<< 'NAM VET KNOWS TRUTH ~ MAIN ~ THE JERICHO EFFECT >>
RESPONSIBILITY TAKEN
Following last week’s item accusing Sun-Herald columnist Phil Gould of plagiarism, blundering Media Watch now publishes a retraction:
Correction: Phil Gould is not a plagiarist.
When the Sun Herald told us that this was a subbing error we didn’t believe them, but we were wrong.
Memo to Media Watch: not everybody is as difficult to believe as your own executive producer.
They’ve now provided documentation that shows that Phil Gould submitted his original article with the material from the web attributed to an email he received: so Phil did everything above board.
A practice that must be baffling to Media Watch, a smear-first, correct-later (if at all) cavalcade of graceless spite. Speaking of which ...
We remain amazed that the Sun Herald’s subs would remove that attribution, but the Sun Herald’s apparent plagiarism was entirely the responsibility of the paper’s subs and editors.
We remain amazed that Media Watch didn’t inform viewers that the Sun-Herald replaced the attribution within hours, which rather supported their sub-editing claim.
Just as our mistake is our responsibility.
And you’ve faced up to it ever so manfully! Giving Dave a mention tonight, Media Watchers?
UPDATE: “Being a former Media Watch host makes you a target whenever you stumble.”
I think it’s cruel of the ABC not to put masking tape on the balcony doors to prevent people walking into them.
Posted by Jim Geones on 2005 08 07 at 11:48 AM • permalinkThey’re amazed at a stupid sub? I’ve seen subs rewrite entire stories to say exactly the opposite of what it originally said, not only that it opposes reality. Leaving out an important line is worth a smack across the back of the head, not amazement.
There are some incredibly smart subs out there, there are also incredibly dumb ones.
Posted by Aging Gamer on 2005 08 07 at 12:42 PM • permalinkI just had a look at the Media Watch comments entry page and this was in the Your Say bit up the top right. MW is becoming an Islamic Q&A site!!
“abid khan is mistaken: Dear Abid Khan,
I suggest you read the ENTIRE surah 9 and tell us where I quoted out of context. I only quoted one verse but the entire surah does ....
—from Hisham Dawud”tthomas2: Good point! Here’s some other holders of honorary doctorates whom the media generally refuses to recognise as such:
Dr Cathy Freeman
Dr Rolf Harris
Dr Sir Joh Bjelke-Peterson (or is it Sir Dr?)
Dr Sultan of Brunei (Or is it Sultan Dr?)
Dr Yahoo Serious (no, really)
Dr Jeff Kennett
Dr John HowardIt must be stated, however, that Lois O’Donoghue has no fewer than _six_ honorary doctorates (Murdoch, UWA, UniSA, ANU, QUT and Flinders).
Source: Crikey.
So we should refer to her as Dr Dr Dr Dr Dr Dr O’Donoghue?
Posted by Evil Pundit on 2005 08 07 at 08:49 PM • permalinkIt must be stated, however, that Lois O’Donoghue has no fewer than _six_ honorary doctorates (Murdoch, UWA, UniSA, ANU, QUT and Flinders).
Does anyone else see the need for a program called ‘University Watch’?
Posted by blandwagon on 2005 08 07 at 09:13 PM • permalinkI have a friend with both an MD and a PhD. We call him Dr. Dr. Neal. I don’t know what his patients/clients call him.
Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2005 08 07 at 09:17 PM • permalinkOnce had to deal with an elderly koori lady who was being conveyor-belted through a PhD course. She wasn’t doing anything other than her family history - the sort of thing thousands of retired gubba mums and dads do all the time. She handed me a list of references that had obviously been prepared for her by someone else, and when I started to explain how she could look them up, she looked at me with genuine astonishment: “But aren’t you going to do it for me?” Needless to say, when she got her “PhD”, it was held up as an example of what kooris could achieve.
considering that hardly any article or commentary by David Marr doesn’t have some sort of error in it, it would probably smart for his protectors at media watch to have a go at marr over his whitey comments - if they are smart it will be in the chuckly silly section at the beginning, so it comes across as silly but harmless (which lets face it, in the scheme of things it is).
But think if the benefits for media watch - they could then claim to be balanced (look, we even had a go at David marr!) without ever really taking the great imaginator to task.Subject: Political Correctness/ABC Memo
TOWEL HEADS
Recently I received a warning about the use of this politically incorrect term, so please note, we all need to be more sensitive in our choice of words.
I have been informed that the Islamic terrorists who hate our guts and want to kill us do not like to be called “Towel Heads” since the item they wear on their heads is not a towel but actually a small, folded sheet.
Therefore, from this point forward, please refer to them as “Little Sheet Heads.”Thank you for your support and compliance on this delicate matter.
You don’t have to be a koori to have a shonky PhD. There all sorts of suss doctorates available in Oz, many from previously reputable unis. If you can play the piano you might qualify for a Doctorate of Creative Arts from Wollongong. And for $100,000, the University of QLD will give any GP a PhD in Skin Cancer Medicine - so you can run one of those shonky skin cancer clinnics without any specialist qualification.
Many years ago, I paid $10.00 for a mail-order Doctor of Theology degree from the Universal Life Church. Which I guess makes me as well-qualified an academic as Ward Churchill.
Posted by Bruce Lagasse on 2005 08 08 at 01:19 AM • permalinkCondoleeza Rice has an actual PhD, along with half a dozen honorary doctorates, and I rarely see her called ‘Dr. Rice.’
I’ve seen it in the Australian press and fairly frequently.
The convention is that registered general practitioners use the honorific ‘Doctor’ daily (although not having a Doctorate). Dentists and vets reckon they are entitled to this courtesy and insist on being so called as well.
In Australia and the UK surgeons pride themselves on being a ‘Mr’, to distinguish them from their hack-work brethren. Chiropractors most definitely do not qualify and they have at best, in Australia, a second-rate B. App. Sc. They are legally required to make it clear that they chiropractic doctors, not real doctors, so gullible consumers are not under the illusion they can diagnose or cure illness.
PhDs, both academic and honoris causa, should not use ‘Dr’ everyday. The Australian Government Publishing Service Style Manual states, “Post-nominals representing tertiary education qualifications are usually restricted to correspondence within the academic community or in correspondence where qualifications are cited as a warrant of expertness.
PhDs who didn’t get one through hard work should add ‘Honoris Causa’ to their post-nomimals so that their lower status and lack of expertness is clear.
Posted by walterplinge on 2005 08 08 at 05:40 AM • permalinkOMG they actually gave David Marr a serve but without the usual spite and venom. It was so sugar coated as to make it little more than a slap on the wrist.
Posted by Astonished on 2005 08 08 at 07:40 AM • permalink#22, Mr. Magoo - “Surely they were not serious to give a doctorate to Yahoo Serious?”
And don’t call me Shirley.
Posted by Bruce Lagasse on 2005 08 08 at 12:54 PM • permalinkFor a programme charged with maintaining quality in the media, their own quality control should be absolutely flawless. It’s not. Punctuation errors all over the place. Who types this stuff out, a monkey? Or is it the monkeys that pick the MW stories?
Posted by James Waterton on 2005 08 08 at 02:08 PM • permalinkslightly o/t
abc sunday profile August 7- monica attard v ray martin.(literally).
attard attempts to slice mild mannered ray into a sandwich loaf.
her"the vast GULF between A.C.A. and the 7.30 report”.Now monica it’s a little unkind to speak about your colleague red kerry like that.
“a.c.a. caught by mediawatch on chequebook journalism","the abc doesn’t do irresponsible journalism”.Ray fights back-says he spent 9 years at abc including four years on 4cnrs.Says people switch off abc.
Points out that denton’s interviews with renee rivkin were “highly selective” and against someone who was mentally ill.
attard-"well rivkin WAS a CONVICTED CRIMINAL”.(of course they should be saying the late renee rivkin).
AND ‘a.c.a. SPECIALIZES IN BLOOD IN THE WATER”.. and the abc don’t???????Great to see MW remaining topical and vibrant. Just had a squizz at the MW website and was quite shocked to see this little gem;
Quote of the day
“MEDIA WATCH is wrong, Media Watch knows that it is wrong, and Media Watch’s viewers know that Media Watch is wrong.”
- Tim Blair makes a fool of himself, May 2003Please note that this item is listed under “Quote of the day”. May 2003????? I find it hard to believe not one media identity said anything of note for over 2 years. Then again expecting MW to actually do some work is probably asking far too much.
I also fail to see how MW comes to the conclusion that Tim has somehow made “a fool of himself. Stating the bleeding obvious perhaps, but hardly making a fool of himself.
As for that smarmy bastard David Marr, does anyone else agree that he has an extremely punchworthy face?
Posted by TruthHandler on 2005 08 11 at 01:42 AM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
apparent plagiarism
er, no, their ‘editing mistake’.
but it sounds so much more sexy to keep slinging ‘plagiarism’ about.
“Frank Sinatra’s apparent murder at age 82 following eight decades of intensive boozing turned out to be a simple case of a death that was entirely the responsibility of that boozing”