Be Legal and Fair
2 views | +0 today
Follow
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Kyle Florgaborf
Scoop.it!

What is a Citation

Broadly, a citation is a reference to a published or unpublished source (not always the original source). More precisely, a citation is an abbreviated alphanumeric expression (e.g. [Newell84]) embedded in the body of an intellectual work that denotes an entry in the bibliographic references section of the work for the purpose of acknowledging the relevance of the works of others to the topic of discussion at the spot where the citation appears. Generally the combination of both the in-body citation and the bibliographic entry constitutes what is commonly thought of as a citation (whereas bibliographic entries by themselves are not). References to single, machine-readable assertions in electronic scientific articles are known as nanopublications, a form of microattribution.

Citation has several important purposes: to uphold intellectual honesty (or avoiding plagiarism),[1] to attribute prior or unoriginal work and ideas to the correct sources, to allow the reader to determine independently whether the referenced material supports the author's argument in the claimed way, and to help the reader gauge the strength and validity of the material the author has used.[2]

The forms of citations generally subscribe to one of the generally accepted citations systems, such as the Oxford,[3] Harvard, MLA, American Sociological Association (ASA), American Psychological Association (APA), and other citations systems, as their syntactic conventions are widely known and easily interpreted by readers. Each of these citation systems has its respective advantages and disadvantages relative to the trade-offs of being informative (but not too disruptive) and thus are chosen relative to the needs of the type of publication being crafted. Editors will often specify the citation system to use.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Kyle Florgaborf
Scoop.it!

Journalism foundation gives journalist $20,000 after lying, plagiarism incident

Journalism foundation gives journalist $20,000 after lying, plagiarism incident | Be Legal and Fair | Scoop.it

Want to know how to earn big money in journalism? Lie, make up quotes and plagiarize. While those actions cost journalist Jonah Lehrer reputable employment, they didn't stop one of the most well-known journalism foundations from paying him $20,000 to speak at an event.

Journalism sure has come a long way.

According to Politico, Lehrer "resigned from The New Yorker following a report today [July 30, 2012] that he fabricated quotes by Bob Dylan in his new book." 

How did that happen? Well, Tablet magazine's Michael Moynihan thought quotes in the book, aptly titled "Imagine," seemed bogus. He was right. 

Lehrer was later fired from WIRED magazine for his "failure to meet WIRED editorial standards." 

Notice a trend?

Ordinarily, one incident of serious plagiarism alone would be enough to end your journalism career. (See: Jayson Blair and Janet Cooke for prime examples.) Thanks to the Knight Foundation, that was enough to get a check bigger than most people will see in a lifetime for speaking at Knight's Media Learning Seminar this week on Februay 12.

Initially, the foundation was proud of its efforts, running a story that detailed the event, mentioning that "Lehrer broke the basic code of journalism." And there was also this: "There are important lessons here for all of us as decision makers and supporters of information projects," the story quoted Knight Foundation President Alberto Ibargüen saying.

Their story changed when news got out about how ridiculous their actions had been -- paying Lehrer $20,000 to speak. In an interview with The Huffington Post, Ibargüen defended the incident but didn't question that "some people are still angry and feel he should be punished."

This from Knight which claims it "supports transformational ideas that promote quality journalism, advance media innovation, engage communities and foster the arts." 

Then again, I guess lying and plagiarism are kind of "transformational."

The criticism certainly helped transform Knight's response. At 10:08 p.m. on Feb. 13, the foundation issued an apology under the headline "Knight Foundation regrets paying Lehrer speaking fee." The apology mentions not wanting to upset "partners." The $2-billion foundation works with many organizations and paid out $112 million in donations in 2011 to organizations such as $1.9 million to the liberal journalism start-up Pro Publica.

Perhaps this year, Knight will spend some of its war chest to fund a program in journalism ethics. It might try out the courses on its own leadership.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/02/14/journalism-foundation-gives-journalist-20000-after-lying-plagarism-incidents/#ixzz2TSxkwCHs

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Kyle Florgaborf
Scoop.it!

What is Plagiarism?

What is Plagiarism? | Be Legal and Fair | Scoop.it

ACCORDING TO THE MERRIAM-WEBSTER ONLINE DICTIONARY, TO "PLAGIARIZE" MEANS: to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's ownto use (another's production) without crediting the sourceto commit literary theftto present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source

In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward.

 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Kyle Florgaborf
Scoop.it!

Copyright Video

A work is automatically granted a copyright at the moment of creation. Registering a copyright is not necessary. If you plan to sue someone for infringement, you will register copyright as part of that process.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Kyle Florgaborf
Scoop.it!

What is a citation?

This video explains what is a citation. Students learn that a citation is a written reference to a work. It helps to find the work by identifying its author(...
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Kyle Florgaborf
Scoop.it!

Creative Commons Resource Page

Creative Commons Resource Page | Be Legal and Fair | Scoop.it
Creative Commons licenses provide a flexible range of protections and freedoms for authors, artists, and educators.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Kyle Florgaborf
Scoop.it!

Creative Commons

Creative Commons | Be Legal and Fair | Scoop.it
Creative Commons licenses provide a flexible range of protections and freedoms for authors, artists, and educators.
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Kyle Florgaborf
Scoop.it!

Copyright Infringement Example

Attorney General Eric Holder was in New Zealand for a meeting of Attorneys General from the US, New Zealand, Canada, Australia and the UK. Radio New Zealand got to meet up with Holder and after asking him about the meeting proceeded to ask him about the Megaupload case (mp3), which the interviewer noted was of great interest to New Zealanders. 

Holder, in his usual fashion, answers with generalities that don't actually answer the questions being asked. He gives his standard "intellectual property theft = bad!" speech:

Well I don't want to comment on a case that is pending. But I will say, more generally, that we are very concerned about the theft of intellectual property. It's something that we take very seriously, both in the United States, and I think our allies do as well. With regard that case, we've been cooperating with the New Zealand authorities. And I will just rely on the pleadings we have filed in court to talk about that.

First of all, we've pointed this out before, but you would think that the supreme "lawyer" for the government would know the damn law. There is no "intellectual property theft." That's a made up term by copyright maximalists. There is such a thing as copyright infringement, which is what he means. He should use the actual term. Otherwise it does make him look like a pawn of Hollywood.... Which leads right into the next question. The interviewer notes that Kim Dotcom has been saying that the case is all about the DOJ "heeding the beck and call of Hollywood moguls." Holder immediately responds:

Well, that's not true. I don't want to comment on that case other than to say that it was brought on the basis of the facts and the basis of the law and it's consistent with the enforcement priorities that this administration has had.

Well, yes, the enforcement priorities that have heavily been pushed for by Hollywood. 

The interviewer notes the various screwups in the case, and Holder doesn't bite, saying that there's been good collaboration and they expect everything to turn out fine in the end. The next question is about how serious Holder is about pursuing extradition, and Holder makes it sound like no big deal:

We have made an extradition request. We have an existing treaty between the US and New Zealand that has been used a great many times throughout the years. And I don't see how any individual would not be subject to that treaty.

Uh.... that's a bullshit answer. Because the problem with the extradition issue is not whether or not Dotcom is subject to it, but whether or not the issues in the case are subject to it. The DOJ had to bolt on some questionable conspiracy claims to make this work, since mere copyright infringement is not an extraditable offense. Holder also responded to a question about New Zealand's attempt to spy more on citizens and residents by saying he doesn't see how that violates civil liberties. When questioned on that, he throws out some random statement about cooperation to stop terrorism, and again says that spying on people doesn't need to violate civil liberties.

more...
No comment yet.