The Boston Herald was whacked today with two separate accusations of lifting material from other publications without giving credit.
In the stranger of the two incidents, the Huffington Post reveals that the Inside Track (barely) rewrote an Editor & Publisher item about — yes! — plagiarism. Trackster Gayle Fee says she was in a rush and concedes that she should have credited E&P. The item appears to have been removed from the Herald’s Web site. (Via Romenesko.)
Also today, the Weekly Dig has documented some close similarities between a Herald story on people who answer their cell phones even when they’re not ringing and a New York Times story on the same subject. London’s Daily Telegraph appears to have been a source, too.
Meanwhile, Herald publisher Pat Purcell tells the Boston Business Journal that he hasn’t ruled out free distribution (although he’s skeptical), and that he’d love to outsource his printing so that he no longer has to rely on presses that are, in some cases, 50 years old.
Discover more from Media Nation
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
This stuff only counts if it’s in the Globe. The Inside Track: a no harm no foul deal.
Worse, the Herald repeated an error in the Daily Telegraph story.Both papers quoted someone from California’s School of Professional Psychology. It’s actually called the California School of Professional Psychology — without the ‘s. California is part of the school’s formal name.
Can you imagine how little news and how much advertising there would be in a free paper? You’d have to buy a parrot. . . .
Can’t tell you how doozied I am by the Weekly Dig’s coverage of the Dem convention in Worcester. What some reporters ate for lunch. What some goon’s T-shirt said. Hey, a pol looked like a loon on the stage. What insight. What cogency. What snark. And all of it a full week later! How would we get through the week without the Weekly Dig’s week’s worth of digging into deekly wiggery. Those guys over there, they are some hip and snarky guys. Old media, look out. there are some new sheriffs in this town.
Before the formal sharing agreement between the Herald and CNC was formed, you would often see MetroWest stories rerun in the Herald with a Herald reporter’s byline. Of course, the article had its fat trimmed to fit into the space allowed. But same story, same quotes.
If this sort of stuff happened with the Globe, the cheap shots from Wingo Square would be flying fast. Can we just can the crap about how fortunate Boston is to have two newspapers blah blah blah and face the fact that the Herald is a lousy paper run by third-rate journalists? And stop the inane excuse-making as if the Herald’s obvious foundering will somehow be turned around if we call it a feisty tabloid?
Reader — Although I certainly don’t want the Herald to go away, your point about different standards is right on target. The Herald would be going ballistic if anything like either one of these incidents had happened at the Globe.
Forget the Herald. Why are both the Globe and Phoenix ignoring this story?
The Globe covered it in Living/Arts on Thursday.
RE:”Reader’s” quote: “…..Herald is a lousy paper run by third-rate journalists”…Please visit the Herald and see the multitude of awards lining the halls. Please visit a family that has been touched by city violence and ask them how important the Herald’s coverage is. Heck, please check out my “third rate” photos on my website pictureboston.comProud to be at 1 Herald Square
The only thing phonier than journalism awards wears a beard and a red suit. True, The Herald runs a lot of quick and dirty formula stories kicking the stuffing out of criminals. But they can’t even turn it into a halfway decent crusade. Good fotos should be a tabloid stock-in-trade. Graphics should be as well, but the Herald graphics are silly and rather tired. Today the paper has even gone to the tired old milk carton routine (and when was the last time you saw a milk carton?)
I find that journalism awards vary. When I don’t win, they’re phony and meaningless. But when I do, the judges invariably represent the pinnacle of sagaciousness. I’m sure that Mark agrees!
The Dig’s story looked to me like the Herald, the Times and the Telegraph just (and I mean just) rewrote a press release, something all too common at all levels of journalism these days I’m sad to say