Or The Case of the Senator and the Healthy Home Economist
One of the interesting things about the debate regarding the RH Bill is the side casualties of the conflagration. In this instance it the theft or pilfering of a blog post online for use in a speech delivered by a Senator sgainst the RH Bill. Senator Sotto and staff through their act, denials and eventual non -apologetic acceptance has stirred a digital hornet’s nest. And it would seem that he and company has taken the position to dig in rather than issue a mea culpa. Perhaps the Senator and his allies have calculated that the angry constituency is not really his constituency, therefore it does not matter. Perhaps given the nature of the debates the gumption the Senator is displaying is not at all surprising.
One cannot question the strength of purpose of the Senator nor perhaps the facts that he used.
However, the means by which parts and parcels of his speech borders on less than honorable. Plagiarism is a serious intellectual crime. Students have been flunked and kicked out of schools because of plagiarism. Instructors, department chairs and even Deans have fallen because of purloined studies. Writers have been disgraced because of passing off another material as their own. And public officials and figures have been condemned because of lifting and quoting without attribution.
Part of the interview of Blogger Sarah Pope on Radyo Inquirer via blogwatch.
Sarah: That is absolutely ridiculous. I don’t think I have ever heard quite as ridiculous of an excuse than that. Of course it is out on the internet but if you would go to my blog, it clearly has a copyright on it. You can’t even cut and past on my blog easily. You right click any of the text, it says, “copyright by my company name ”. So in order to take that information, they have to be fully aware that they are violating the copyright of my blog, and by taking it and plagiarizing it word for word, and denying it that they were wrong… that is the worst. Denying it and refusing to admit that they were wrong—that is the worst part. It shows that they think that they are above the law, that they can do whatever they want, and that they hide behind the govermental immunity. It’s ridculous! It is a very bad behaviour.
In this case, was the Senator a victim of sloppy research work. Was the topic googled and then copied? Did The purloined passages from a blog post come about because of ineptitude and now being covered up with gumption and arrogance that betrays a high public office, an office of public trust?
It is not a matter of facts. It is the act of pilfering. An act much condemned and much abused online. And now for a Senator and his staff to do it wantonly and without remorse is to say the least incredulous.
Again, perhaps the Senator feels that we are not his constituents, but this is very far from the Truth. A public servant, entrusted with a public trust should know better.
Sotto Voce: Speaking with Emphasis
Or The Case of the Senator and the Healthy Home Economist
One of the interesting things about the debate regarding the RH Bill is the side casualties of the conflagration. In this instance it the theft or pilfering of a blog post online for use in a speech delivered by a Senator sgainst the RH Bill. Senator Sotto and staff through their act, denials and eventual non -apologetic acceptance has stirred a digital hornet’s nest. And it would seem that he and company has taken the position to dig in rather than issue a mea culpa. Perhaps the Senator and his allies have calculated that the angry constituency is not really his constituency, therefore it does not matter. Perhaps given the nature of the debates the gumption the Senator is displaying is not at all surprising.
One cannot question the strength of purpose of the Senator nor perhaps the facts that he used.
However, the means by which parts and parcels of his speech borders on less than honorable. Plagiarism is a serious intellectual crime. Students have been flunked and kicked out of schools because of plagiarism. Instructors, department chairs and even Deans have fallen because of purloined studies. Writers have been disgraced because of passing off another material as their own. And public officials and figures have been condemned because of lifting and quoting without attribution.
Part of the interview of Blogger Sarah Pope on Radyo Inquirer via blogwatch.
In this case, was the Senator a victim of sloppy research work. Was the topic googled and then copied? Did The purloined passages from a blog post come about because of ineptitude and now being covered up with gumption and arrogance that betrays a high public office, an office of public trust?
It is not a matter of facts. It is the act of pilfering. An act much condemned and much abused online. And now for a Senator and his staff to do it wantonly and without remorse is to say the least incredulous.
Again, perhaps the Senator feels that we are not his constituents, but this is very far from the Truth. A public servant, entrusted with a public trust should know better.