tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092552783161885712.post1647856009352075614..comments2024-03-13T15:35:30.839+00:00Comments on Tabloid Watch: Plagiarism at the Daily MailMacGuffinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16894506410560858668noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092552783161885712.post-90161105506909926842010-06-10T17:44:18.308+01:002010-06-10T17:44:18.308+01:00Hi, I'm a copy editor at a Chinese newspaper. ...Hi, I'm a copy editor at a Chinese newspaper. Led to this site after typing "Daily", "Mail" and "Plagiarism" into google following a suspiciously similar article to one I worked on appearing on the Mail's website....it has no byline, and no credit for our original article. Oh, and they screwed up their slight attempt at a rewrite by referring to "the city's Special Administrative Zone", whereas, infact, the city is IN the SAR. Duh.<br /><br />ORIGINAL:<br />http://life.globaltimes.cn/travel/2010-06/540787.html<br /><br />UNORIGINAL:<br />http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/article-1285541/Death-Chinese-tourist-row-guide-prompts-Hong-Kong-ban-shopping-tours.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092552783161885712.post-36901149001448446372010-02-26T19:33:48.035+00:002010-02-26T19:33:48.035+00:00Anonymous - The two articles are clearly too simil...Anonymous - The two articles are clearly too similar for it to be a coincidence - but do you have proof as to which came first?<br /><br />Please do email if you have more detailsMacGuffinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16894506410560858668noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092552783161885712.post-67333557086947358862010-02-26T02:00:40.979+00:002010-02-26T02:00:40.979+00:00For another example of blatant Daily Mail plagiari...For another example of blatant Daily Mail plagiarism, compare the two recent articles below. <br /><br />http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_14429686<br /><br />http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1251946/Racially-charged-fight-U-S-bus-YouTube-hit.html<br /><br />The sentences have been shuffled around a bit, but the Daily Mail "journalist", Anny Shaw, didn't bother to change much beyond that.<br /><br />Any way to publicize this latest example of journalistic theft?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092552783161885712.post-78609124086139375312010-02-03T12:58:38.610+00:002010-02-03T12:58:38.610+00:00They have form for this. A few years back a popula...They have form for this. A few years back a popular TV nostalgia site found its in-depth, original article on Blue Peter presenters had been lifted word-for-word and printed in the Mail. Emails flew back and to, and the justification by the Fail was "there isn't any rule against copying stuff off a website, is there?" <br /><br />http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2002/oct/30/1Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092552783161885712.post-38430499332976431652010-02-01T18:14:07.729+00:002010-02-01T18:14:07.729+00:00Aww, they are no longer accepting comments on the ...Aww, they are no longer accepting comments on the Daily Mail website, I was hoping to cut and paste the comments from the LA Times websitePaul UKnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092552783161885712.post-49732168856604358412010-01-31T21:48:38.752+00:002010-01-31T21:48:38.752+00:00I'd love to see how they defend this...
I'...<i>I'd love to see how they defend this...</i><br /><br />I'm guessing if they do, it'll be via a massive grovelling 2-line 'clarification' splashed across the foot of column 5 on page 63 of the September 28th 2010 edition, just under the Shinty results.Jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092552783161885712.post-36847247498095124962010-01-30T15:31:40.871+00:002010-01-30T15:31:40.871+00:00Wow. It's exactly the same. Except less well w...Wow. It's exactly the same. Except less well written. ("Slipped into the role much easier" doesn't exactly roll off the tongue.)<br /><br />The "acing"/"acting" a test thing is pretty funny.<br /><br />I'd love to see how they defend this...tkt2everywherehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07649909692650741667noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2092552783161885712.post-40984811654104775682010-01-30T14:53:23.900+00:002010-01-30T14:53:23.900+00:00And when he changes 'cajole' to 'persu...And when he changes 'cajole' to 'persuade' he forgets to change the preposition - it's persuade to, not persuade into...Jamienoreply@blogger.com