This document summarizes a debate around allegations that New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd plagiarized a passage from a blog post by Josh Marshall. It notes that Dowd's explanation - that she had discussed the passage in an email with a friend without realizing the friend had read Marshall's post - is questionable. It also discusses the response from the Times, with some arguing Dowd should have faced punishment but the paper considering the matter resolved with her correction. Key discussion points center around whether intent is needed for plagiarism and if the Times handled it appropriately.

1. Is Maureen Dowd
a plagiarist?
A close call for one of our
most celebrated columnists

2. Josh Marshall
May 15: “More and more
the timeline is raising the
question of why, if the
torture was to prevent
terrorist attacks, it seemed
to happen mainly during
the period when we were
looking for what was
essentially political
information to justify the
invasion of Iraq.”

3. Maureen Dowd
May 17: “More and more
the timeline is raising the
question of why, if the
torture was to prevent
terrorist attacks, it seemed
to happen mainly during
the period when the Bush
crowd was looking for
what was essentially
political information to
justify the invasion of
Iraq.”

4. Caught by Josh the Blogger
“[I]f this isn’t outright
plagiarism by a top NY
Times Editorialist, than
[sic] I’m a happily married,
straight man with 4 kids, 2
dogs, a lovely 2nd wife of
15 years with a girl half
my age on the side.
Which I assure you all, I
am not.”

5. Dowd’s excuse
E-mail to Huffington Post: “i was talking to a friend of
mine Friday about what I was writing who suggested I
make this point, expressing it in a cogent -- and I
assumed spontaneous -- way and I wanted to weave
the idea into my column.
“but, clearly, my friend must have read josh marshall
without mentioning that to me.
“we're fixing it on the web, to give josh credit, and will
include a note, as well as a formal correction
tomorrow.”

6. Is Dowd’s excuse credible?
• How do you copy a 43-
word passage almost
verbatim from “talking”
with a friend?

7. Is Dowd’s excuse credible?
• How do you copy a 43-
word passage almost
verbatim from “talking”
with a friend?
• She later said it was by
e-mail. If you were
e-mailing with someone,
would you call it “talking”?

8. Is Dowd’s excuse credible?
• How do you copy a 43-
word passage almost
verbatim from “talking”
with a friend?
• She later said it was by
e-mail. If you were
e-mailing with someone,
would you call it “talking”?
• Wouldn’t it make more
sense if she’d copied and
pasted, then forgot to give
credit?

9. When Mo met Joe
In 1988, Dowd’s story that
Joe Biden had plagiarized
from a speech by Neil
Kinnock drove him out of
the race. In fact, he had
credited Kinnock on many
other occasions.
The story also cost
Michael Dukakis his
campaign manager.

10. Howell of outrage
In 1998, Times editorial-
page editor and Dowd
friend Howell Raines
ripped the Times Co.-
owned Globe for its light
punishment of Mike
Barnicle. Raines wrote:
“Trust is the glue that
holds newsrooms together
and ultimately binds
readers to a specific
newspaper and to
newspapers in general.”

11. How the Times responded
• Dowd was allowed to fix
her column online

12. How the Times responded
• Dowd was allowed to fix
her column online
• Correction: “Maureen
Dowd’s column on
Sunday, about torture,
failed to attribute a
paragraph about the
timeline for prisoner
abuse to Josh Marshall’s
blog at Talking Points
Memo.”

13. Andrew Rosenthal’s comment
“Journalists often use
feeds from other staff
journalists, free-lancers,
stringers, a whole range
of people. And from
friends. Anyone with even
the most passing
acquaintance with
Maureen’s work knows
that she is happy and
eager to give people
credit.”

14. Clark Hoyt’s assessment
“I do not think Dowd
plagiarized, but I also do
not think what she did was
right…. [R]eaders have a
right to expect that even if
an opinion columnist like
Dowd tosses around
ideas with a friend, her
column will be her own
words. If the words are
not hers, she must give
credit.”

15. Catherine Mathis
Times spokeswoman was
asked if Dowd had been
suspended. Her answer:
“Maureen is on vacation.
Since she didn’t do
anything wrong, there
would be no reason for a
suspension.”

16. Discussion points
• Does plagiarism require intent?

17. Discussion points
• Does plagiarism require intent?
– Northeastern defines plagiarism as
“intentionally representing the words,
ideas, or data of another as one’s own
... without providing proper citation.”

18. Discussion points
• Does plagiarism require intent?
– Northeastern defines plagiarism as
“intentionally representing the words,
ideas, or data of another as one’s own
... without providing proper citation.”
– If Dowd did not plagiarize Marshall, did she
nevertheless plagiarize her friend?

19. Discussion points
• Does plagiarism require intent?
– Northeastern defines plagiarism as
“intentionally representing the words,
ideas, or data of another as one’s own
... without providing proper citation.”
– If Dowd did not plagiarize Marshall, did she
nevertheless plagiarize her friend?
– What would happen to a student who’d
done what Dowd says she did?

20. Discussion points
• Does Marshall have a say in this?

21. Discussion points
• Does Marshall have a say in this?
– He wrote: “I generally think we’re too quick
to pull the trigger with charges of
plagiarism. I haven’t said anything about
this because I really didn’t think I had
anything to add. Whatever the mechanics
of how it happened, I never thought it was
intentional. Dowd and the Times quickly
corrected it, which I appreciated. And for
me, that’s pretty much the end of it.”

22. Discussion points
• Does it matter that this was apparently
a one-time incident?

23. Discussion points
• Does it matter that this was apparently
a one-time incident?
– We may assume that bloggers pored over
everything she’s ever written and found
nothing

24. Discussion points
• Does it matter that this was apparently
a one-time incident?
– We may assume that bloggers pored over
everything she’s ever written and found
nothing
– Is a Pulitzer winner likely to start
plagiarizing in her late 50s?

25. Discussion points
• Did the Times handle this well or not?

26. Discussion points
• Did the Times handle this well or not?
– Based on the facts as we know them,
should she have been punished?

27. Discussion points
• Did the Times handle this well or not?
– Based on the facts as we know them,
should she have been punished?
– Does lack of punishment feed into distrust
of media? Or is her lack of malign intent
enough?

28. “Beat the Press” discussion