No kidding around with blogging regret

The American Thinker points out that Ben Domenech, the “Red State” blogger who took a spot at the Washington Post only to resign this morning after he was outed for blatant plagiarism, is guilty of multiple transgressions. Too bad – he should have thought before he copied.

Unfortunately, the blogosphere is abuzz with commentary on the virtriol Domenech sometimes spewed, and later regreted.

“There is not a blogger on this planet who has not written something and then regretted hitting the “publish” button. The immediacy and speed with which blogs cover and comment on issues sometimes leads to writing stupid, emotional posts full of ad-hominem attacks and vituperative digressions from the facts.”

I don’t condone – in fact I denounce the guy’s actions – he may win the Press Plagiarist of the Year Award after only a few days on the job – that could be a record. But, it is getting apparent that people are going too far – using the tools given them to seek and destroy.

We are quickly forgetting we are human, and this will only get worse. Many are laughing now – but their turn will come up soon.

“You cannot always prevent people from speaking evil about you, but you can live so that their stories will be false.” — Unknown

Lookee there. I don’t even know who the hell said that, but how damn easy is it to give a little credit anyway? Too damn easy.

What a sad, pathetic bunch, on all sides. Someone thinks they won here, but in the grand scheme, everyone will turn out the loser.

Comments

fub says:

It isn’t clear to me what the basis of your “everyone will turn out the loser” notion is.

Do you mean that any (or all) bloggers who are widely read will be subject to marginally arguable but ultimately silly attacks for plagiarism for failing to attribute an apt phrase of which they do not know the source?

Do you mean that the discourse among blogs will deteriorate to plagiarism flames roughly equivalent to usenet spelling flames?

Or what?

Don’t you think that most bloggers can distinguish between an incidental error or failure to attribute, and a systematic pattern of plagiarism?

After all, even an old blue tick hound knows the difference between somebody accidently stumbling over him, and somebody hauling off and kicking him.

Should I attribute that? Was Tennessee Ernie Ford the originator? Did I misquote him? Who really cares? The point is that it makes the point, whatever the point is.

M.A. says:

The thing about Domenech, though, is that he doesn’t really represent the “blogosphere” — he represents the mainstream conservative movement. As a speechwriter for a Republican Senator, a contributor to National Review Online and an editor for Regnery (editing representatives of the Angry Right such as Hewitt and Malkin), he is right in the thick of the Conservative MSM and the Angry Right.

The fact that a serial plagiarist who called Coretta Scott King a Communist and Dan Froomkin “a lying weasel-faced Democrat shill” could get that many opportunities within the conservative MSM says more about the Regnerized, Bush-following Angry Right of today than it does about the Blogosphere.

michael says:

Agreed. It also says something about the depth of available talent, or should I say lack thereof.

michael says:

On fub’s comment:

I believe content is less powerful than the distribution channel, and if the channel is perceived as incredible (and/or untrustworthy), then bloggers lose. One bad apple can spoil the pie (oops..who said that? – see, free expression was just inhibited by the need to attribute). Secondarily, there is a lot of fine blogging going on, but the fact that Ben was associated with WaPo means the mainstream news consumer now knows about it, and will associate the plagiarism with blogging (when it is anything but).

You can ask “Don’t you think that most bloggers can distinguish between an incidental error or failure to attribute, and a systematic pattern of plagiarism?” My answer is yes. But can the everyday American who steadfastly believes everything in newspapers and on six-o-clock news? I wonder.

On “Tennessee Ford” – I agree – who cares? Unfortunately, when someone has you in their crosshairs, they will, and you may pay for it.

If you’re into the “Singularity” at all, you can see the day coming when EVERY person who ever gets raised up gets taken down in a matter of minutes by computer-enhanced opponents… only the robots will be pure enough to rule.