"Plagiarism, Sloppy Journalism or Both?" by Daniel Guss
Did a WeHoOnline writer “borrow creatively” from this column, copy and paste unique writing style quirks and still fail to grasp the subject?
I recently wrote several columns about LA City Council considering, this week, a ban on the use of certain intensifying words during the public comment period of its meetings.
On April 11th, I published one of them, "Harris-Dawson Celebrated Rap Lyrics on Official Gov't Social Media That He Wants to Ban at Its Meetings," in which I wrote the following:
On April 16th, WeHoOnline.com, a West Hollywood-centric publication, posted “LA Councilmember’s Push to Ban Offensive Language at Meetings Sparks Debate,” in which Brian Hibbard wrote:
Pretty dang coincidental, to some.
Pretty dang plagiaristic, to others.
According to the Harvard College Writing Program, this could more precisely be described as Mosaic Plagiarism:
Hibbard quoted others in his column, but not DanielGuss.Substack.com, so he understands the concept of proper citation. Perhaps he didn’t like my first, only and recent column referencing West Hollywood just a week earlier. Perhaps this was motivated something else.
At any rate, Hibbard also:
typed a space before and after the slash in “Zuma Dogg / Matt Dowd,” just as I did five days earlier, without referencing the context of their lawsuit, as I did
capitalized “YouParkLikeACunt.com,” exactly as I did five days earlier
rounded-up @YPLAC’s Twitter following to “over 32,000,” which I wrote as “more than 32,000” five days earlier.
That’s bad enough.
But bad can always get worse.
Like not knowing what the fuck he is writing about.
In my column, I questioned what LA City Council president Marqueece Harris-Dawson, MHD, “WILL” do when button-pushing gadflies find ways around his proposed word ban, particularly with “HOMOPHONIC WORDS.”
Meaning in the future, if and when the word-ban becomes a reality.
In Hibbard’s column, he incorrectly asserts that this has already taken place: “Some public commenters HAVE FOUND ways to circumvent potential bans by using HOMOPHONIC WORDS…”
No, they have not.
This was a hypothetical that I came-up with, in which gadflies might reference, for example, “YouParkLikeACunt.com” the next time that parking comes-up as an LA City Council agenda item.
This has not yet been done because there isn’t a word-ban for the gadflies to actually circumvent.
So how did Hibbard reach that conclusion?
Any ideas?
Hmmm?
And how did Hibbard draw his conclusion that “Attorney Wayne Spindler, known for defending public commenters…” is correct?
Spindler is an immigration attorney who actually uses the incendiary language himself, with no record of his defending anyone other than immigration clients in federal court.
If Hibbard claims that he meant it colloquially, it’s a stretch. But cool, man. Live your reality if that’s what this means.
Personally, I am embarrassed for Hibbard. Whether you believe that this is mosaic plagiarism, sloppy journalism, a series of wild coincidences — any combination of the three, or none of them at all — it’s just a bad look.
(Daniel Guss, MBA, won the LA Press Club’s “Online Journalist of the Year” and “Best Activism Journalism” awards in June ‘23. In June ‘24, he won its “Best Commentary, Non-Political” award. He has contributed to the Daily Mail, CityWatchLA, KFI AM-640, iHeartMedia, 790-KABC, Cumulus Media, KCRW 89.9 FM, KRLA 870 AM, Huffington Post, Los Angeles Daily News, Los Angeles Magazine, Movieline Magazine, Emmy Magazine, Los Angeles Business Journal, Pasadena Star-News, Los Angeles Downtown News and the Los Angeles Times in its sports, opinion, entertainment and Sunday Magazine sections among other publishers.)