By Red Pill  |  01-15-2018   News
Photo credit: @nymtwit | Twitter

A writer for the liberal hack-job media outlet “Daily Beast” has been caught red-handed engaging in plagiarism in a scandal that's sure to rock the website and damage their credibility as well as being scrutinized under past articles by the brand.

As a well-known name for the Daily Beast, Lizzie Crocker, has now had her work scrutinized and placed under the spotlight as a result of the accusations laid against her by social media users after New York Times writer Thomas Chatterton Williams sent out a tweet recognizing the plagiarism committed by Crocker where she had copied the work of The Weekly Standard writer Alice Lloyd.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">This whole harpers/roiphe controversy is exposing all kinds of problems in contemporary journalism. i&#39;m reading <a href="https://twitter.com/nymtwit?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nymtwit</a>&#39;s <a href="https://twitter.com/thedailybeast?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@thedailybeast</a> piece jan 12 piece and she just straight up copy and pasted (in red) <a href="https://twitter.com/aliceblloyd?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@aliceblloyd</a>&#39;s exact wording in a Jan 11 piece in the <a href="https://twitter.com/weeklystandard?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@weeklystandard</a>. <a href="https://t.co/qbYMQ4eKDM">pic.twitter.com/qbYMQ4eKDM</a></p>&mdash; Thomas Chatterton Williams (@thomaschattwill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thomaschattwill/status/952240164956524545?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 13, 2018</a></blockquote>

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

As shocking as it may be for many of Lizzie Crocker’s co-workers to accept such an outright theft of another author’s work, there is very little doubt by looking at the pages which are completely identical to one another.

There's a complete comparison of the two author’s pages side-by-side and it's undeniable. Sure, there's a chance of having some similarities in a paragraph especially when describing a specific event, but this is outright theft of Alice Lloyd's beautifully written story.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">this is actually incredible. had to step away and returned to the article to see another graph lifted entirely word for word. am i missing something? does the <a href="https://twitter.com/thedailybeast?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@thedailybeast</a> have a content licensing deal with the <a href="https://twitter.com/weeklystandard?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@weeklystandard</a>? <a href="https://t.co/NaUycpnTRf">pic.twitter.com/NaUycpnTRf</a></p>&mdash; Thomas Chatterton Williams (@thomaschattwill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thomaschattwill/status/952268736739921920?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 13, 2018</a></blockquote>

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

It's really not about political preference either, this boils down to integrity or lack thereof, and the fact that Lizzie Crocker was caught.

I also find it even more so amazing that she believed she'd get away with this to begin with while working for a high profile website.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">the entirety of the rest of the <a href="https://twitter.com/weeklystandard?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@weeklystandard</a> piece is lifted after that. it takes time to write things. and to think up your own turns of phrase/construct an argument.</p>&mdash; Thomas Chatterton Williams (@thomaschattwill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thomaschattwill/status/952278300759674880?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 13, 2018</a></blockquote>

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Reading the thread from Thomas Chatterton was actually meaningful in the sense that when he outed Lizzie Crocker in defense of Alice Lloyd he did so with class and integrity.

Reports from <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/14/daily-beast-reporter-resigns-after-blatantly-plagiarizing-article/"> The Daily Caller</a> suggest that Crocker has since offered her resignation, and it was indeed accepted.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Hypothesis: <a href="https://twitter.com/nymtwit?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nymtwit</a> felt free to copy <a href="https://twitter.com/aliceblloyd?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@aliceblloyd</a> bc she could safely assume few readers look across ideological lines, a <a href="https://twitter.com/thedailybeast?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@thedailybeast</a> reader is unlikely to check the <a href="https://twitter.com/weeklystandard?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@weeklystandard</a>. All stay hunkered down, but the irony is that the same exact piece can work in either venue!</p>&mdash; Thomas Chatterton Williams (@thomaschattwill) <a href="https://twitter.com/thomaschattwill/status/952539652346564609?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 14, 2018</a></blockquote>

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Daily Beast editor in Chief John Avlon gave a statement on the matter to the DC in which underscored these facts and essentially denounced the actions of Crocker saying the following:

"As The Daily Beast’s Code of Ethics and Standards makes clear, and our newsroom understands, plagiarism is unacceptable. When we became aware of this incident on Saturday, we took swift and decisive action to verify the extent of the plagiarism, and deleted the article with an editor's’ note. Lizzie Crocker has offered to resign and her resignation was accepted," Avlon said of the matter..

“A larger investigation of her work at The Beast has revealed no other incidents of plagiarism. But one incident is enough. Though this was a difficult decision, we take plagiarism seriously, and will not allow the hard-earned trust we’ve built with our millions of loyal readers to be compromised,” Avlon said in closing.

John Avlon is correct here in the sense that you simply cannot allow your writers to behave in this manner. It's poignantly unethical first of all and second, it's unprofessional.

Plagiarism is considered as being both academic dishonesty and a breach of journalistic ethics.

Typically in a place of employment and academia, for example, it is subject to various potential sanctions like penalties, suspension, and even expulsion from your position.

Plagiarism is not in itself a crime, except in specific states, for specific purposes. It can constitute copyright infringement that leads to a potential lawsuit from the person or persons who had their work plagiarized.

Furthermore, it's embarrassing to the company you work for, and completely ruins the reputation of the person responsible for the absolute disregard of another person's effort and hard work.

For those who don't understand, plagiarism is a big deal in both written communication, media, news, literature, journalism and all forms of writing in general.

<strong><span style="color:red;">Tips? Info? Send me a message!</span></strong>

—<i>[email protected]</i>

<i>Follow Me On Twitter:</i>

<a href="https://www.twitter.com/IWillRedPillYou">@IWillRedPillYou</a>

Share this article
Thoughts on the above story? Comment below!
2 Comment/s


Anonymous No. 16140 1516009630

Thanks for covering this. That's so wrong of them. Red Pill we love you. You're the best writer that we've ever seen in the modern media and you're always fast to report way before the mainstream media. Thank you!

Maggie Moon No. 16146 1516016771

I love reading the articles you write. You never miss a beat on anything! When I'm reading your articles, I feel as though I'm in that article because you bring it to life! You are very talented.

What do you think about this article?
Name
Comment *
Image