Comments on: Plagiarism at the AP? https://www.yourish.com/2005/11/18/336 Cutting straight to the point Mon, 21 Nov 2005 20:59:41 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: Michael Lonie https://www.yourish.com/2005/11/18/336/comment-page-1#comment-981 Sat, 19 Nov 2005 19:40:30 +0000 http://www.yourish.com/?p=336#comment-981 The AP probably looks on plagiarism the way PDQ Bach did. It’s not stealing, it’s recycling.

]]> By: Sabba Hillel https://www.yourish.com/2005/11/18/336/comment-page-1#comment-973 Fri, 18 Nov 2005 13:59:37 +0000 http://www.yourish.com/?p=336#comment-973 I think I see the mistake that they made. In many cases, finding for the defendant when it is an obvious situation will often mean dimissing the case as totally invalid. Often this will include requiring the plaintiff to pay court costs as well. I think that saying found for Professor Lipstadt might have implied a countersuit which won.

I think that in the original article, the Times made the mistake and the AP used that language because they thought it did not sound as bad for Mr. Irving.

The AP probably has a canned paragraph which is pulled up whenever Irving is mentioned and probably dates from the original Times article. I doubt that they would bother to do any research once the have the canned paragraph.

(ob disclaimer)
I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV. This is just the way it appears to me as a layman who reads blogs.

]]>