If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Jane Goodall tramps all over the rights of other authors, plagiarizes bits of their work for her own book   (nytimes.com) divider line 50
    More: Interesting, Jane Goodall  
•       •       •

6811 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Mar 2013 at 8:46 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



50 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-03-21 07:48:20 AM
Heh, nice.
 
2013-03-21 07:49:22 AM
Nice, subby:

bonvito.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-03-21 08:23:19 AM
Do Not Taunt Monkey Author
 
2013-03-21 08:37:09 AM
Jane see, Jane do.
 
2013-03-21 08:50:16 AM
Well that's just bananas
 
2013-03-21 08:56:28 AM
She's the silverback of authors, it's her right.
 
2013-03-21 09:00:41 AM
www.time.com
Hmmmm
 
2013-03-21 09:03:18 AM
Is that example really plagiarism?
 
2013-03-21 09:08:43 AM
I hope to one day be popular enlightened that the press uses the word "borrowed "when they catch me ripping off someone else's work.
 
2013-03-21 09:10:39 AM
Not the first person to make money by apeing the works of others.
 
2013-03-21 09:14:33 AM

dittybopper: Nice, subby:

[bonvito.files.wordpress.com image 278x375]


Y'know, I once got a headline greened involving a reference to "that Jane Goodall tramp", and the one person in existence who hadn't seen that Far Side cartoon took offense to her being called a tramp.
 
2013-03-21 09:17:08 AM
Jane you ignorant slut.
 
2013-03-21 09:19:21 AM
There was actually a discussion of this cartoon in Gary Larson's autobiographical information in one of his collection books.   The institute relayed to him that Jane Goodall was upset by the characterization and threatened action.   Larson said that a personal friend said the protest "didn't sound like the Jane Goodall he knew."   Turns out, Jane hadn't been behind it, found it hilarious and even wrote a preface to one of the subsequent Far Side collections.
 
2013-03-21 09:20:30 AM
Came for the Far Side pic, leaving satisfied!
 
2013-03-21 09:21:48 AM
Think she ever really farked a monkey?
 
2013-03-21 09:23:36 AM
Jane Goodall gave me pinkeye.

She's an asshole.
 
2013-03-21 09:25:14 AM

SwiftFox: Is that example really plagiarism?


Yes it is. Especially because it was most likely copied and pasted, with minimal effort to change the wording, and no attribution. Copying and pasting is inexcusable laziness from any person who sells themselves as a scientist.
 
2013-03-21 09:27:57 AM

FirstNationalBastard: dittybopper: Nice, subby:

[bonvito.files.wordpress.com image 278x375]

Y'know, I once got a headline greened involving a reference to "that Jane Goodall tramp", and the one person in existence who hadn't seen that Far Side cartoon took offense to her being called a tramp.


Well, her own people threatened litigation against Gary Larson when it first hit papers.

/She thought it was funny and would later sell it on a t-shirt to raise money
 
2013-03-21 09:29:24 AM

rnatalie: There was actually a discussion of this cartoon in Gary Larson's autobiographical information in one of his collection books.   The institute relayed to him that Jane Goodall was upset by the characterization and threatened action.   Larson said that a personal friend said the protest "didn't sound like the Jane Goodall he knew."   Turns out, Jane hadn't been behind it, found it hilarious and even wrote a preface to one of the subsequent Far Side collections.


Yeah, and she explains the whole kerfluffle in a very dignified and yet humorous way.
 
2013-03-21 09:30:05 AM

almejita: Think she ever really farked a monkey?


www.myhero.com

/Cue the Barry White tunes
 
2013-03-21 09:46:27 AM
Is that example really plagiarism?
 
2013-03-21 09:47:31 AM
Monkey see, monkey do?
 
2013-03-21 09:48:49 AM
Funny how it is now "borrowing" not plagiarism.
 
2013-03-21 09:51:02 AM

FirstNationalBastard: dittybopper: Nice, subby:

[bonvito.files.wordpress.com image 278x375]

Y'know, I once got a headline greened involving a reference to "that Jane Goodall tramp", and the one person in existence who hadn't seen that Far Side cartoon took offense to her being called a tramp.


Because calling a woman a tramp on Fark is soooo cool and edgy.

It is still offensive even in Larson said it too.
 
2013-03-21 09:51:34 AM
Off Wiki, "Plagiarism is the "wrongful appropriation" and "purloining and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions," and the representation of them as one's own original work."

So yes, it's plagiarism, but it's relatively mild.
 
2013-03-21 09:51:53 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: FirstNationalBastard: dittybopper: Nice, subby:

[bonvito.files.wordpress.com image 278x375]

Y'know, I once got a headline greened involving a reference to "that Jane Goodall tramp", and the one person in existence who hadn't seen that Far Side cartoon took offense to her being called a tramp.

Because calling a woman a tramp on Fark is soooo cool and edgy.

It is still offensive even in Larson said it too.


I don't think you're quite getting the joke...
 
2013-03-21 09:52:22 AM

Triptolemus: SwiftFox: Is that example really plagiarism?

Yes it is. Especially because it was most likely copied and pasted, with minimal effort to change the wording, and no attribution. Copying and pasting is inexcusable laziness from any person who sells themselves as a scientist.


In the example given, I'm really not convinced it's plagiarism. Plagiarism isn't a question of laziness: it's a question of theft.

I'm not sure there's a requirement to cite a source for Every Damned Thing. The example given just looks like a flat fact to me.
 
2013-03-21 09:54:20 AM
Yo, it's okay everyone... her version had an extra "click" in it...

i2.ytimg.com
 
2013-03-21 09:55:59 AM
I was going to write a book called "The". The only word in it would be the word 'the'. Then, I would sue everyone for plagiarizing my work. Then I sobered up. In retrospect, I don't think it was such a great idea. Sobering up, I mean.
 
2013-03-21 09:57:03 AM

Yomoxu: Off Wiki, "Plagiarism is the "wrongful appropriation" and "purloining and publication" of another author's "language, thoughts, ideas, or expressions," and the representation of them as one's own original work."

So yes, it's plagiarism, but it's relatively mild.



1. On the 'expressions' point - if someone else has said or written that "On Tuesday 12 March 2013, it was raining in Seattle" -- does that mean another couldn't use that phrasing?

2. On the 'representation' point -- is Goodall, do you think, asserting that the job of tracking down the truth value of the example given was her own?
 
2013-03-21 09:58:08 AM

FirstNationalBastard: Y'know, I once got a headline greened involving a reference to "that Jane Goodall tramp", and the one person in existence who hadn't seen that Far Side cartoon took offense to her being called a tramp.


As did the Jane Goodall Foundation, who threatened to sue Gary Larson. That was without her knowledge; when she saw the cartoon she slapped them down, and put it on foundation T-shirts. Style.
 
2013-03-21 10:01:44 AM

tenpoundsofcheese: It is still offensive even in Larson said it too.


Jane Goodall herself didn't think so, so what right do you have to speak for her?
 
2013-03-21 10:02:11 AM
 
2013-03-21 10:09:42 AM
images.cheezburger.com
...seems even the cheezburger crowd has seen that FS cartoon

/get a lot of hits with a GIS for "Jane Goodall tramp" - lol
 
2013-03-21 10:16:25 AM

FirstNationalBastard: tenpoundsofcheese: FirstNationalBastard: dittybopper: Nice, subby:

[bonvito.files.wordpress.com image 278x375]

Y'know, I once got a headline greened involving a reference to "that Jane Goodall tramp", and the one person in existence who hadn't seen that Far Side cartoon took offense to her being called a tramp.

Because calling a woman a tramp on Fark is soooo cool and edgy.

It is still offensive even in Larson said it too.

I don't think you're quite getting the joke...


I think you found the second person...
 
2013-03-21 10:24:53 AM

FirstNationalBastard: tenpoundsofcheese: FirstNationalBastard: dittybopper: Nice, subby:

[bonvito.files.wordpress.com image 278x375]

Y'know, I once got a headline greened involving a reference to "that Jane Goodall tramp", and the one person in existence who hadn't seen that Far Side cartoon took offense to her being called a tramp.

Because calling a woman a tramp on Fark is soooo cool and edgy.

It is still offensive even in Larson said it too.

I don't think you're quite getting the joke...


Maybe subby should have called her an ignorant slut?
 
2013-03-21 10:28:55 AM
Ms. Goodall wrote: "'Bartram's Boxes,' as they came to be known, were regularly sent to Peter Collinson for distribution to a wide list of European clients."

That seems to me to be an unremarkable statement of fact, not plagiarism.

Also, Goodall's statement differs from the Wikipedia entry by "European" ("England") and includes a particular time of year "Fall." Therefore, the Goodall statement represents a fact that is different from the Wikipedia fact. The Wikipedia entry is too limiting. In fact, it is known that Bartram's collections of New World seeds ended up all over Europe, not just England. Therefore, the Goodall entry is correct and the Wikipedia entry is incorrect. How is that plagiarism?
 
2013-03-21 10:30:54 AM
In all honesty, I thought she was no longer amongst the living.
 
2013-03-21 10:47:15 AM
Delay: "That seems to me to be an unremarkable statement of fact, not plagiarism. "

If two people independently knew the facts presented:
That these boxes came to be known colloquially as "Bartram's Boxes"
That they were sent to Peter Collinson
That Peter Collinson distributed them to a wide list of European clients.
 How likely is it that they would write all three into a single sentence with essentially the same exact phrasing?

Hint: it's not.  Just using the aside -- "as they came to be known" -- is one of those style choices that individuals tend to do, or not do.  Presenting information with the stylistic choices of other authors is the exact opposite of writing it *yourself*.

Now that example alone isn't enough to send someone up the river.  When doing research on a new topic, people tend to write as they research, as opposed to ingesting all the information, understanding it, and then writing their own book. And it's pretty common to subconsciously absorb presentation style into short-term memory.

But if there's a pattern of that in the book, of Goodall essentially transcribing other people's thoughts instead of ingesting the information and framing it in her own voice, that is absolutely plagiarism.
 
2013-03-21 10:54:40 AM

dittybopper: tenpoundsofcheese: It is still offensive even in Larson said it too.

Jane Goodall herself didn't think so, so what right do you have to speak for her?



Why can't TPOC find it offensive even if the person it was directed at doesn't?


FirstNationalBastard: I don't think you're quite getting the joke...


Explain it. Does it have to do with the hilarity associated with bestiality? Or the hilarity associated with infidelity? Deceit, distrust, etc.

/bustin' balls
 
2013-03-21 11:12:31 AM
I am surprised she still has a face

/with the chimps and all
 
2013-03-21 11:22:56 AM

ringersol: Now that example alone isn't enough to send someone up the river.


Is your stylistic choice for "sending someone to prison" plagiarism?

Now if she copied this: It was "Bartram's Boxes," which Collinson sold through a subscription system, that supplied the great houses and the new commercial nurseries of England with North American trees, shrubs and flowers, and that fueled the development of English-style gardens and the English obsession with gardening in the 18th century.http://jeansgarden.wordpress.com/2010/01/23/favorite-garden-b ooks-the- brother-gardeners/

It is more than a statement of fact. It gives the opinion that it was Colinson alone who started the gardening craze.
 
2013-03-21 12:28:19 PM

Master Sphincter: I am surprised she still has a face

/with the chimps and all


I think it's because she's female, and correctly intuited the proper submissive posture to take when a male chimp was displaying. Male chimps are less likely to beat up a subservient female, unless they're just being assholes. Goodall was exceedingly lucky in her observation strategies, and the chimps were too. If a male researcher had tried the same thing we'd still be thinking of chimps as savage brutes. Which they can be, but as part of a spectrum of more nuanced behaviors.
 
2013-03-21 12:30:14 PM

theorellior: Master Sphincter: I am surprised she still has a face

/with the chimps and all

I think it's because she's female, and correctly intuited the proper submissive posture to take when a male chimp was displaying. Male chimps are less likely to beat up a subservient female, unless they're just being assholes. Goodall was exceedingly lucky in her observation strategies, and the chimps were too. If a male researcher had tried the same thing we'd still be thinking of chimps as savage brutes. Which they can be, but as part of a spectrum of more nuanced behaviors.


I hear she *REALLY* likes studying the Bonobos.
 
2013-03-21 12:34:24 PM

dittybopper: I hear she *REALLY* likes studying the Bonobos.


They do have pretty stylish slacks, although they're aiming more for the douchebag market.
 
2013-03-21 12:41:38 PM
I hear she wears diamonds on the soles of her shoes.

No, wait. That was a Simpsons episode.
 
2013-03-21 01:46:20 PM
I had the pleasure of seeing her for a taping of ETown, and was very impressed.
csb
 
2013-03-21 01:52:42 PM
media.theonion.com
 
2013-03-21 07:05:30 PM
She's still alive?
 
2013-03-23 01:37:27 AM

Rich Cream: dittybopper: tenpoundsofcheese: It is still offensive even in Larson said it too.

Jane Goodall herself didn't think so, so what right do you have to speak for her?


Why can't TPOC find it offensive even if the person it was directed at doesn't?


FirstNationalBastard: I don't think you're quite getting the joke...

Explain it. Does it have to do with the hilarity associated with bestiality? Or the hilarity associated with infidelity? Deceit, distrust, etc.

/bustin' balls


I'm confused. Am I not on Fark? Did I take a wrong turn?

Are we really debating the appropriateness of a joke in a cartoon?
 
Displayed 50 of 50 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report