Plagiarism in politics

[mugtang]

I think Melania is catching a lot of flack for her speech writer lifting the comments from Michelle Obama's 2008 DNC speech.  But, it's not like it's uncommon in politics...

 

[IanforHeisman]

Didn't Duval say he gave Obama permission?

[mugtang]

27 minutes ago, IanforHeisman said:

Didn't Duval say he gave Obama permission?

Maybe?  Honestly I'm not sure. 

[IanforHeisman]

20 minutes ago, mugtang said:

Maybe?  Honestly I'm not sure. 

I saw someone in another thread say this. I don't care enough to look it up myself but I'm sure someone here knows if it's true.

[thelawlorfaithful]

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/george-mason-forgotten-founder-he-conceived-the-bill-of-rights-64408583/

In 1776, Mason, then 51, had been appointed to a committee charged with drafting a "Declaration of Rights" for Virginia. From the writings of English Enlightenment philosopher John Locke (1632-1704), Mason had come to a then-radical insight: that a republic had to begin with the formal, legally binding commitment that individuals had inalienable rights that were superior to any government.

One other committee member did play a significant role: Mason's young friend James Madison, who kept his (and Mason's) friend Thomas Jefferson apprised of Mason's progress in drafting the declaration. Mason's work began, "That all men are by nature equally free and independent, and have certain inherent rights...namely, the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the means of acquiring and possessing property, and pursuing and obtaining happiness and safety." Jefferson's U.S. Declaration of Independence included the immortal words of what may be the most famous political statement in history: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

The Virginia Declaration of Rights was created in May and ratified on June 12, 1776; right as Jefferson and the committee of five were penning the opening drafts to the Declaration of Independence.

http://www.gettysburgbattlefieldtours.com/lincolns-speech-memorial/

Now hailed as a literary masterpiece, the Gettysburg Address and its theme were not new to Americans. Daniel Webster made a statement in 1830 saying “the origin of our government and the source of its power is the people’s constitution, the people’s government, made for the people, made by the people and answerable to the people.” Supreme Court Justice John Marshall stated “The government of the Union…is emphatically and truly a government of the people…its powers are granted by them and are to be exercised directly on them, and for their benefit.” In an anti-slavery address, Reverend Theodore Parker addressed Boston saying that democracy is “a government of all the people, by all the people, for all the people.”

[mysfit]

When something is wrong, it's just wrong. Pointing out well so and so did it doesn't change anything.

 

It's still wrong. Journalists are fired for it, students are expelled. There are and should be consequences. It is dishonest. I fail to understand why people have so much trouble acknowledging such a basic fact.

[trl87]

I heard that she was rick rolled in the speech.

[nomascows]

2 hours ago, mysfit said:

When something is wrong, it's just wrong. Pointing out well so and so did it doesn't change anything.

 

It's still wrong. Journalists are fired for it, students are expelled. There are and should be consequences. It is dishonest. I fail to understand why people have so much trouble acknowledging such a basic fact.

Are you talking about plagiarism of the speech or Hillary and her email server?  

[thelawlorfaithful]

1 hour ago, mysfit said:

When something is wrong, it's just wrong. Pointing out well so and so did it doesn't change anything.

 

It's still wrong. Journalists are fired for it, students are expelled. There are and should be consequences. It is dishonest. I fail to understand why people have so much trouble acknowledging such a basic fact.

There are good reasons it is wrong for journalists and academics but not for politicians in a liberal democracy.  A journalists who doesn't properly attribute does harm to the original journalist and to journalism as a whole.  The value of the original's hard work is diminished when they get ripped off.  The field is greatly diminished because plagiarism removes the reader far from primary sources and objective facts.  This is serious because good journalism is almost entirely dependent  upon the readers trust in its objective accuracy. Plagiarism is similarly harmful to academia. It does disservice to the student, and to the mountain of reliable scholarship needed for the widespread advancement of knowledge. In both cases, accuracy in attribution is essential to the endeavor.

The point of a political speech is to persuade the listener to the ideas and narrative  in the speaker's remarks. That either the listener should ascribe to the speaker's beliefs, or to convince them that the politician is the best vessel for the advancement of the listener's own beliefs.  Subjectivity is the entire point. Who said it first is academic. What is important to democracy is who said it when it was most meaningful. To forgo utterances because someone else said it better first, or because constant attribution within a speech would dilute its effectiveness, is a disservice to the democratic process.  Political speeches in a democracy should be persuasive and above all understood, regardless of originality.

[SharkTanked]

3 hours ago, mysfit said:

When something is wrong, it's just wrong. Pointing out well so and so did it doesn't change anything.

 

It's still wrong. Journalists are fired for it, students are expelled. There are and should be consequences. It is dishonest. I fail to understand why people have so much trouble acknowledging such a basic fact.

 

1 hour ago, nomascows said:

Are you talking about plagiarism of the speech or Hillary and her email server?  

Bingo. That's why people can't really get outraged when politicians break the law (though I'm not really sure there is a "law" against plagiarism outside of Universities). They'd end up looking hypocritical. And that is truly scary shit.

What Hillary did is FAR worse IMO. She should at least be charged and put on probation. It's a horrible precedent to set. And I hope she still wins (though I won't vote for her) because Trump literally scares me that much. I'd rather have someone who I can't trust and has broken the law over someone who professes admiration for our dictatorial sworn enemies and regularly enjoys tearing this country apart on its racial lines.

[sean327]

4 hours ago, mysfit said:

When something is wrong, it's just wrong. Pointing out well so and so did it doesn't change anything.

 

It's still wrong. Journalists are fired for it, students are expelled. There are and should be consequences. It is dishonest. I fail to understand why people have so much trouble acknowledging such a basic fact.

It's phucking hilarious that you get worked up over a speech, but have no problem with Hillary mishandling classified material. Classic MWC Board Cat Lady.

[cardrater]

Maybe she got permission to use it? I listened to Obamas speech and never once did he credit Duvall yet some say he asked to use those lines. Maybe it's the same with Mrs. Trump and Mrs. Obama?

 

EDIT: looks like the lady who wrote the speech copied word for word what Malania was reading to her as some ideas to work with. She didn't know it was Michelle's work . Pretty  naïve on both her and Melanias part.

[jackmormon]

20 minutes ago, cardrater said:

Maybe she got permission to use it? I listened to Obamas speech and never once did he credit Duvall yet some say he asked to use those lines. Maybe it's the same with Mrs. Trump and Mrs. Obama?

Patrick said he gave Obama permission to use it. Obama said Patrick encouraged him to use it. They both had David Axelrod on their campaign staff and Patrick was a co-chair of Obama's campaign. Patrick has also used lines from Obama's speeches in 2006 when he was running for Governor. They were friends.

It ain't the same.

[MrBug708]

No way was Patrick going to sabotage someone in his own party either but throwing him under the bus. Permission or not, he didn't cite the words from Patrick.

This whole thing is silly

[cardrater]

4 minutes ago, jackmormon said:

Patrick said he gave Obama permission to use it. Obama said Patrick encouraged him to use it. They both had David Axelrod on their campaign staff and Patrick was a co-chair of Obama's campaign.

It ain't the same.

Im saying listening to his speeches he never credited Patrick during them. People were quick to rush and accuse plagiarism when that wasn't the case.  

The full details weren't out regarding Melanias speech and people were quick to yell plagiarism right away. Maybe she did ask Michelle? I don't know..

[jackmormon]

Just now, MrBug708 said:

No way was Patrick going to sabotage someone in his own party either but throwing him under the bus either. Permission or not, he didn't cite the words from Patrick.

This whole thing is silly

As soon as it was brought up, Obama acknowledged it. The Trump campaign is still using the my little pony defense.

[mugtang]

Here's how the Trump campaign should've handled this: 

"The speech writer for Melania was inspired by the words from Michelle Obama. We believe whole heartedly that President Obama has been an unmitigated failure as President and has divided this country. We also believe that Michelle has been a fine FLOTUS and like her predecessors (except Crooked Hillary) been very respectful of her position.  The speech writer lifted the words from Michelle's 2008 speech without the campaigns approval and he has since been fired.  We stand by Melania's comments and don't want the message of her speech to be lost in these 50 words.  Melania will make a fine FLOTUS and we look forward to winning in November.   We consider this matter closed and will have no further comment."

 

damn Trump should hire me. 

[THEUniversityofNevada]

13 minutes ago, mugtang said:

Here's how the Trump campaign should've handled this: 

"The speech writer for Melania was inspired by the words from Michelle Obama. We believe whole heartedly that President Obama has been an unmitigated failure as President and has divided this country. We also believe that Michelle has been a fine FLOTUS and like her predecessors (except Crooked Hillary) been very respectful of her position.  The speech writer lifted the words from Michelle's 2008 speech without the campaigns approval and he has since been fired.  We stand by Melania's comments and don't want the message of her speech to be lost in these 50 words.  Melania will make a fine FLOTUS and we look forward to winning in November.   We consider this matter closed and will have no further comment."

 

damn Trump should hire me. 

Meredith McIver, aka Mugtang

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/07/20/meredith_mciver_takes_responsibility_for_melania_trump_speech_disaster.html

 

[mugtang]

Just now, THEUniversityofNevada said:

Meredith McIver, aka Mugtang

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/07/20/meredith_mciver_takes_responsibility_for_melania_trump_speech_disaster.html

 

No shit?  I hadn't heard of her before now.  I stand by my statement though.  And Trump should hire me.   I'll whisper in his ear, Mr President, the University of Nevada needs a $1,000,000,000 athletics grant you should make it happen. 

[Old_SD_Dude]

I don't think the plagiarism part is a big deal. It's the lack of sophistication on the part of the campaign that's scary. These hacks are going to be Presidential staff?