March 07, 2008

Can we get these guys for plagiarism?: These two editorials, pro and con, appeared in today's USA Today. Read them, then the original thread from SpoFi. It's deja vu all over again.

posted by Howard_T to navel gazing at 08:34 AM - 6 comments

Howard T, could you point out the offending sections that indicate plagiarism?

posted by worldcup2002 at 12:18 PM on March 07

I think Howard found it whimsical rather than offensive. Unless I'm wrong, in which case my pitchfork is at the ready.

posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 01:25 PM on March 07

Could it be that we're just ahead of the curve?

posted by owlhouse at 04:09 PM on March 07

Is that the same as being on the cutting edge, owlhouse? Also, if it was Friday's USA Today, some times they have editorials on news that has already been reported. I think that is what might have happened here.

posted by steelergirl at 11:10 PM on March 07

I think Howard found it whimsical rather than offensive. I was being neither whimsical nor serious, just making an observation and trying to put a catchy title to it. Actually, I had noticed that the general tone of both sides rather closely paralleled the comments of the SpoFi thread. It's almost as if the USA Today writers had read our comments, then summarized them into the editorials. It just goes to illustrate that our very own SpoFites are every bit as perceptive as the mass media. I was also going to add that we are as accurate too, but that would be an insult to SpoFi. We're generally more accurate with some of our commentary. Weedy, can you get us a package deal on torches to go along wit the pitchforks?

posted by Howard_T at 03:53 PM on March 08

I believe grum@work is in charge of torches.

posted by apoch at 08:13 PM on March 08

You're not logged in. Please log in or register.