I have no problem with the Mea Culpa blog raising concerns over Wente's tendency to use others words as her own without crediting them. That strikes me as the normal conversation we should have about the nature of plagiarism. I also think the Globe's response was inadequate and self-serving. But I think the sudden escalation by, for example, the "Journalism Doctor" to "WHAT DO YOU MEAN THIS IS NO BIG DEAL THIS IS THE BIGGEST DEAL" is total bullshit. In fact, it's a very dangerous move that is tied up to hierarchical power dynamics which give us bad copyright law and ndividualistic notions of merit and worth rather than social and collaborative ones.
I believe, and you can find these same thoughts in the "What Wente Wrote" thread, that Wente should be fired not because she is a right-wing journalist (which is how my argument was repeatedly represented by a co-worker), but because she is deliberately divisive and toxic. We have this misconception about journalism in the West -- built through no accident by a merging of corporation, state and media -- that journalism is about finding obejctivity. As Michelle points out, this simply isn't possible. What journalism is is telling us the best stories possible based on the information we can find. Wente should be fired not only because her stories are bad, but because she is trying to tell stories which hurt. She should be fired because she is a bad journalist. A decent paper would want to tell stories wrought with ethical courage and conviction, not ones which sow hate and fear.
