This article has since been retracted because it does not adhere to The Daily Californian’s policy. Please see the editor’s note posted on the Editors’ Blog for more information.
If you have any questions or concerns please email me at [email protected].
— Stephanie Baer,
Editor in Chief & President
The Daily Californian
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.
Reposting deleted comment from Enraged:
ARE YOU GUYS SERIOUS!? You are associating this poor girl with who seems
like she has very little prior journalistic experience who YOUR editors
failed to properly train (as Sink and Swim said below, why aren’t you
teaching new hires the ethics of journalist from the get-go anyways? I
bet you MOST average people don’t even know what on earth
“self-plagiarism” even is! I certainly didn’t until now -I think I could
have committed the same mistake if I were in the author’s shoes.
Shouldn’t this be standard protocol if, as you application site states,
you also are willing to hire people with no experience???) with
something that could very well damn her future employment-wise:
plagiarism, and self-plagiarism. As readers wrote on your Facebook page,
I don’t think you have that right.
The only thing you have the right to write is that she unintentionally
breached your policies and thus journalist etiquette, or even ethics; it
was a mistake made by somebody you could barely call a journalist, as
she hasn’t even been trained properly to be one nor given the time to
learn how to be one. At the very, very least, you should be emphasizing
this was not intentional on her part – did you even read her article!?
It was about ethics in the media in the first place! Clearly this girl
was just trying to help people and spread some transparency in the
media, but now you are accusing her of being fraudulent whether you
wished to or not by throwing around such loaded terms like “plagiarism”
and “self-plagiarism”.
You know what’s more unethical in this situation? Your editors
brandishing the word “plagiarism” from the get-go, letting her go so
harshly and now forever embellishing her with a word that could doom her
financial prospects in an already poor economy. Really, The Daily Cal?
You call this “punishment”!? I think a lot of us would agree that this
is just cruelty. I encourage the author to take this to
higher-ups and fight this case.
Way to go on being accountable to your readers and “ethical”. You’re
just showing yourselves to be irresponsible, unethical, cruel editors
who, like Sink and Swim said below, is “putting it off on the
little-guy.” Who are you doing this for anyways? It doesn’t sound like
you fired this girl for “your readers”, because your readers are enraged
with what you’ve done. No, it sounds like you’re doing this to maintain
your own image. Now watch as you ruin it.
I’m no longer reading this newspaper.
Reposting deleted comment from Is the author OK?
:
I
really hope the author is doing OK, and that somebody
has reached out to her. She did mention in her article she’d “overcome
an eating disorder” which is incredibly brave and difficult to publicly
announce, and then to receive a harsh backlash like this must be
traumatizing in itself. I hope if the author is reading this, that you
are alright and know most people here support you 100%. Don’t give up on
your dreams, you are still a wonderful writer who has overcome so much
already. Please take care of yourself.
And to you, Ms. Baer: As far as I’m concerned, this girl’s strength,
transparency, and authenticity as demonstrate in her article is truly
admirable, rare traits to find in people nowadays, and the fact I
haven’t seen a single comment from her publicly on this issue speaks to
me of a dignity and class your staff could learn from. Not only is the
girl’s future at stake because of the newspaper’s improper handling of
this situation, so is her mental health, something you should have also
been aware of as she was public about having an eating disorder history.
You are dealing with somebody’s life here, and you should have shown
more sensitivity and responsibility.
Ms. Baer, you should have not so hastily and cruelly handed this; you
should have at least waited a few days and spoken to your entire
editorial board, which I doubt you did given how quickly you posted this
letter.
Also, is anybody else annoyed at how most of the readers seem to
disapprove of 1) associating plagiarism with this poor girl and this
note and 2) disposing of her, and yet, the editor hasn’t bothered to
respond to such overwhelming criticism and response? Yeah, so much for
“being accountable to the readers”, you’re not even listening to us.
You guys are pretty amazing. I read the article. It was pretty good. I also read a recent piece on Israel from a writer who went on Birthright. I’m upset with the former because it seems the editors are not doing their jobs. Can you please tell me why you didn’t do your own research before the article was posted, and even though you are the editor, a READER pointed it out? Secondly, why didn’t you guys train her? I would assume in the world of everyday publishing, one thing you would instill would be the dangers of “self-plagiarism” instead of letting someone jump in the water without teaching them how to swim thereafter.
Also, why is “self plagiarism” unacceptable…but slander is not. Do you know what Birthright is? Would one of your columnists be allowed to write an article, based off their one visit to China, or Africa, and publish an article about “why chinese or blacks hate [insert group here]?” Nope. But it’s okay with painting Israel as if Israelis, Jews, or Birthright patrons are Islamic hating bigots? I am sorry but that is not opinion–that is slander.
How dare you condemn this women for using her own material, about a real issue, but allow a narrow-minded individual to paint an entire race of people, or an organization as hateful based off his ONE experience. Something is really wrong with this and I’m going to spread the message to Jewish community at Cal try to get some answers. Great job, editors. Way to lose track of accountability and respectable journalism. I don’t know what’s going on up there but somebody needs to take some responsibility instead of putting it off on the little-guy.
I don’t understand. The message is still authentic and original
weather it was from a former post or not. Is all this dram really
wanted or necessary? It looks like this is her first post so assuming
she’s new? Perhaps a little understanding that the author is most
likely still learning the rules of the game; the writing was still
powerful and hit me in a way that screams “finally! Someone is writing
about this!”
Most of the preceding comments are just vile trolls, it seems, who are
bored with their lives and suddenly have something to focus on (in one
case, someone went to another column in the newspaper and wrote about
this same author in a targeted and venomous manner–what purpose does
that serve except that they are simply trying to spread drama?). Some
of these comments/readers (such as that example) are acting like
children hitting a pinata without a blind-fold: swinging, foaming at
the mouth to draw blood with some weird and wild motive in mind.
So, this is the audience that the Daily Cal attracts?
No wonder I am
getting Daily Cal employees in class and on Sproul asking me to sign a
voluntary one-dollar increase in tuition to fund the paper. Grow up,
all of you.
I couldn’t agree more. Self-plagerism? If the message is from the same person, and one venue differs from another. I think that’s catalyzing a message. Who readins a little whatever that blog is, like three people? The message is important, and needs a bigger venue. Way to take it down, Cal… Ironic that a post about self-image issues and is ruined because Cal is worried about their online-image. Way to think that one through, guys. I say let the message stand, just add a citing so that it’s proper.
well said
Okay, I don’t understand. The message is still authentic and original weather it was from a former post or not. Is all this dram really wanted or necessary? It looks like this is her first post so assuming she’s new? Perhaps a little understanding that the author is most likely still learning the rules of the game; the writing was still powerful and hit me in a way that screams “finally! Someone is writing about this!”
Most of the preceding comments are just vile trolls, it seems, who are bored with their lives and suddenly have something to focus on (in one case, someone went to another column in the newspaper and wrote about this same author in a targeted and venomous manner–what purpose does that serve except that they are simply trying to spread drama?). Some of these comments/readers (such as that example) are acting like children hitting a pinata without a blind-fold: swinging, foaming at the mouth to draw blood with some weird and wild motive in mind.
So, this is the audience that the Daily Cal attracts? No wonder I am getting Daily Cal employees in class and on Sproul asking me to “sign a petition for a voluntary one-dollar increase in tuition to fund the paper.” Grow up, all of you.
Signed: Seriously Annoyed
Sheena’s comment (before the whole “self-plagiarism ruckus) was censored by the Daily Cal editors. Here’s the text of it:
“Thanks for the comments, guys. As far as I can see, the contrast and
brightness settings have been tweaked with to make my face stand out,
not for cosmetic reasons. This is my first piece for The Daily Cal.so I
was not aware our mugs are altered even a little bit beforehand, but if I
was, I’d have certainly posted something. Take this, then, as my
disclaimer. =) – Sheena”
Signed,
Do Not Censor
Ooohhhhhh shit. Opinion editors done f**ked up now
J.D. Morris
Opinion Editor
[email protected]
http://www.dailycal.org/about/
professional of you
I seem to have a fan who is posing as me.
The concept of “self-plagiarism” seems a bit unclear. Was this person recycling material that was effectively licensed to another publication?
Why is this article almost a word-for-word copy and paste from http://www.adiosbarbie.com/2012/06/you-look-so-much-different-on-facebook/?
These articles have the same author…
(Reposting this comment again since it was censored by the Daily Cal after I posted it a few minutes ago.)
I noticed that the articles had the same author. But that the article was first posted in a blog post in December 2011, reposted by adiosbarbie in June 2012, and copy and pasted to here smacks of laziness.
At the very least, this article should have had an editor’s note saying that this was originally published by The Adios Barbie website. The failure to do so is indicative of poor journalism.
And shouldn’t the Daily Cal be producing original content? No wonder she’s the Wednesday online columnist rather than the Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, and Friday print columnists.
Thank you, Editor Stephanie Baer for:
This article has since been retracted due to an instance of
self-plagiarism. We are currently investigating how this occurred and
will publish an editor’s note in regard to the situation.
The Daily Californian does not tolerate plagiarism or self-plagiarism
in any form and holds itself to the highest standards of journalistic
integrity.
If you have any questions or concerns please email me at [email protected].
— Stephanie Baer,
Editor in Chief & President
The Daily Californian
Please also post an editor’s note about why Daily Cal contributors aren’t allowed to post in the comments section (see discussion below). There is a lack of transparency about why we the readers aren’t allowed to engage in public discussion with the writers and columnists.
Thank you for your consideration.
That is interesting. She posted this article on that blog back in November 2011.
Great article! I feel this pressure everyday too. I’m so glad that this issue is getting increased media attention, whether it’s Seventeen’s recent decision to stop digitally altering models to Jennifer Newsom’s Miss Representation documentary.
Thanks for the article and the link to the MSNBC article on Facebook and depression. I have tended to think that Facebook acted more as a way for teens to gain self esteem, especially among women. As I look at photos my female friends post, there are always a number of comments from their friends about how beautiful they look in every picture. I never see negative comments about the pictures.
At the very least, we could write captions underneath our photos to say whether or not they have been altered.
Has your photo for this column been altered?
Yeah, it’s a bit hypocritical to say that and not provide a caption for her own picture.
I guess it’s “do as I say, but not as I do.”
Thanks for the comments, guys. As far as I can see, the contrast and brightness settings have been tweaked with to make my face stand out, not for cosmetic reasons. This is my first piece for The Daily Cal.so I was not aware our mugs are altered even a little bit beforehand, but if I was, I’d have certainly posted something. Take this, then, as my disclaimer. =) – Sheena
The irony is that hobbyist and professional photographers automatically apply lighting and enhancement techniques to make your photo more spectacular, so amateurs at home using a cheap camera can never compare. You are very photogenic and I don’t see why you ever felt the need to Photoshop your pictures. Perhaps you wanted to look more like skinny European models? Or maybe you wanted to look more like Ashrawi Rai or Amy Jackson? When you help other young women overcome their eating disorders you should bring along a laptop and demonstrate how easy it is to digitally enhance a photograph so that those women would stop starving themselves to look like magazine fashion models.
Thanks for the article. It is so nice to see someone writing about something that will help students.
Why the fuck was the above comment deleted? The level of censorship on this website is disgusting.
The post was deleted, because Daily Cal writers are not allowed to post in the discussion section. I thought you might get away with it, but I guess not.
Lol, the Daily Cal sure likes censoring its staff and the comments on its forum. I don’t see this rule publicized anywhere. It’s unfortunate they can’t be more transparent about it because I’d like to know why they enjoy trampling upon the First Amendment rights of their VOLUNTEER writers.
I’d understand if they don’t want the journalists to reply to posters because that might compromise their journalistic neutrality but that’s clearly not the case for columnists.
The censoring editors are pathetic.
It is too bad they took down the article now. It was a good article.
Thanks for the about link.
But it still doesn’t explain WHY they prohibit comments from their VOLUNTEER writers. I really hope Editor Stephanie Baer will shed light on this for the sake of transparency.
I also LOL at the uneven-handedness of their censorship. S.C.Woolf’s made a lot of comments on Daily Cal and hasn’t had all his posts censored. I guess it’s because S.C.Woolf’s a member of the Editorial Board and the rules don’t apply to him. The double standards and lack of transparency here are amusing.
The removal was ridiculous. Here’s the text of Sheena’s removed post:
“Thanks for the comments, guys. As far as I can see, the contrast and
brightness settings have been tweaked with to make my face stand out,
not for cosmetic reasons. This is my first piece for The Daily Cal.so I
was not aware our mugs are altered even a little bit beforehand, but if I
was, I’d have certainly posted something. Take this, then, as my
disclaimer. =) – Sheena”
Signed,
Do Not Censor
(replying to you because I can’t reply to the deleted comment)
Deleted comment from Do Not Censor:
The author’s comment (before the whole “self-plagiarism” ruckus) was censored by the Daily Cal editors. Here’s the text of it:
“Thanks for the comments, guys. As far as I can see, the contrast and brightness settings have been tweaked with to make my face stand out, not for cosmetic reasons. This is my first piece for The Daily Cal.so I was not aware our mugs are altered even a little bit beforehand, but if I was, I’d have certainly posted something. Take this, then, as my disclaimer. =) – the author”
Signed,
Do Not Censor