Sunday, July 02, 2006

Expert: Three Cases Of Plagiarism In Coulter Book

For critics of Ann Coulter, this probably won't come as a surprise.

John Barrie, the creator of a leading plagiarism recognition system, claims he found three examples of "textbook plagiarism" in Coulter's Godless: the Church of Liberalism, after he ran the book's text through the company's digital iThenticate program.

Barrie, CEO of iParadigms, says one 25-word passage from Godless was apparently lifted from Planned Parenthood literature published at least 18 months before Coulter's book was released.

A separate, 24-word string appeared about a year earlier in the San Francisco Chronicle with just one word change -- "stacked" was changed to "piled."

Another 33-word passage allegedly comes from a 1999 article in the Portland (Me.) Press Herald.

Note: JABBS was among the websites that cited the Planned Parenthood and Portland newspaper examples last month.)

Barrie says he also ran Coulter's Universal Press columns from the past 12 months through iThenticate and found "similar patterns of cribbing.

In other words, not only is Coulter a hate-monger who has proposed killing U.S. journalists and a Supreme Court justice, but she's unoriginal!

Why does anyone listen to her? Is it merely because "seeing hate-speech pop out of a blonde who knows her way around a black cocktail dress makes for compelling viewing"?

Hello, Fox News Channel, MSNBC and NBC: You can do better than promote a plagiarist. There are other "compelling" conservatives you can book in your quest for ratings.


Barrie also -- and again, this is probably not news to Coulter critics -- found that many of the 344 citations Coulter includes in Godless are misleading.

"They're used purely to try and give the book a higher level of credibility -- as if it's an academic work. But her sloppiness in failing to properly attribute many other passages strips it of nearly all its academic merits," he told the New York Post.

Last year, JABBS noted a similar pattern of misleading citations from Coulter's book, Slander.


Anonymous madame defarge said...

Ask those people this...

"Are you an Ann Coulter Republican?" Use it like they used Michael Moore on us. (And I really like Michael Moore, btw...) Ask them why & how they support such a wacko...

10:50 AM  
Anonymous liberalmike27 said...

I remember Al Franken talking about her footnotes in the last book she wrote.

Sadly it seems to be on the top of the list, whether her publisher bought a bunch of copies to put it there or not.

10:51 AM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

the way they do it is to give freebies to people who get magazine subscriptions, donations to conservative causes and think tanks, etc.

go to, and you'll see that with a subscription, you get Godless for just $4.99.

That's how the sales shoot up ... these conservative organizations buy tons of books, then give them away for next to nothing. the initial purchase by the organizations is what counts toward's Coulter's book sales.

if they did it as "book sales in stores or on-line bookstore sites" coulter would fare much, much worse, as would most "conservative pundit" authors.

10:51 AM  
Anonymous SpiralHawk said...

Only Godless neoCONS would stoop to plagiarism

How typical of the cons to lie and steal

10:51 AM  
Anonymous bunkerbuster1 said...

Ron Brynaer &Rude pundit found more than just three:

when the time comes to burn Coulter at the stake of plagiarism, the Rude Pundit and Ron Brynaert of Raw Story (Brynaert especially so since he did far, far more legwork than the Rude Pundit on this story) deserve to hold the torch along with Barrie, let alone get some mention in the New York Post. (And especially since the plagiarism work of the Rude Pundit and Brynaert was mentioned at MSNBC, Slate, Huffington Post, and other mucho larger media outlets - in other words, just a Google away.)

But let's face facts--the whole damn book could've been a copy/paste job, and the NutMax/WingnutDeli knuckle-draggers would still think it a masterpiece.

10:54 AM  
Anonymous rob of wilmington, del. said...

true but that doesn't mean that MSNBC/NBC (Jay Leno, Today, etc.) need to give Coulter air time.

People should write or call and say that they can do better than promote plagiarists.

10:55 AM  
Anonymous Gitmo Greg said...

I understand the possible plagarism allegations, but from what I'm reading here, it seems to be a bit of reach. Coulter writes about today's political and social spectrum.  I wouldn't be surprised if she had "lifted" from
periodicals and literature. I bet most pundits do when they write. This will only bring more publicity to an already popular book, thus, defeating the purpose (keeping her book sales down)of most who hate Ann
Coulter. You must admit, like her or not, she can hold her own. And
with more wit and common sense than, say, the brilliant debater James Carville who's best technique is speaking over a rebuttal.

4:35 PM  
Anonymous Ken Grandlund said...

Actually Greg, she can only 'hold her own' among other like-minded pundits. Put her up to someone with other points of view AND a solid base of relevent facts on their side, and she becomes a shrewish harpy who can only spew venom at her would be debater.

The fact that many pundits 'lift' text from another source, (and many bloggers do just this daily) does not excuse Coulter, especially if she does not properly source her lifts. That is the difference between plagarism and citing references. Most of the people I read happily give credit where it is due. Sadly, Coulter does not.

4:36 PM  
Anonymous Liberal Jarhead said...

Evil is usually also lazy.

4:36 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares