times said that a search of Kouwe’s work didn’t turn up any indications that his stories had any inaccuracies.” (Because those other writers whom he copied knew there stuff! Kouwe didn’t steal schlock work, mind you.) The non-informative report concludes: “The newspaper declined to comment on any penalties Kouwe could face. In 2003, Times reporter Jayson Blair resigned from the paper after it became clear that he had engaged in plagiarism and fabrications in his work.” No mention that Maureen Dowd was found plagiarizing and that nothing happened to her.
It seems that Kouwe isn’t going quietly. Perhaps a deal is in the works. Maybe he’s bringing up the Dowd matter. (How unpleasant that would be to have Kouwe bring a lawsuit and call her as a witness for the plagiarist.) Well, we’ll know soon enough what is to become of Kouwe. Presumably, that will be news that’s fit to print.