Comments on: The Chris Anderson Plagiarism Controversy

By: 5 Rules for the Next Plagiarism Scandal | PlagiarismToday

5 Rules for the Next Plagiarism Scandal | PlagiarismToday — Tue, 23 Nov 2010 20:49:25 +0000

[...] scandal in literature and the Nick Simmons plagiarism scandal in Manga, most are like the Chris Anderson scandal or the Maureen Dowd scandal and are either blown out of proportion or are backed by weak [...]

By: Book Review: Starving the Artist | PlagiarismToday

Book Review: Starving the Artist | PlagiarismToday — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 16:02:48 +0000

[...] Book of Plagiarism by Judge Richard Posner, Remix by Lawrence Lessig and Free by Chris Anderson (which was the subject of a plagiarism controversy of its own) just to name a few.However, William Aicher is a relatively new addition to this field. Though he [...]

By: Remix literário: escrevo, logo plagio? (*) | Pontolit Beta

Remix literário: escrevo, logo plagio? (*) | Pontolit Beta — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 20:00:33 +0000

[...] Quarterly Review (VGR), jornal de resenhas literárias associado à Universidade de Virginia, havia observado semelhanças entre passagens do livro Free, de Chris Anderson, editor da Wired magazine, e outras [...]

By: Gratis: reseña « Alexandre López Conesa

Gratis: reseña « Alexandre López Conesa — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 21:15:35 +0000

[...] lo achacó a problemas con la edición de las notas a pie de página en la versión final (ver este artículo en [...]

By: Jonathan Bailey

Jonathan Bailey — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 14:28:00 +0000

Sadly, I have to disagree. Though I understand Andersen was trying to do something different, it doesn’t matter if you quote verbatim or change the words, when you use someone else’s material to do research, you need to cite the source. It’s good research, good ethics and good standards. It’s important to let the reader verify and vet the sources as well as provide credit where it is due.

Not providing attribution, especially in a published book, is at least sloppy work. “Free” might not be a scientific paper, but it should hold itself to standards that are similar, if only to improve how seriously it is taken.

By: Jonathan Bailey

Jonathan Bailey — Tue, 04 Aug 2009 09:28:45 +0000

Sadly, I have to disagree. Though I understand Andersen was trying to do something different, it doesn't matter if you quote verbatim or change the words, when you use someone else's material to do research, you need to cite the source. It's good research, good ethics and good standards. It's important to let the reader verify and vet the sources as well as provide credit where it is due.

Not providing attribution, especially in a published book, is at least sloppy work. "Free" might not be a scientific paper, but it should hold itself to standards that are similar, if only to improve how seriously it is taken.

By: Roy O'Brien

Roy O'Brien — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 23:24:00 +0000

As a subscriber to Wired, I read of Anderson’s proposed “Free” about a year before planned publish release.
He suggested, as I recall, that the book was going to be a writing experiment, leaning heavily on the work of others; inviting contributions from readers, with plenty of guidance re desired subject matter. I believe it was said, (though maybe my inference), that he’d gotten the idea from the writing of “The Long Tail”, which evidently was a step in that direction.
It seems to me that he deserves some slack. There’s not much difference between copying verbatim versus saying the same thing, but with the words jiggled about to qualify as “research”.
Also, demanding attribution as regards quotes from Wikipedia is almost comical, in view of the most used phrase on the site; “(citation needed)”.

By: Roy O'Brien

Roy O'Brien — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 18:24:36 +0000

As a subscriber to Wired, I read of Anderson's proposed "Free" about a year before planned publish release.

He suggested, as I recall, that the book was going to be a writing experiment, leaning heavily on the work of others; inviting contributions from readers, with plenty of guidance re desired subject matter. I believe it was said, (though maybe my inference), that he'd gotten the idea from the writing of "The Long Tail", which evidently was a step in that direction.

It seems to me that he deserves some slack. There's not much difference between copying verbatim versus saying the same thing, but with the words jiggled about to qualify as "research".

Also, demanding attribution as regards quotes from Wikipedia is almost comical, in view of the most used phrase on the site; "(citation needed)".

By: Wired Magazine Editor Argues For Free Lectures « Open Education News

Wired Magazine Editor Argues For Free Lectures « Open Education News — Wed, 08 Jul 2009 20:04:19 +0000

[...] differing viewpoints. Readers are cautioned about Anderson’s new book, which is surrounded by plagiarism concerns. From the blog post: Though Mr. Anderson is hardly the first person to praise free lectures [...]

By: Chris Anderson, Malcolm Gladwell And A Look At Free | dv8-designs

Chris Anderson, Malcolm Gladwell And A Look At Free | dv8-designs — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 19:49:48 +0000

[...] feeling it will be raised in the comments. There was a lot of attention paid recently to charges of plagiarism in the book. Chris has admitted to the basics of the charges, and explained it as sloppy editing in [...]