Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Traction for Tribe/Kagan matter?

Within an article titled Right-wingers falsely accuse Kagan of covering up plagiarism at Harvard , one has the text:

Following panel inquiry, Kagan, Summers "firmly convinced" Tribe's "error was the product of inadvertence rather than intentionality." In an April 2005 article, The Boston Globe reported that "Harvard University officials have concluded that it was ''a significant lapse' for law school professor Laurence H. Tribe to have used phrasing from another scholar's writing, without attribution," but "President Lawrence H. Summers and law school dean Elena Kagan said in a statement that the mistake was an inadvertent one."

The first comment to the article was:

There's a difference between plagiarism and some flunky making a mistake.

Leave it to the rightwing to ignore that difference.

The comment brings up a point which appeared in posts by Dean Velvel on the matter. Laurence Tribe's strangely worded apology suggested that the plagiarism was by the ghost-writing student "flunky." So, the plagiarism of Abraham was committed by the "flunky." However, putting one's name on the work of the "flunky" is also plagiarism (copying without attribution.)

At the end of the day, this story will get no more traction than Joe Biden's plagiarism at Syracuse Law School. [In passing, one notes, back in the day, Kagan was a Tribe assistant, aka "flunky." In judging Tribe, she had a bit of history in the matter being judged,]

Nevertheless, it is interesting to contemplate what happens in alternative worlds:

Nevertheless, Pangilinan dealt promptly and concisely with the problem, unlike the situation with academics such as Laurence Tribe, Doris Kearns-Goodwin, Glenn Poshard or Professor Sticklen of Michigan State, all of whom committed acts far worse than what Pangilinan did. from http://ipbiz.blogspot.com/2010/04/further-in-pangilinan-matter.html.

Some other posts-->





Post a Comment

<< Home