Co-Authored

by

Füsun Atalay  &  Kit Duncan

Plagiarism has been defined in so many different and subtle ways that it is only natural, especially for a novice writer, to understand exactly what it is, or whether s/he is consciously plagiarizing. Committing plagiarism is a serious act and, despite all the variations of its definitions, it can be avoided by adopting and following a few basic guidelines.

In a handout distributed by the University of North Carolina's Writing Center, plagiarism is defined as "the deliberate or reckless representation of another's words, thoughts, or ideas as one's own without attribution in connection with submission of academic work, whether graded or otherwise."

Most of us who contribute to Open Salon know this. Many also know that, as in every professional field, some ideas are considered to be "common knowledge." But what if you are writing about a topic which you do not know much and are learning as you go along? If you did not know the information before you wrote it then that information was not common knowledge to you. In that case, you must acknowledge the source(s) where you found it.

Sometimes we inadvertently tend to make notes as we go along and then paraphrase someone else's ideas into our own words. Remember that paraphrasing by merely changing a couple of words here and there, or rearranging the sentence structure in your own way, does not save you from plagiarism.

The best way to be sure that you have not infringed on any intellectual property or copyright nor be accused of stealing something that is not your own work is to accredit it at the beginning of your work by stating the source(s) from which it comes, or you were inspired.

Now, a simple Plagiarism 101 such as this hopefully will not be taken as an affrontery to the esteemed writers of Open Salon, who already know and practice the rules. It is not meant for them anyway. This is a general post for anyone who wishes to read and keep for future reference. It is written in the spirit of preventing any future singling out of individuals, or finger pointing to ridicule decent contributors whose contributions are read and enjoyed by many; or create divisions on Open Salon where people come with the hope of finding a heaven for writing and getting constructive feedback, rather than being singled out, kicked around, demanded apologies, and ostracised for them because they are not long enough in word count.

A writer is someone who writes. Period.

A blogger is someone who is writing, using the blog as a forum for posting what he or she has written. Period.

Everyone who blogs on OS is writing. All bloggers on OS are writers. Period.

There are as many different styles of writing as there are individuals who write. Most of us, from time to time, post blogs with typos, grammatical errors, misspellings. Sometimes we post opinions with which others disagree. Sometimes we inadvertently (or perhaps even deliberately) post misinformation. Sometimes we fail to communicate ourselves with the clarity we had hoped.

And sometimes we do not give appropriate credit where credit is due.

Some folks call this plagiarism. Perhaps it is. But there is a world of difference between someone who deliberately passes off someone else’s work as his/her own, and someone who simply doesn’t take the time to include the sources.

When we stumble, either in our writing or in other areas of our life, most of us would prefer to learn rather than mire about in ignorance. Most of us do not learn well when we are getting slapped upside the head, kicked in the gut, called names, or in any way treated in an inhumane manner. Most of us do not learn well when we are publicly reviled or ridiculed.

If we feel we must respond to someone’s postings, let us be humane about it. If they refuse to follow our recommendations, let us be gracious.

When you post blogs or comments, do so with several questions in mind. What would Mom think of me if she read what I wrote? What would my children and grandchildren think of me if they read what I wrote? And finally, what do I think of myself when I read what I wrote?

In conclusion, let us all remember what M Chariot wrote in his stellar post about WRATH:

"Wrath automatically focuses on the most negative interpretation of events; it trades in contempt, sneers at hope. Confronted with innocence, the wrathful respond with sarcasm. Dialogue? Wrath shouts louder so as to drown it out. The wrathful embrace the uncompromising attitude that you "Go Fuck Yourself". Wrath incites mobs and underlines the motivation to pointless - and endless – war."

Peace to all.