Zachery Kouwe Plagiarism Scandal? New York Times Says Reporter 'Borrowed' Repeatedly

The New York Times has issued an editor's note saying that business reporter Zachery Kouwe, "reused language from The Wall Street Journal, Reuters and other sources without attribution or acknowledgment."

According to the Times, they were notified of the issue by the Journal.

In articles about the Bernard Madoff scandal that appeared in both newspapers on February 6, there were similar phrases and even identical sentences. Versions of the stories were also available online on February 5. For example, each contained a sentence reading:

Last year Mr. Madoff's wife, Ruth, also agreed to an asset freeze as part of a separate trustee's $45 million lawsuit against her.

In each story, that sentences was immediately preceded by very similar passages. From the New York Times version:

Under the agreement, the family members cannot transfer or sell property or assets valued at more than $1,000 or incur debts and obligations greater than $1,000 without approval of Mr. Picard. They are allowed to use credit cards for necessary living expenses. The defendants also will provide the trustee with an accounting of their expenditures.

From the Wall Street Journal version:

The family members agreed not to transfer or sell property or assets valued at more than $1,000 or incur debts and obligations greater than $1,000 without approval of the trustee. They are allowed to use credit cards for necessary living expenses. The defendants also will provide the trustee with an accounting of their expenditures, the orders say.

The Times indicated that the problem may be larger, potentially involving unattributed work from Reuters and elsewhere. From the paper's corrections page:

A subsequent search by The Times found other cases of extensive overlap between passages in Mr. Kouwe's articles and other news organizations'. (The search did not turn up any indications that the articles were inaccurate.)

Copying language directly from other news organizations without providing attribution -- even if the facts are independently verified -- is a serious violation of Times policy and basic journalistic standards. It should not have occurred. The matter remains under investigation by The Times, which will take appropriate action consistent with our standards to protect the integrity of our journalism.

Comments

[jojobinx]

04:24 PM on 02/16/2010

Integrity and journalism in the same sentence? Now that should be investigated !!!!

[paulfla99]

01:26 PM on 02/16/2010

No surprise here. Yet another liberal operation that deals in lies and dishonesty. That is the platform for the liberals.

[collies1]

08:48 AM on 02/16/2010

The NYT is a daily version of the sunday comics. It's been that way for years. I mean would you really
quote the NYT with confidence in their journalism???? NOOOOO WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!

[SpookyTwo]

09:28 PM on 02/15/2010

A plagiarist in the midst of fiction writers.

[Gronkie]

06:21 PM on 02/15/2010

All these conservatives are talking about how "liberal" publications plagiarize, but it seems to me that plagiarism is still better than just making something up out of thin air, which is what most conservative publications and broadcasters do.

[Ramart]

06:21 PM on 02/15/2010

Attribution is easy, but too many reporters seem to think "excessive" attribution makes them look like they did too little real reporting of their own (which often is true). They need to learn that copious attribution is far better than being suspected of plagiarism. Beyond demographics and economics, another aspect of the Web sending print down the tubes is that shoot-from-the-hip blogging now passes for a kind of "journalism" that may lure some "real" journos into expedient and undisclosed "borrowing." I commend the NYT for its transparency. At least Kouwe was judicious in his choice of sources, leaving his accuracy unquestioned. He was lucky on that count, but the bond of trust with readers was broken nonetheless.

[ClarcKing]

05:31 PM on 02/15/2010

How many instances of omissions are there in the profession of journalism and the news media generally? There is an economic catastrophe hovering the United States, and its' population; its' source, location, and treason has not been communicated.

Congress is dedicating the nation's financial resources to enemies of the United States.

The Times has been reporting, through their stable of editors and journalists, that the genius of Mr. Greenspan and other illustrious fellows that have created unimaginable wealth. Called it the American system etc. Mr. Bernanke saves us daily, the economy is looking up. the numbers tell us, we see signs? for at least 30 years.

This story of plagiarism is weak, irrelevant and maybe injudiciously used.

[Ramart]

05:56 PM on 02/15/2010

This comment is largely unintelligible, ungrammatical, incoherent. Maybe you speak better than you write?

[ClarcKing]

06:14 PM on 02/15/2010

I have offended your superior sense of grammatical style.

Meanwhile the irreversible, accelerating, collapsing operation of the international monetary financier debt based market economy is not reported. Foreclosures, bankruptcies, homelessness, failures in Healthcare, tens of millions in unemployment is no longer an crisis issue? An economic catastrophe hovers the population; no one will communicate these facts, the origin or location.

If the citizenry, journalists, and the political leadership do not confront the monetary financier system; the exact nature of our disaster, this great nation will cease to exist; we will lose everything.

[Jase84]

04:34 PM on 02/15/2010

Gotta cite those sources, even if you do paraphrase.

[theguyfromchesapeake]

04:31 PM on 02/15/2010

I guess Jason Blair's looking pretty good about now, 'ya reckon? Him and Stephen Glass can head up their Editorial Board!

[IslandGyal]

04:30 PM on 02/15/2010

I am waiting to hear how FAUX news folks wet themselves over this story, as they lie and distort while they do it.

[petermd]

04:30 PM on 02/15/2010

Even collage kids know that they can no longer Plagiarize papers as there often scanned.

[avocats]

11:33 PM on 02/15/2010

Even college kids know they can no longer plagiarize papers as they're often scanned.

[petermd]

11:57 AM on 02/16/2010

LOL

[Soundofthunder]

04:16 PM on 02/15/2010

The question at hand is precisely how many ways are there to convey the dry as toast details of a dry as toast story that requires financial and legal jargon.

The clear similarities could be attributed to press releases from the case as much as a case of plagiarism. We're not talking about swiping someone's creative writing project but a rote account of, as I said, a particularly dull section of a news story.

S ot

[VegetableMan]

05:32 PM on 02/15/2010

very true!

[TremoluxMan]

04:14 PM on 02/15/2010

Just show's how clueless and arrogant some writers are. Do they really think know one will notice? Even a Junior High School kid knows to at least rewrite a 'borrowed' report in their own words. How long could it take, a half hour for a column?

If you're going to be a thief, at least try to be clever.

[TremoluxMan]

04:18 PM on 02/15/2010

I should have proof read my own post. It should be 'shows', not 'show's' and 'no one' instead on 'know one'. That's what happens when you try to think too far ahead of your fingers.

[Jase84]

04:36 PM on 02/15/2010

Yep, I do it all the time :) I have dyslexia so that doesn't help.

[Uosdwis]

03:59 PM on 02/15/2010

What is this, the 80s? 90s?

[Frogfoot]

03:51 PM on 02/15/2010

Yawn, does anybody really care?

[VegetableMan]

05:33 PM on 02/15/2010

then why the FRICK did you click the link, read the piece (presumably) and then comment?