The plagiarism continues at WFMY. Here is a story with the byline "Written by John Wright," the highlighted portions are copied word for word from the original source, written by Robert Burns. It joins the ever growing list of WFMY's plagiarized articles here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.
Washington, DC -- The Pentagon's top lawyer has informed the former Navy SEAL who authored a forthcoming book describing details of the raid that killed Osama bin Laden that he violated agreements to not divulge military secrets and that as a result the Pentagon is considering taking legal action against him.
The general counsel of the Defense Department, Jeh Johnson, wrote in a letter transmitted to the author on Thursday that he had signed two nondisclosure agreements with the Navy in 2007 that obliged him to "never divulge" classified information. Johnson said that after reviewing a copy of the book, "No Easy Day," the Pentagon concluded that the author is in "material breach and violation" of the agreements.
Johnson said the department is considering pursuing against him "all remedies legally available to us."
How did WFMY come to put the name of one of its staff on an article written by someone else? The plagiarized author says they explained to her:
"[W]hen they were adding the attribution they meant to click on "gannett wire service" and accidently clicked on the next name which was hers, also starting with a g."
I don't believe them.
They got caught in what has become a standard practice of low professional standards at WFMY by someone they could not ignore this time and instead of owning up to it, lied. Doubt me? Take a look at the multiple other instances of WFMY's plagiarism that they neither acknowledged or corrected. Were these all "accidental" too?
(GREENSBORO, NC) Local bloggers Doug Clark and Sam Hieb have taken notice of Guilford College's increase in student health insurance rates, an increase Greg Bursavich, Vice President for Finance at the college explained:
“It is directly related – it is only related – to the new healthcare law,” said Bursavich. “There is no reason why it has gone up except the requirements of the new law have forced it to go up. That is the whole story.”
As Mr. Bursavich wrote in his letter to students announcing the increase, the new health insurance policies will indeed expand coverage to conform to the requirements of the Affordable Care Act—requirements such as no co-pays or deductibles for preventative care, no caps on essential services and a doubling of maximum coverage for other treatments.
The Act also mandates that insurance companies allow students to stay on their parents' health insurance through age 26, although Bursavich doesn't mention that in his letter.
Bursavich's explanation that the new health care law is the only reason for the increase—that it is the "whole story"—is remarkable when considered in the historical context of student health care insurance costs at Guilford College which have averaged a 42 percent yearly increase since the 2007/2008 academic year*.
If Mr. Bursovich is correct, that there is "no reason" rates have gone up except for the expanded coverage of the new health care law, that means the causes for the previous increases averaging 42 percent have been vanquished. Good news indeed.
(* Historical rates for student health insurance at Guilford College gathered from archived pages of the College's website: 2007/2008, 2008/2009, 2009/2010, 2010/2011.)
Too often, reporters simply write what they are told by people in authority and leave it at that. It's stenography or he said/she said when they are reporting "both sides" of the story. Some reporters are better than others at avoiding it. Still, it's a terrible and all too common shortcoming and one of the easiest to fix, with the greatest effect on credibility.
So on the heels of a big mistake in failing to align his reporting of the governor's race with the facts, it's nice to see News & Record reporter Travis Fain bring the facts to bear on this story about Libertarian vice [corrected] presidential candidate Jim Gray:
Questioned on this, he [Gray] acknowledged the Constitution requires presidential candidates to be 35.
“I sit corrected,” Gray said. “It’s the only mistake I’ve made on this campaign. I think it’s 32 to be a member of Congress.”
That is also incorrect. It’s 25 for the House and 30 for the Senate.
That's how we like it. Report what people say, sure, but then fact check them.
(GREENSBORO, NC) It's no small thing—North Carolina gubernatorial candidates' positions on expanding Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. Today, News & Record writer Travis Fain, reported this referring to candidates Pat McCrory and Walter Dalton:
Neither man has staked out a
position on Medicaid expansions that are part of the Obama
administration’s complex health-care overhaul.
I thought I remembered McCrory saying recently that he would reject the expansion.
Last Wednesday, Republican gubernatorial candidate Pat McCrory stated that if elected, he will join with his Republican counterparts in governor’s mansions across the country who have indicated that they will not go along with the fiscally reckless Medicaid expansion mandated by Obamacare. McCrory’s statement allies him with prominent conservative governors such as Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, Scott Walker of Wisconsin, Nikki Haley of South Carolina and others.
[T]he former Charlotte mayor
also said that, if elected, he would work with other governors and the
next president to repeal the Affordable Care Act and replace it with "a
more flexible system for each state."
Do you need to reach somebody who works for The City of Greensboro? Don't rely on the City's website. Whether you browse the staff directory alphabetically, search by name or choose to view "all," the directory is empty.
News & Record editorialist Doug Clark in wondering why, if privatized Medicare is good enough for federal employees, it shouldn't be considered for all of us:
And their health care plan contracts with private insurers, such as Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina.
Clark conflates Medicare, the public health care funding available to all retirees, which is not privatized for federal workers, and a health care plan offered to workers while they are employed, which is what he links to.
More interesting, in offering as an example of "pretty decent benefits" for government employees that Clark suggests should be available for the "rest of us," he links to a menu of available health care plans qualified for our state. I agree with Clark here, the rest of us should have this too, and will in 2014 under the Affordable Care Act.
After saying he doesn't want to get into a discussion about the privatization of Medicare and Social Security, News & Record editorialist Doug Clark does just that, with a factually incorrect premise:
I don't want to get into that
debate now. But I do want to point out the fact that federal employees —
whom everyone agrees get pretty decent benefits — have "privatized"
retirement and medical care plans.
Their Thrift Savings Plan, for example, offers options for investing funds in stocks and bonds instead of participating in Social Security.
The Thrift Savings Plans is not offered instead of participating in Social Security, it is in addition to it. From the source to which Clark links:
If you are covered by FERS, the TSP is one part of a three-part retirement package that also includes your FERS basic annuity and Social Security.
So, when Clark asks:
So if this approach works for millions of
federal workers and retired employees, why is it such a horror to
consider comparable options for the rest of us?
the answer is because the approach is not what he says it is. As Ayn Rand would say, check your premise. The Thrift Savings Plan, like other retirement plans offered by private employers and labor unions, is a supplement to Social Security, not a substitute.
Did you know that when you use the form on the City of Greensboro's website to send an email to your elected representatives, those emails are previewed by city staff and may also be forwarded to other parties at the discretion of staff? Your message will be delayed too, until the review has happened.
There is no indication of this on the contact form.
To avoid this, email council members directly (such emails still remain subject to disclosure under N.C. public records law):
Greensboro is a cliquish city where people are slow to let go of grudges formed by slights, real or imagined, against their cliques, so I'm afraid this very excellent idea for a non-profit grocery store to serve the food desert of east Greensboro will be handicapped because of who is suggesting it. But that doesn't mean it isn't a great idea.
When serving on the Greensboro City Council and arguing (successfully) for the elimination of red light cameras, now-state senator Don Vaughan cautioned against Greensboro becoming "a surveillance society."
How well have we heeded that warning?
There are at least 200 cameras in City parking garages alone. With cameras also in and on other city buildings, libraries and the coliseum, in parks and on public streets, inside and outside city buses and mounted to the front and rear of police cars, not to mention handheld, helmet mounted and maybe even airborne, it's not inconceivable that Greensboro citizens are being monitored by thousands of cameras, unaware as they simply go about their lives.
How many surveillance cameras does the City maintain? What are they watching? What are they doing with the information they collect? Are they also recording audio, recognizing faces, storing license plates? Who is watching and under what circumstances? Have these systems been deployed surreptitiously or have our elected representatives given their explicit approval?
Have we, the people, given our consent to the monitoring that is
underway? How could we have if we don't even know the extent of it?
I have made multiple requests for a variety of records from the City of Greensboro that would shed some light on this topic. So far, the City has refused to provide any records that would answer any of these questions. None.
The City will not even release a single video segment from the alleged downtown melee that occurred on July 4th of this year, even though the City Attorney initially said they should and the City Manager said they would and even though release of this video would greatly serve the public interest as the alleged event is being cited by City Councilor Zack Matheny as a reason to reconsider a downtown curfew and since no other visual records (oddly, in my opinion) are to be found on the Internet.
Crowdsource me. If I've missed some video or pictures of the July 4th event, please bring them to my attention in the comments. The only thing I could find was this interview with someone who says he was threatened with tear gas and describes:
"six or seven police kicking another guy... holding him on the ground kinda kicking him."
In the mean time, I wait for the City to adjust their response to my requests to conform with North Carolina public records law. I'll keep you posted.
Some of the most beautiful places I've been to in my life are the far southwestern parts of North Carolina. Specifically, the counties of Jackson, Macon, Swain, Cherokee and Graham. Graham County is home to the so-green-you'll-think-it's-not-real Lake Santeetlah.
It is also apparently home to some ignorant numbskulls who don't mind crapping their own beds.
Authorities have determined what was dumped into a creek that feeds Lake Santeeltah and who did it. From JDNews:
Leaders of a western North Carolina town blamed some of its workers
Friday for dumping sludge from its drinking water treatment plant near a
local creek instead of into the town's sewer system, causing a mess [Roch: and a fish kill] and
potential sanctions from the state.
Robbinsville town leaders said in a news release Friday they deeply
regretted what they called an improper discharge Wednesday in or near
Long Creek, which flows into Lake Santeetlah in Graham County. The state
Division of Water Quality estimated as much as 4,000 gallons of sludge
could have been deposited in a stormwater ditch that flows to the creek.
[UPDATE, Sept. 11, 2012: Welcome Romenesko readers. The example below is but one of many from WFMY, the latest, with an accompanying list of more than a dozen examples of plagiarism, can be found here.]
This article appears on the WFMY website under the byline "Written by Wendy Gatlin." It was not. It was copied nearly completely from this.
Here is the text of the article. The copied portions are highlighted. Notice that one thing not directly copied, the location, is wrong. Elon University School of Law is located in Greensboro, NC.
----------------
(Elon, NC) -- Elon University School of Law announced plans today to open an Elder Law Clinic that will begin serving clients in the school's fall 2012 semester. Law students participating in the Elder Law Clinic will provide free legal counsel and services, under the supervision of law faculty, to low- and moderate-income residents of Guilford County, ages 60 and above.
"The clinic will meet a significant need among low-income elderly residents in our region, while providing law students with important experience in the practice of law," said George R. Johnson, Jr., dean and professor of law at Elon University School of Law.
The clinic will focus on the civil legal issues of older adults, such as power of attorney, end of life planning, contract and consumer issues, housing, grandparent rights, Medicare and Medicaid, Social Security benefits, and Veterans benefits.
"The clinic will provide excellent educational opportunities for our law students by exposing them to a broad range of law and client circumstances," said Associate Professor of Law Margaret Kantlehner, who will direct the clinic.
The Elder Law Clinic will serve those with a monthly household income of $1,700 or less, if single, and $2,200 or less, if married. In Guilford County, low-income elders unable to afford private legal representation are served by the Legal Aid of North Carolina-Greensboro Office, which serves a six county area. The U.S. Census Bureau estimates that one in five Guilford County residents will be over age 60 by the year 2030. The Elder Law Clinic at Elon Law will help to meet a growing need for legal services within this demographic.
The Elder Law Clinic will begin considering new cases on August 15, 2012. Beginning August 15, please contact Clinic Practitioner-in-Residence, Hannah Vaughan, at (336) 279-9314 or elderlaw@elon.edu for more information.
Elon Law students also serve clients free of charge, under the supervision of faculty, through the law school's Humanitarian Immigration Law Clinic and Wills Drafting Clinic. Students have additional opportunities to engage in experiential learning through the law school's leadership program and externship program, which recently expanded through a partnership with The Washington Center to offer full-semester and summer legal externship opportunities in Washington, D.C.
