Journalists condemn plagiarism, yet rarely acknowledge disagreements over attribution standards. To document and evaluate those differences, journalists in broadcasting and print operations were surveyed (N = 953). Respondents were far less willing to attribute press releases than they were their colleagues' work. They were more likely to consider attribution optional if they were under pressure to produce, worked for a broadcast medium, were a content creator, were less experienced, or saw their principles as flexible. The findings reveal that attribution beliefs are far more pliant than ethics policies suggest and illuminate some of the reasons why plagiarism occurs.
Figures - uploaded by Bu Zhong
Author content
All figure content in this area was uploaded by Bu Zhong
Content may be subject to copyright.
Discover the world's research
- 20+ million members
- 135+ million publications
- 700k+ research projects
Join for free
Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly
90(1) 148 –166
© 2012 AEJMC
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1077699012468743
http://jmcq.sagepub.com
468743JMQ90110.1177/1077699012468743Journali
sm & Mass Communication QuarterlyLewis and Zhong
1University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA
2Penn State University, University Park, PA, USA
Corresponding Author:
Norman P. Lewis, University of Florida, P.O. Box 118400, Gainesville, FL 32611-8400, USA
Email: nlewis@jou.ufl.edu
The Root of Journalistic
Plagiarism: Contested
Attribution Beliefs
Norman P. Lewis1 and Bu Zhong2
Abstract
Journalists condemn plagiarism, yet rarely acknowledge disagreements over attribution
standards. To document and evaluate those differences, journalists in broadcasting
and print operations were surveyed (N = 953). Respondents were far less willing to
attribute press releases than they were their colleagues' work. They were more likely
to consider attribution optional if they were under pressure to produce, worked for
a broadcast medium, were a content creator, were less experienced, or saw their
principles as flexible. The findings reveal that attribution beliefs are far more pliant
than ethics policies suggest and illuminate some of the reasons why plagiarism occurs.
Keywords
plagiarism, ethics, journalism
In August 2011, the Washington Post Outlook section published a guest opinion piece
by a former software company recruiter, Anna Lewis, about the paucity of women in
the computing industry. She began her piece with quotations from a 1967 Cosmopoli-
tan story and offered statistics about the historical prevalence of women in the field.
The piece did not attribute the primary source for that information: a University of
Texas professor, Nathan Ensmenger, who spent years tracking down a clean copy of
the magazine via eBay and who researches the history of technology. Ensmenger's
colleagues recognized his unattributed work and called it to his attention. The profes-
sor told Post ombudsman Patrick B. Pexton the Outlook essay was so poorly attributed
that, had it been submitted as a classroom assignment, he would have given
Ethics
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Lewis and Zhong 149
it a failing grade and referred it to his university's academic dishonesty board. The
Outlook section editor who solicited and handled Lewis's essay defended the omission
of attribution as standard practice—although she conceded that she would include a
citation if she were doing it all over. Pexton ruled the essay omitted important attribu-
tion, yet didn't plagiarize.1
The incongruous response of the Outlook section editor and the ombudsman's false
dichotomy illustrate that attribution—and thus plagiarism—is contested terrain.
Clearly, not all information cited by a journalist requires attribution; commonly under-
stood facts, or what might be considered "public domain" information, don't demand
sourcing. But Pexton's declaration, that the piece lacked attribution yet wasn't plagia-
rism, ignores the reality that Lewis was entirely reliant on another person's work for
the facts cited, and her failure to attribute her source constitutes plagiarism.2 Journalistic
plagiarism is a failure to attribute. And yet, while journalists condemn plagiarism, they
disagree over which information must be attributed. As the New York Times public
editor said in a situation similar to the Washington Post Outlook episode, "It simply
isn't clear how much attribution is enough."3 Journalists disagree on whether they
must cite a press release as a source of information4 or when uniquely obtained infor-
mation becomes common knowledge and is thus exempt from attribution.5 And they
disagree whether to attribute information they take from each other.6 In short, profes-
sionals endorse the pithy "never plagiarize" proscription of the Society of Professional
Journalists ethics code without putting skin and bones on that skeletal motto.7
Variances in attribution practice are at the heart of many plagiarism cases,8 yet little
research has been published exploring those distinctions. Therefore, the purpose of
this study is to survey professional journalists to evaluate attribution beliefs and
uncover the roots of plagiarism.
This study is grounded in the theoretical primacy of autonomy in professional ide-
ology. Acting independently is one of four sections in the SPJ ethics code,9 and exer-
cising personal conscience is one of Kovach and Rosenstiel's ten elements of
journalism.10 Some argue from a libertarian perspective that journalists must have
freedom to exercise their craft,11 while others have noted that autonomy is a central
element in the sociological construct of professionalism.12 A few have acknowledged
flaws in the execution of autonomy13 or conceded it to be the "unindicted co-conspir-
ator" in newsroom scandals.14 Still, freedom to choose is a necessary condition for
ethical decision making.15 At least 80% of reporters said they have considerable auton-
omy in choosing stories and emphases.16 A long-term study of a failed effort to intro-
duce teams into a newsroom environment concluded a primary cause was the
unwillingness of journalists to relinquish independence.17 A six-week study of a news-
room found that journalists frequently cited autonomy as central to their self-image
and job satisfaction.18 Autonomy is one of five "ideal-typical values" of journalistic
ideology19 and is so taken for granted that journalists interviewed for an ethics study
rarely invoked the idea.20 In fact, journalism ethics can be construed as serving to sup-
port autonomy.21 The primacy of journalistic autonomy, especially in the light of
ethical relativism, theoretically presupposes variance in attribution beliefs. Whether
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
150 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 90(1)
autonomy norms flow from Enlightenment notions of individual determinism22 or are
shaped by the moral ecology of a newsroom,23 the exalted position given indepen-
dence predicts that journalists will hold a flexible view of attribution.
Literature Review
Normative journalism condemns plagiarism and extols attribution. The Washington
Post ethics code declares that all material derived from other media must be attributed
because "plagiarism is one of journalism's unforgivable sins."24 A reporting textbook
defines plagiarism as "the most loathsome, most shameful" of journalistic transgres-
sions.25 Plagiarism is prohibited by ethics codes for the Radio Television Digital
News Association,26 Society for News Design,27 Society of Professional Journalists
(SPJ),28 and bloggers.29 Attribution allows readers to trace a story to its source30 and
advances objectivity norms by distancing the reporter from the information cited.31
Prohibitions against plagiarism apparently do not bar journalists from recycling
each other's sources. Columbia Journalism Review documented in 2011 how Brian
Condra of Ireland was such a good quote that journalists interviewed him about twenty
times in two years as an exemplar for a typical person stung by the recession—showing
that while journalists did their own work, they saw no problem in stealing the source.32
Reporters have a tendency to "use the same sources who offer the same pithy quote or
put the same spin on an issue."33 Legacy media journalists who complain about "new
media parasitism" ignore their own heavy reliance on their peers to identify sources
they can reuse.34
Even when borrowing words, journalists disagree on when attribution is necessary.
When repeating quotations, for example, journalists often assert the original source
must be provided.35 Yet practice differs. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina 2005,
National Public Radio interviewed former First Lady Barbara Bush, who said the
"underprivileged anyway" evacuees were well served by staying in the Astrodome.36
Although the quotation was spoken in an exclusive radio interview, dozens of news
organizations such as the Washington Post and New York Times repeated Bush's
words without attributing the radio source.37 An internal Detroit Free Press investiga-
tion into the work of the paper's prominent sports columnist, Mitch Albom, found
several instances in which he had republished quotations without crediting the origi-
nating news organization. Sports editors backed Albom's claim that attribution was
optional as long as he accurately copied the quote—an assertion not found in any
journalism textbook. The newspaper admitted its staffers were confused about attrib-
uting quotations.38 A New York Post reporter who copied quotes from the Associated
Press without attribution to the wire service or to the originating newspaper, the
Hartford Courant, said such cribbing was "pretty standard" in New York.39 And the
Courant systematically copied material from smaller Connecticut newspapers in 2009,
often without attribution and sometimes crediting itself, until the victims cried foul.40
Newspapers are not the only medium for which attribution standards are ambigu-
ous. Some broadcasting textbooks argue that attribution is just as important as it is for
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Lewis and Zhong 151
print and that it differs only in its placement: at the beginning of a sentence rather than
the end.41 Others disagree, saying that broadcasters should attribute less than their
print colleagues to avoid interrupting a story's flow.42 Another textbook declares that
"statements don't have to be attributed unless you have a reason."43 Although the
policy of the Associated Press is to attribute information derived from other journal-
ists,44 broadcasters "don't usually attribute stories to wire services because, in a sense,
they work for our news department."45 An ethnographer studying broadcast outlets
found that time-pressed staffers incorporated material from newspaper accounts into
television reports without attribution. "Welcome to plagiarism news," a videographer
told him.46 Websites facilitate copy-and-paste borrowing. "The 900-pound gorilla fac-
ing news organizations distributing content over the Internet is the ever-present temp-
tation to copy material from another Web site," one textbook states.47 A study of how
blogs influence news organizations found considerable variance in attribution, con-
cluding, "Certainly, there are no universal attribution or editorial policies in place."48
An example of a gap between attribution policy and praxis can be seen in how print
and broadcast journalists treat press releases or video news releases. Only four of
thirty-six organizational ethics codes collected by a newspaper association mentioned
press releases, and all four said information from them should be credited.49 Yet in the
wake of layoffs decimating newsrooms, journalists increasingly use press releases as
primary sources for stories, including reusing quotes without attribution.50 Similarly,
the Radio Television Digital News Association calls for any third-party sources, such
as video news releases, to be attributed.51 However, one study showed that forty-eight
of fifty-four video news releases aired had no hint of attribution.52 Of television news
directors, 30% said they rarely, if ever, identified the source of a video news release.53
Attribution standards are not uniform across industrialized democracies. A study
laboriously tracing the origins of stories produced over two weeks in 2006 found that
five leading London dailies (The Guardian, The Independent, The Times, The
Telegraph, and the Daily Mail) mainly or wholly relied on Press Association copy for
49% of the stories studied, yet credited the wire service in only 1% of the stories. So
many stories were found to be copied from competing publications and from press
releases, without attribution, that what appears to be common practice in England
"would, elsewhere, be regarded as straightforward plagiarism."54 A third of Daily
Telegraph stories examined in another study had been copied from other publica-
tions.55 An examination of 1,603 articles at ten web sites in five nations (France,
Germany, Russia, United Kingdom, and the United States) found about 29% attributed
the sources of information, a figure low enough to raise fears that "copy & paste
becomes the basic principle."56 Attribution is "a practice that is particular to U.S. jour-
nalism and not necessarily similar in other cultures."57 British newspapers treat unat-
tributed copying as normal, but have discovered that "American newspapers apparently
object to this practice and are therefore credited when material is lifted."58
Yet even in the United States, attribution practices vary widely, in part because the
standards are undefined. "Most newspapers have no rules," concluded the Poynter
Institute's Roy Peter Clark after evaluating how journalists used unattributed information
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
152 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 90(1)
from wire services, press releases, and other media.59 In a review of twenty plagiarism
cases, a Columbia Journalism Review author noted that a contributing factor is a lack
of journalistic consensus regarding when attribution is required.60 "Definitions can be
blurry," wrote media critic David Shaw.61 Bob Giles, a former newspaper editor who
wrote a book about newsroom management, urged colleagues to commit attribution
policies to writing because "if every newsroom had clearly articulated standards,
you'd have fewer cases of plagiarism."62 Editor Steve Buttry argued that the SPJ
should expand its ethics code beyond its pithy "never plagiarize" injunction and urged
journalists to be more specific than "press reports" or "reportedly."63
The policy-minded perspective of editors suggests that attribution differences may
exist between management and employees.64 Leaders must think in broad strokes
about objectives and strategies, while subordinates, especially in a professional envi-
ronment such as a newsroom, exercise discretion in the tactics to reach those objec-
tives.65 Thus, managers may think more idealistically about attribution, while
employees are focused on the practical trade-offs inherent in producing original work
on deadline. Similarly, behind-the-scenes workers who assemble newscasts or edit
writing may have a different view of attribution because they are a step removed from
the in-the-field work of reporters and correspondents.
Career longevity may also influence attribution beliefs. The Internet, with its poten-
tial to both dismiss attribution (by normalizing copying) and encourage it (through
hyperlinks), may be embraced differently by newer journalists than by more experi-
enced ones.66 More seasoned journalists perceive standards are declining because of
business practices and a hurry-up mentality; newer journalists may see such pressure
as the new norm.67 Also, three decennial surveys have consistently shown that news-
room learning is the primary influence on ethical attitudes, which would allow attribu-
tion beliefs to vary with experience.68
The literature review sparked the following questions:
RQ1: Do attitudes toward attributing other media vary according to position
held?
RQ2: Do attitudes toward attributing other media vary according to length of
career?
RQ3: Do journalists consider attribution of information derived from a press
release to be as important as attributing information derived from other
media?
RQ4: Do attitudes toward attribution vary according to the type of media orga-
nization for which a journalist works?
RQ5: Which of three forces shaping journalism today—the Internet, news com-
petition, and pressure to produce—has the greatest influence on attitudes
toward attributing other media?
RQ6: Do attitudes toward attribution vary according to whether the respondent
believes that those decisions are largely determined by the respondent's per-
sonal standards or by the organization's standards?
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Lewis and Zhong 153
Schlenker's Integrity Scale
To further explore journalism's tolerance for ambiguous attribution standards, a scale
that measures ethical relativity was used. Schlenker's Integrity Scale presumes integ-
rity exists along a continuum between principles and expediency. It totals Likert-type
scale responses to eighteen questions such as, "One's principles should not be com-
promised regardless of the possible gain."69 The scale presumes people have integrity,
yet differ according to the flexibility they grant themselves in their principles.70
Integrity Scale scores were correlated with self-reported plagiarism among students;
those who scored toward the expedient end of the scale were more likely to have
plagiarized in school.71 Other studies have found that people who valued expediency
were more likely to prefer a successful yet unethical act over a failed ethical act,72
while those on the principled end were less likely to have cheated.73
H1: Scores on the principled end of Schlenker's Integrity Scale are associated
with less acceptance of exceptions for attribution.
Method
Professional journalists in newspapers, online news, radio, and television organiza-
tions were surveyed regarding their attitudes toward attribution and the eighteen
Integrity Scale statements. The attribution statements were written based on the lit-
erature review and on an examination of at least one hundred professional plagiarism
cases over the past twenty years.74 The statements addressed issues such as whether
press releases or specific media need to be credited and whether factors such as a
desire to avoid interrupting a story's flow or pressing deadlines mitigated a need for
attribution. Responses were made according to a 5-point Likert-type scale. The online
survey was approved by a university institutional review board.
Survey respondents were drawn from a database of U.S. journalists maintained by
CisionPoint that is built on Bacon's Media Database.75 Like any similar database,
CisionPoint is dependent on the voluntary participation of media organizations, which
may choose to submit the names of all staffers, or only managers, or no one at all. The
CisionPoint database was used to create a large mailing list with journalists from a
broad cross-section of job types and media companies: broadcasting, newspapers, and
online organizations.76 That list was culled only to eliminate foreign-language publi-
cations and newsletters for religious organizations. An invitation to participate in the
survey was sent to 20,191 unique email addresses.
Participation was limited in two ways: A password was required to screen out non-
journalists who might find the survey by chance, and the survey began with a screen-
ing question asking if the respondent worked full-time in an organization with at least
three people. That limitation was imposed because part-time or freelance employees
may not have the same level of commitment to professional norms as a full-timer.
Also, those who work alone or in a partnership are not subject to the situational influ-
ences that organizations can exert.77
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
154 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 90(1)
After the initial email invitation sent October 4, 2011, produced 844 responses, a
reminder was sent two weeks later and generated another 188 responses over the fol-
lowing three weeks, for a total of 1,032. Questionnaires with a quarter or more of the
responses unanswered were excluded to produce a final N of 953, or 5% of the email
addresses to which invitations were sent. The true response rate is unknowable because
no reliable count of "dead" email addresses was possible and some invitations may
have been blocked by spam email filters. Survey response rates have been decreasing
for the past couple of decades and achieving even a 20% return often requires multi-
modal reminders such as postcards and phone calls,78 neither of which was practical
for a sample of 20,000. Even still, a 5% response rate is not far removed from those of
other large-scale electronic surveys. Editors from only 7% of 1,114 U.S. newspapers
responded to a request for staff email lists79 and just 9% of 2,500 European journalists
completed surveys.80 Single-digit rates are acceptable "if the researcher has obtained a
reasonable sample size to support the desired statistical power."81 Moreover, tech-
nique is more important than response rates; a probability sample with a lower response
rate offers greater validity than volunteer panels with higher response rates.82 Finally,
lower response rates are a concern when drawing population inferences, which was
not the purpose of this study. Instead, this study was designed to search for relation-
ships among variables, which an N of 953 enables.
The Likert-type scale scoring ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly
agree). All scales were examined using an exploratory factor analysis and a one- or
two-factor solution.
Attribution absolutes scale. Respondents were asked three questions regarding
whether they believed all information derived from other media should be attributed
to (a) newspapers or magazines, (b) a radio or television outlet, or (c) an online-only
news organization. Respondents showed a high degree of consistency in responding to
those three questions, so they were combined into a single scale (Cronbach's α = .97).
A higher score indicated a stronger belief that information from other media should be
attributed as an absolute matter.
Attribution exceptions scale. Six statements posed as potential exceptions to a general
belief that information from other media should be attributed showed sufficient
(approximately .70)83 internal consistency to form a scale (α = .69). Those six were
(a) another news medium has to be credited only if it obtained information through an
exclusive, (b) another medium's exclusive does not have to be credited if a few weeks
have passed since the originating story was published or aired, (c) another medium's
exclusive does not have to be attributed if the information has been widely repeated,
(d) when attributing information derived from other media, use of "reportedly," with-
out naming the news organization, is sufficient, (e) it is more important to attribute
information derived from a national news organization than from a local news organi-
zation, and (f) in general, attribution is optional if it would interrupt the flow of the
story. A higher score indicated a greater willingness to allow exceptions.
Internet influence scale. Three statements were posed regarding the influence of the
Internet on attribution. Two of those were sufficiently correlated to form a scale (α = .69).
Those two were (a) thanks to hypertext conventions, journalists today are more likely
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Lewis and Zhong 155
to attribute their sources of information and ideas, and (b) widespread use of the Inter-
net has encouraged journalists today to be more willing to disclose their sources of
information and ideas. The third question, regarding the influence of online competi-
tion, was excluded from the scale. A higher score indicated a greater belief that the
Internet encouraged more attribution.
Personal standards scale. Six responses were offered for a question asking how jour-
nalists made decisions regarding attributing information from other news organiza-
tions. Three of those statements involved personal standards: (a) my training, (b) my
views on proper professional conduct, and (c) my understanding of journalistic ethics
codes. Those three formed a scale (α = .70). A higher score indicated a greater belief
that one's personal standards determined attribution decisions.
Organizational standards scale. The other three statements regarding how attribution
decisions were made involved organizational influences: (a) what my newsroom col-
leagues would do in a similar situation, (b) how my boss would probably react, and (c)
our organization's need to be ahead of news competitors. Those three formed a scale
(α = .69). A higher score indicated a greater belief that organizational standards deter-
mined when other media should be attributed.
Integrity Scale. As noted earlier, this scale is formed by summing each respondent's
scores on the eighteen questions after six were reverse-scored.84 Results produced a
high level of internal consistency among the statements (α = .85), affirming earlier
findings.85 High scores indicated a stronger commitment to principles, while a lower
score suggested a greater willingness to see principles as flexible.
Results
Of the 953 journalists who submitted substantially complete surveys, 593, or 62.2%,
were men. A total of 176 worked for a broadcast operation that could include a web-
site, for either television (n = 149, 15.6%) or radio (n = 27, 2.8%). Another 767
worked for a newspaper that could include a website, either a daily (n = 568, 59.6%)
or a nondaily (n = 199, 20.9%). Only 5 worked for an online-only organization, too
few for statistical analysis. (The remaining 5 respondents chose an "other" category.)
Some 481 (50.5%) were content creators, producing words, pictures, video, graphics,
and so on. Another 326 (34.2%) were in management, while 121 (12.7%) worked
behind the scenes, such as editing or working a control board. A total of 23 (2.4%)
reported that they did not belong to any of the three types of positions, and 2 others
did not answer the question. Most were experienced; 562, or 59.0%, had worked in
the field for more than twenty years. Another 111 (11.6%) had worked as journalists
for sixteen to twenty years, 111 (11.6%) for eleven to fifteen years, 91 (9.5%) for six
to ten years, and 78 (8.2%) for five years or less.
RQ1: Job type. This question asked if respondents differed in their attribution
beliefs based on the type of job they held: as a content creator, in a behind-the-scenes
position, or in management. Although respondents overall indicated strong support
for attribution, ANOVA analyses found two significant differences in terms of the
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
156 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 90(1)
attribution absolutes scale (F[2, 906] = 4.62, p = .01) and the scale allowing for
exceptions (F[2, 856] = 13.75, p < .001). Tukey's HSD post hoc tests found that jour-
nalists working behind the scenes (M = 4.62, SD = 0.57, n = 118) were more likely
than content creators (M = 4.39, SD = 0.72, p < .01, n = 472) to see attribution as an
absolute value. Meanwhile, content creators (M = 2.18, SD = 0.61, n = 446) were
more likely to allow exceptions than were those working behind the scenes (M = 1.96,
SD = 0.53, n = 110, p = .001) or were managers ( M = 1.98, SD = 0.56, n = 303, p < .001).
So while respondents generally shunned exceptions, content creators were slightly
more willing to embrace them.
RQ2: Career longevity. Multiple regression analysis resulted in a significant model
(F [4, 870] = 5.91, p < .001) that predicted career longevity by using four variables
measuring attribution attitudes. Two were scales: (a) the three-statement attribution
absolutes scale and (b) the three-statement attribution exceptions scale. The other two
were statements: (c) good journalism requires the attribution of all sources of informa-
tion and (d) press releases must be attributed. Those four variables were loaded into
the regression model because they reflected the range of issues most likely to be influ-
enced by longevity. Table 1 shows that more experienced journalists generally were
less likely to accept exceptions to attribution and more likely to believe press releases
should be credited. Interestingly, more experienced journalists were less likely to
agree that good journalism always required attribution, suggesting that experience is
associated with a willingness to see gray areas.
RQ3: Press releases and other media. This question further explored differences in
press-release attribution by comparing responses to that statement with the reaction to
the attribution absolutes scale. A paired samples t-test found that respondents were
significantly more likely (t = 22.52, n = 940, p < .001) to attribute information from
other media (M = 4.45, SD = 0.73) than from press releases (M = 3.57, SD = 1.15).
RQ4: Employer. A comparison of the individual statements in the attribution excep-
tions scale with the type of medium for which the respondent worked proved signifi-
cant for four issues, according to an ANOVA. The first involved this statement:
Another news medium has to be credited only if it obtained information through an
exclusive, F (3, 895) = 5.44, p = .001. A Tukey's HSD post hoc test showed that
Table 1. Impact of Career Longevity on Attribution Attitudes
B SE B β
Constant 4.89 0.41
Attribution absolutes scale −0.05 0.07 −.03
Attribution exceptions scale −0.22 0.08 −.10**
Attributing press releases 0.12 0.04 .10**
Attributing all sources −0.16 0.04 −.13***
Adjusted R2 = .22.
**p. < 01. ***p = .001.
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Lewis and Zhong 157
journalists working for radio (M = 3.52, SD = 1.25) were significantly more likely than
were their peers working for daily newspapers (M = 2.57, SD = 1.24, p = .001), non-
daily papers (M = 2.54, SD = 1.16, p = .001), and television (M = 2.53, SD = 1.25,
p = .001) to assert that only information obtained through an exclusive had to be attrib-
uted. In other words, radio respondents agreed with that statement, while those in daily
newspapers and television disagreed.
The second significant result involved this statement: another medium's exclusive
does not have to be credited if a few weeks have passed since the originating story was
published or aired, F(3, 896) = 4.50, p < .01. Although respondents overall disagreed
with the statement, a Tukey's HSD post hoc test showed that those working for nondaily
papers (M = 1.90, SD = 0.82) were stronger in their disagreement than were their peers
in television (M = 2.20, SD = 1.06, p < .05) and radio (M = 2.44, SD = 1.12, p < .05).
The third involved this statement: when attributing information derived from other
media, use of "reportedly," without naming the news organization, is sufficient,
F(3, 895) = 4.84, p < .01. A Tukey's HSD post hoc test found that those working for
daily papers (M = 1.99, SD = 0.89) were more likely to disagree with this statement
than were their cousins in television (M = 2.25, SD = 1.01, p < .05) or radio (M =
2.44,SD = 1.22, p < .05), although all three groups disagreed with "reportedly" as an
attribution technique.
The final significant result involved this statement: it is more important to attribute
information derived from a national news organization than from a local news organi-
zation, F (3, 895) = 6.68, p < .001. Overall, respondents strongly disagreed with the
statement. Yet a Tukey's HSD post hoc test showed that television journalists
(M = 1.83, SD = 0.75) were more likely than daily newspapers (M = 1.56, SD = 0.71,
p < .001) and nondaily papers ( M = 1.52, SD = 0.65, p < .001) to see a difference in
whether the originating news organization was national or local.
Correlations between media type and several attribution exceptions, though statisti-
cally significant, were in the range of .1, or too small to be meaningful.86 For instance,
a comparison of whether print and broadcast journalists differed in accepting "report-
edly" as sufficient attribution revealed a Spearman's rho correlation (r = .09, n = 899,
p < .01) that was significant but small.
RQ5: Current factors. This research question asked which of three forces shaping
journalism today—the Internet, news competition, and pressure to produce—has the
greatest influence on attitudes toward attributing other media. The influence of the
Internet was measured by the two-item scale detailed earlier. Two other relevant state-
ments derived from the literature review were posed: (a) my organization is located in
a market with lots of news-gathering competitors and (b) at our organization, we're
under intense pressure to produce as much material as we can. Multiple regression
analyses showed a significant model (F[3, 884] = 3.23, p < .05) that revealed pressure
to produce stood out as the most likely factor to affect respondents' views on attribut-
ing information from other media, as Table 2 shows. Those with the strongest sense
of production pressure were less likely to believe other media always should be
attributed.
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
158 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 90(1)
RQ6: Personal or organization standards. This question compared responses to the
attribution absolutes scale with whether personal or organizational standards were pre-
eminent in making such choices. No significant relationships were found between
attribution beliefs and decision-making standards.
H1: Exceptions and integrity. Less willingness to embrace exceptions was hypothe-
sized to be associated with the principled end of Schlenker's Integrity Scale. Regres-
sion analyses demonstrated that the Integrity Scale could significantly predict scores
on the attribution exceptions scale, F(1, 825) = 39.97, p < .001. As shown in Table 3,
those who scored high in Schlenker's Integrity Scale (the principled end of the scale)
were significantly less likely to embrace exceptions in attributing information obtained
from other news media.
Discussion
The results expose significant disagreements over attribution. Although the SPJ ethics
code calls for identifying sources "whenever feasible"87 and Washington Post policy
asserts that "attribution of material from other newspapers and other media must be
total,"88 this study revealed that journalists don't believe in those platitudes.
About a fourth of respondents rejected the prescriptive ideal that good journalism
required the attribution of all sources of information, and the most significant excep-
tion regarded press releases. Respondents were far more likely to believe that the work
of their fellow journalists required attribution than to assert that press releases should
be cited explicitly. Some of that difference may be generational, for experienced jour-
nalists were more willing than their newer colleagues to indicate that press releases
should be attributed. But the reluctance to attribute press releases may also reflect a
Table 2. Current Factors Influencing Attribution Attitudes
B SE B β
Constant 4.58 0.13
Internet influence 0.02 0.03 .01
Competition −0.002 0.02 −.004
Production pressure −0.08 0.03 .10**
**p < .01.
Table 3. Schlenker's Integrity Scale and Attribution Exception
BSE B β
Constant 3.44 0.21
Schlenker's Integrity Scale −0.31 0.05 −.21***
***p < .001
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Lewis and Zhong 159
desire to perpetuate a "pretense of originality"89 and hide journalism's derivative
nature,90 if not contempt for public relations as a field.91 And a belief in crediting peers
may flow from professional loyalty enabled by autonomy norms.92
Even when using information from other journalism organizations, respondents
were willing to forgo attribution when faced with production pressure. That finding is
especially significant in light of sharply deteriorating advertising revenues fueling a
do-more-with-less atmosphere that has lessened commitment to traditional journalis-
tic principles.93 The finding that journalists in a production-focused news operation
are significantly more likely to consider attribution optional may indicate that stan-
dards are eroding across the profession.
Another important finding is that attribution beliefs varied with the type of job held.
Content creators, the people tasked with finding and reporting stories and visuals,
were more likely than the people in the office to see attribution as situationally defined.
The managers who write the official policies and employees who work behind the
scenes editing copy or producing video were less likely to allow for exceptions than
were the people in the field. That job-type distinction pinpoints the source of some
differences in attribution beliefs and affirms the primacy of professional autonomy.
Differences also can stem from individual-level beliefs about the degree to which
people see their principles as flexible, as measured by Schlenker's Integrity Scale. The
scale is an especially pertinent one for journalists expected to produce original report-
ing under deadline pressure, which requires trade-offs between completeness and
speed. Those who see principles as mutable are also more willing to forgo attribution
if information obtained exclusively is widely repeated, as happened with the interview
Barbara Bush gave NPR after Hurricane Katrina. As journalists increasingly are asked
to do more with less,94 autonomy norms suggest they may see attribution standards as
fluid, paralleling Schlenker's scale.
The findings validated assertions that attribution varies with the medium.95 Four
attribution exceptions were embraced more warmly by broadcasters than by print jour-
nalists. Radio journalists were most likely to agree that only exclusives required attri-
bution, a belief in keeping with a medium that depends on brevity. Likewise, nondaily
print journalists were least likely to agree that scoops held an expiration date, a view
befitting mostly weekly publications. The data also revealed that television journalists
were more likely to think attribution more important for national than for local stories
and to consider a generic "reportedly" to be sufficient. Although such findings are not
surprising, they show that attribution beliefs are far from universal.
The distinctions identified in this study are meaningful given the possibility that
variance was compressed. After taking the survey, nearly a tenth of the respondents
sent emails asking to see results, and several wrote notes expressing concern that peers
were minimizing attribution. Therefore, the survey may have been most attractive to
people who strongly valued attribution. Response bias is a potential concern for any
survey and is especially salient for ethical issues, which are vulnerable to social desir-
ability bias.96 Although the survey and all correspondence about it carefully avoided
any form of the word "plagiarism," questions about attribution may have evoked the
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
160 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 90(1)
concept and unintentionally prompted respondents to provide a "correct" answer.
Therefore, the study's findings may understate the intensity of differences.
One of the limitations of the study is that it measures only attitudes, not practice.
Journalists may believe they are attributing more frequently than their news reports
show. More research like the British elite-press study is needed to measure whether
journalists in other countries live up to their attribution ideals.97 So, too, is research into
the evolving practices of online journalists, only five of whom responded to this survey.
Hyperlinks are the closest thing journalism has to footnotes, yet practitioners differ
regarding their use and whether links substitute for quotation marks, as media ethics
watchdog Jim Romenesko discovered in 2011 when the Poynter Institute accused him
of systematic attribution failure.98 Another limitation, and thus fodder for future study,
is that different measures to evaluate the ethical perspectives of the respondents might
offer different insights into attribution. This study used two: whether organizational or
personal standards were more influential in ethical decision making, and Schlenker's
Integrity Scale comparing expediency to principles. Other measures, such as Forsyth's
Ethics Position Questionnaire99 and Victor and Cullen's Ethical Climate Questionnaire,100
could expand understanding of how journalists think about attribution.
Conclusion
This survey of attribution beliefs revealed how journalists vary from the absolutes
they preach. Respondents were far less willing to attribute press releases than they
were their colleagues' work. They were more likely to consider attribution optional if
they were under pressure to produce, worked for a broadcast medium, were a content
creator, were less experienced, or saw their principles as flexible. The findings reveal
that attribution beliefs are far more pliant than ethics policies suggest and reveal some
of the reasons why plagiarism occurs. Clearly, journalists cannot expect to thwart
plagiarism until they are willing to define their attribution standards.
The data also affirm the primacy given autonomy in professional ideology.
Journalists who prize the flexibility that autonomy grants can be expected to prefer a
situational approach to determining when information requires attribution. Although
strong majorities expressed agreement with attribution in principle, substantial differ-
ences arose when confronted with the details. Those differences are less a result of
sectarian quarrels between media than a systemic election of personal autonomy as the
defining element of professional identity.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship,
and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Lewis and Zhong 161
Notes
1. Anna Lewis, "Why Don't More Women Become Computer Geeks?," Washington Post ,
August 26, 2011, B4; Patrick B. Pexton, "Giving Credit Where Credit Is Due," Washington
Post, September 11, 2011, A9; Sydney Smith, "Essay Accused of Plagiarism Just 'Sloppy
Attribution' Says WaPo Public Editor," iMediaEthics, September 21, 2011, http://www.
imediaethics.org/index.php?option=com_news&task=detail&id=1699&search=Ensmen
ger (accessed June 8, 2012).
2. Richard A. Posner, The Little Book of Plagiarism (New York: Pantheon, 2007).
3. Arthur S. Brisbane, "Scholarly Work, without All the Footnotes," New York Times ,
October 3, 2010, WK8.
4. Steve Buttry, "When Does Sloppy Attribution Become Plagiarism?" (American Press
Institute, September 20, 2006; the essay has been removed from the website; the first
author made a printout on September 20, 2006, and can mail a copy upon request); Jo
Procter, "Copying News Releases Is Not Plagiarism," Quill, May 2006, 4.
5. David Simon, "Michael Olesker Is a Plagiarist? Who Isn't?," Baltimore City Paper, January 18,
2006, http://www2.citypaper.com/story.asp?id=11362 (accessed June 8, 2012).
6. Howard Kurtz, Media Circus: The Trouble with America's Newspapers (New York: Times
Books, 1993), 124.
7. SPJ Code of Ethics (Society of Professional Journalists, 1996), http://www.spj.org/ethicscode
.asp (accessed June 8, 2012).
8. Norman P. Lewis, "Plagiarism Antecedents and Situational Influences," Journalism &
Mass Communication Quarterly 85 (summer 2008): 353-70.
9. SPJ Code of Ethics.
10. Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel, The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should
Know and the Public Should Expect, 2nd ed. (New York: Three Rivers Press, 2007).
11. John C. Merrill, The Imperative of Freedom: A Philosophy of Journalistic Autonomy
(New York: Hastings House, 1974); John Merrill, Media, Mission and Morality (Spokane,
WA: Marquette, 2006).
12. Jane B. Singer, "Contested Autonomy: Professional and Popular Claims on Journalistic
Norms," Journalism Studies 8 (February 2007): 79-95; Michael McDevitt, "In Defense of
Autonomy: A Critique of the Public Journalism Critique," Journal of Communication 53
(March 2003): 155-64.
13. Douglas Birkhead, "News Media Ethics and the Management of Professionals," Journal of
Mass Media Ethics 1 (spring/summer 1986): 37-46.
14. Theodore L. Glasser and Marc Gunther, "The Legacy of Autonomy in American Jour-
nalism," in The Press, ed. Geneva Overholser and Kathleen Hall Jamieson (New York:
Oxford University Press, 2005), 384-99, 395.
15. Richard Keeble, "Journalism Ethics: Towards an Orwellian Critique?," in Journalism:
Critical Issues, ed. Stuart Allan (Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press, 2005), 54-66.
16. Randal A. Beam, David H. Weaver, and Bonnie J. Brownlee, "Changes in Professionalism
of U.S. Journalists in the Turbulent Twenty-First Century," Journalism & Mass Communi-
cation Quarterly 86 (summer 2009): 277-98.
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
162 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 90(1)
17. Peter J. Gade and Earnest L. Perry, "Changing the Newsroom Culture: A Four-Year Case
Study of Organizational Development at the St. Louis Post-Dispatch ," Journalism & Mass
Communication Quarterly 80 (summer 2003): 327-47.
18. Tracy C. Russo, "Organizational and Professional Identification: A Case of Newspaper
Journalists," Management Communication Quarterly 12 (August 1998): 72-111.
19. Mark Deuze, "What Is Journalism? Professional Identity and Ideology of Journalists
Reconsidered," Journalism 6 (November 2005): 442-64, 446.
20. Patrick Lee Plaisance and Joan A. Deppa, "Perceptions and Manifestations of Autonomy,
Transparency and Harm among U.S. Newspaper Journalists," Journalism & Communica-
tion Monographs 10 (winter 2009): 327-86.
21. Barbara Thomass, "Journalism Ethics," in Media Ethics: Opening Social Dialogue, ed.
Bart Pattyn (Leuven, Belgium: Peeters, 2000), 239-53.
22. Clifford G. Christians, "An Intellectual History of Media Ethics," in Pattyn, Media Ethics ,
15-46.
23. Patrick Lee Plaisance, "Moral Agency in Media: Toward a Model to Explore Key Com-
ponents of Ethical Practice," Journal of Mass Media Ethics 26 (April-June 2011): 96-113,
citing Chuck Huff, Laura Barnard, and William Frey, "Good Computing: A Pedagogically
Focused Model of Virtue in the Practice of Computing (Part 2)," Journal of Information,
Communication and Ethics in Society 6 (4, 2008): 284-316.
24. Patrick B. Pexton, "The Damage Done by Plagiarism in the Post," Washington Post, March
20, 2011, A9.
25. Tim Harrower, Inside Reporting: A Practical Guide to the Craft of Journalism (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 2007), 147.
26. Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct (Radio Television Digital News Association,
September 14, 2000), http://www.rtnda.org/pages/media_items/code-of-ethics-and-pro-
fessional-conduct48.php (accessed June 8, 2012).
27. Code of Ethics (Society for News Design, August 30, 2006), http://www.snd.org/about/
code-of-ethics (accessed June 8, 2012).
28. SPJ Code of Ethics.
29. Bloggers' Ethics Code, Cyber Journalist, April 15, 2003, http://www.cyberjournalist.net/
news/000215.php (accessed June 8, 2012).
30. Angela Phillips, "Old Sources: New Bottles," in New Media, Old News: Journalism and
Democracy in the Digital Age, ed. Natalie Fenton (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2010),
87-101.
31. Colleen Cotter, News Talk: Investigating the Language of Journalism (Cambridge: Cam-
bridge University Press, 2010), 146.
32. Lauren Kirchner, "Darts & Laurels," Columbia Journalism Review, July/August
2011, 15.
33. Trudy Lieberman, "Plagiarize, Plagiarize, Plagiarize . . . Only Be Sure to Always Call It
Research," Columbia Journalism Review 34 (July/August 1995): 21-25, 24.
34. J. H. Snider, "Free Riding: A Deeply Embedded Media Tradition," Nieman Watchdog ,
June 22, 2009, http://www.niemanwatchdog.org/index.cfm?fuseaction= background.view&
backgroundid= 00366 (accessed June 8, 2012).
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Lewis and Zhong 163
35. Chip Scanlon, "The First Peril: Fabrication" (Poynter Institute, November 13, 2002), http://
www.poynter.org/uncategorized/3323/the-first-peril-fabrication (accessed June 8, 2012);
Thom Lieb, All the News: Writing and Reporting for Convergent Media (Boston: Pearson,
2009).
36. Noah Adams, "Barbara Bush's Comments on Evacuees Cause a Stir," National Public Radio ,
September 6, 2005, http://www.npr.org/news/specials/hurricane/katrina/blog_090605.html
(accessed June 8, 2012).
37. Simon, "Michael Olesker Is a Plagiarist?"
38. David Zeman, Jeff Seidel, Jennifer Dixon, and Tamara Audi, "Albom Probe Shows No
Pattern of Deceit," Detroit Free Press, May 16, 2005, A1.
39. Valerie Basheda, "No Poaching!," American Journalism Review 23 (March 2001): 31-35, 35.
40. Richard Pérez-Peña, "Suit Accuses Hartford Courant of Plagiarism," New York Times ,
November 19, 2009, B2.
41. David Keith Cohler, Broadcast Journalism: A Guide for the Presentation of Radio and
Television News (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1985); Robert A. Papper, Broadcast
News and Writing Stylebook, 3rd ed. (Boston: Pearson, 2006).
42. G. Paul Smeyak, Broadcast News Writing, 2nd ed. (Columbus, OH: Grid, 1983), 43.
43. Frederick Shook, Dan Lattimore, and James Redmond, The Broadcast News Process, 5th
ed. (Englewood, CO: Morton, 1996), 9.
44. Mike Oreskes, "AP Announces Editorial Guidelines for Credit and Attribution," Associ-
ated Press, September 1, 2010, http://theblissindex.blogspot.com/2010/09/they-give-their-
blessing.html (accessed June 8, 2012; AP removed the memo from its website in 2012).
45. Mervin Block, Writing Broadcast News: Shorter, Sharper, Stronger: A Professional
Handbook, 3rd ed. (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2011), 36.
46. John H. McManus, Market-Driven Journalism: Let the Citizen Beware? (Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage, 1994), 94.
47. Jeffrey S. Wilkinson, August E. Grant, and Douglas J. Fisher, Principles of Convergent
Journalism (New York: Oxford University Press, 2009), 150.
48. Marcus Messner and Bruce Garrison, "Study Shows Some Blogs Affect Traditional News
Media Agendas," Newspaper Research Journal 32 (summer 2011): 112-26.
49. Ethics codes submitted to the American Society of News Editors examined in fall 2011, http://
asne.org/key_initiatives/ethics/ethics_codes.aspx (accessed June 8, 2012 ; ASNE deleted the
page in fall 2012 when it redesigned its website).
50. Cristine Russell, "Science Reporting by Press Release: An Old Problem Grows Worse in
the Digital Age," Columbia Journalism Review Observatory blog, November 14, 2008,
http://www.cjr.org/the_observatory/science_reporting_by_press_rel.php (accessed June
8, 2012).
51. Barbara Cochran, "Warnings about Video News Releases," Radio Television Digital
News Association Communicator, April 2005, http://www.rtdna.org/pages/media_items/
warnings-about-video-news-releases254.php (accessed June 8, 2012).
52. Diane Farsetta and Daniel Price, "Still Not the News: Stations Overwhelmingly Fail to
Disclose VNRs" (Center for Media and Democracy, November 14, 2006), http://www.
prwatch.org/fakenews2/execsummary (accessed June 8, 2012).
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
164 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 90(1)
53. Marion Just and Tom Rosenstiel, "All the News That's Fed," New York Times, March 26,
2005, A13; Ron Chepesiuk, "Fake News or Valuable Resource? The Controversy Sur-
rounding the VNR," Quill 94 (January/February 2006): 10-13.
54. Justin Lewis, Andrew Williams, and Bob Franklin, "A Compromised Fourth Estate? UK
News Journalism, Public Relations and News Sources," Journalism Studies 9 (February
2008): 1-20, 18.
55. Angela Phillips, "Transparency and the New Ethics of Journalism," Journalism Practice 4
(August 2010): 373-82.
56. Thorsten Quandt, "(No) News on the World Wide Web? A Comparative Content Analysis
of Online News in Europe and the United States," Journalism Studies 9 (October 2008):
717-38, 728.
57. Cotter, News Talk, 145.
58. Phillips, "Old Sources," 96.
59. Roy Peter Clark, "The Unoriginal Sin," Washington Journalism Review, March 1983,
43-47, http://www.poynter.org/uncategorized/85617/the-unoriginal-sin-2 (accessed June
8, 2012).
60. Lieberman, "Plagiarize, Plagiarize, Plagiarize."
61. David Shaw, "Recycling the News: Just Laziness or Plagiarism?," Los Angeles Times, July
6, 1984, A1.
62. Meredith O'Brien, "When the Words Aren't Our Own," Quill 88 (October/November
2000): 24-26, 26.
63. Steve Buttry, "21st-Century Journalism Requires 21st-Century Code," Quill 99 (March/
April 2011): 16-19, 19.
64. For one look at the gulf between newsroom management and employees, see Doug Under-
wood, When MBAs Rule the Newsroom (New York: Columbia University Press, 1993).
65. Gary Yukl, Leadership in Organizations, 6th ed. (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Pren-
tice Hall, 2006).
66. Sue Robinson, "'Someone's Gotta Be in Control Here': The Institutionalization of Online
News and the Creation of a Shared Journalistic Authority," Journalism Practice 1 (October
2007): 305-21; Jane B. Singer, "Strange Bedfellows? The Diffusion of Convergence in
Four News Organizations," Journalism Studies 5 (February 2004): 3-38.
67. Howard Gardner, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, and William Damon, Good Work: When
Excellence and Ethics Meet (New York: Basic Books, 2001); Carl Sessions Stepp, "Maybe
It Is Time to Panic," American Journalism Review 30 (April/May 2008): 22-27.
68. David H. Weaver, Randal A. Beam, Bonnie J. Brownlee, Paul S. Voakes, and G. Cleveland
Wilhoit, The American Journalist in the 21st Century: U.S. News People at the Dawn of a
New Millennium (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2007), 159.
69. Barry R. Schlenker, "Integrity and Character: Implications of Principled and Expedient Ethi-
cal Ideologies," Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology 27 (December 2008): 1078-1125.
70. Marisa L. Miller and Barry R. Schlenker, "Integrity and Identity: Moral Identity Differences and Pre-
ferred Interpersonal Reactions," European Journal of Personality 25 (January/February 2011): 2-15.
71. Norman P. Lewis and Bu Zhong, "The Personality of Plagiarism," Journalism & Mass
Communication Educator 66 (winter 2011): 325-39.
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Lewis and Zhong 165
72. Barry R. Schlenker, Michael F. Weigold, and Kristine A. Schlenker, "What Makes a Hero?
The Impact of Integrity on Admiration and Interpersonal Judgment," Journal of Personal-
ity 35 (April 2008): 323-55.
73. Schlenker, "Integrity and Character"; Scott A. Wowra, "Moral Identities, Social Anxi-
ety, and Academic Dishonesty among American College Students," Ethics & Behavior 17
(July 2007): 303-21.
74. In addition to the cases cited in the literature review, other representative cases include
the Orlando Sentinel's Emily Badger, who said a credit line in a chart allowed extensive
copying from a book about spring training (Torea Frey, "Ex-Daily Editor Feels the Heat
in Orlando," Daily Northwestern, May 21, 2004); Tom FitzGerald, whose San Francisco
Chronicle sports column was based on aggregation without attribution (Dan Fost, "Sports
Humor Columnist Reinstated by Chronicle," San Francisco Chronicle, July 26, 2001,
A22); and Blaine Harden, whose Washington Post reporting on a murder–suicide was
heavily dependent on regional newspapers (Erik Wemple, "Taking Names," Washington
City Paper, June 6-12, 2003).
75. Cision Media Database website, http://us.cision.com/media-database/media-database-
overview.asp (accessed June 8, 2012).
76. CisionPoint limits searches to five thousand names at a time. Thus, the database had to be
queried using different parameters (such as organization size, geography, and job title) to
stay within the five-thousand-name limit. Those parameters were changed repeatedly in an
attempt to exhaust the database. The results were aggregated into an Excel file so dupli-
cates (based on email address) could be removed.
77. Weaver at al., American Journalist, 159; Pamela J. Shoemaker and Stephen D. Reese,
Mediating the Message: Theories of Influences on Mass Media Content, 2nd ed. (White
Plains, NY: Longman, 1996).
78. Weimiao Fan and Zheng Yan, "Factors Affecting Response Rates of the Web Survey: A
Systematic Review," Computers in Human Behavior 26 (March 2010): 132-39.
79. Scott Reinardy, "Journalism in Crisis: Burnout on the Rise, Eroding Young Journalists'
Career Commitment," Journalism 12 (February 2011): 33-50.
80. Jane B. Singer, "Quality Control: Perceived Effects of User-Generated Content on News-
room Norms, Values and Routines," Journalism Practice 4 (April 2010): 127-42.
81. Neset Hikmet and Shaw K. Chen, "An Investigation into Low Mail Survey Response Rates
of Information Technology Users in Health Care Organizations," International Journal of
Medical Informatics 72 (December 2003): 29-34, 24.
82. Robert M. Groves, "Nonresponse Rates and Nonresponse Bias in Household Surveys,"
Public Opinion Quarterly 70 (summer 2006): 646-75.
83. Although a Cronbach's alpha of .70 is often cited as "acceptable," the value of that number
is inversely related to the number of items in the scale. An alpha of .70 is more difficult to
achieve with fewer than ten scale items than with more than ten items. Furthermore, alpha
tends to underestimate the degree to which the scale items interrelate. See Jose M. Cor-
tina, "What Is Coefficient Alpha? An Examination of Theory and Applications," Journal
of Applied Psychology 78 (February 1993): 98-104; Neal Schmitt, "Uses and Abuses of
Coefficient Alpha," Psychological Assessment 8 (December 1996): 350-53; and Robert
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
166 Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly 90(1)
F. DeVellis, Scale Development: Theory and Applications, 3rd ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage, 2012).
84. Schlenker, Weigold, and Schlenker, "What Makes a Hero?," 354-55.
85. Barry R. Schlenker, Marisa L. Miller, and Ryan M. Johnson, "Moral Identity, Integrity,
and Personal Responsibility," in Personality, Identity, and Character: Explorations in
Moral Psychology, ed. Darcia Narvaez and Daniel K. Lapsley (New York: Cambridge
University Press, 2009), 316-40.
86. Jacob Cohen, Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. (Hillsdale,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1998).
87. SPJ Code of Ethics.
88. Pexton, "Damage Done."
89. Lewis, "Plagiarism Antecedents," 363.
90. Macolm Gladwell, "Something Borrowed: Should a Charge of Plagiarism Ruin Your
Life?," New Yorker, November 22, 2004, 40-48.
91. Philip Patterson and Lee Wilkins, Media Ethics: Issues & Cases, 7th ed. (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 2011), 65.
92. Birkhead, "News Media Ethics"; Singer, "Contested Autonomy"; Jane B. Singer, "Who
Are These Guys? The Online Challenge to the Notion of Journalistic Professionalism,"
Journalism 4 (May 2003): 139-63.
93. Scott Reinardy, "Downsizing Effects on Personnel: The Case of Layoff Survivors in U.S.
Newspapers," Journal of Media Business Studies 7 (winter 2010): 1-19.
94. Dean Starkman, "The Hamster Wheel," Columbia Journalism Review 49 (September/
October 2010): 24-28.
95. Colin McEnroe, "On Plagiarism, and What to Do about It," Hartford Courant, August 14,
1991, A1.
96. Donna M. Randall and Maria F. Fernandes, "The Social Desirability Response Bias in
Ethics Research," Journal of Business Ethics 10 (November 1991): 805-71.
97. Lewis, Williams, and Franklin, "A Compromised Fourth Estate?"
98. Jeremy W. Peters, "Romenesko Leaves Poynter after Conflict over Quotes," New York
Times Media Decoder blog, November 10, 2011, http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.
com/2011/11/10/journalism-ethics-taken-too-seriously-romenesko-scolded-on-his-own-
blog (accessed June 8, 2012).
99. Donnelson R. Forsyth, "A Taxonomy of Ethical Ideologies," Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 39 (July 1980): 175-84.
100. Bart Victor and John B. Cullen, "The Organizational Bases of Ethical Work Climates,"
Administrative Science Quarterly 33 (March 1988): 101-25.
at PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIV on February 28, 2013 jmq.sagepub.com Downloaded from
... Journalistic plagiarisman absence of source attributionis universally considered a serious ethical violation, but disagreement abounds over when attribution is necessary (McBride, 2012;Mullin, 2014;Uberti, 2014). For example, professionals vary in whether attribution is required if the material is obtained from press releases, reported by a competing medium, or re-broadcast without attribution (Corbett, 2012;Lewis & Zhong, 2013). Sources used in the British quality press relied on materials that were rarely attributed (Lewis, Williams, & Franklin, 2008). ...
... An initial invitation in October 2011 to take the survey was followed up two weeks later with a reminder, producing a total of 953 valid responses. Some of the data from that survey was published in studies looking at attribution beliefs (Lewis & Zhong, 2013) and idea plagiarism (Lewis, 2013). For this study, the responses were evaluated further to retain only those that were substantially complete, for a total of 883. ...
A comparison of 1,096 professional journalists in China and the United States on attitudes toward attribution and plagiarism reveals Chinese journalists were more likely to see attribution as a practice to be embraced regardless of career longevity and culture, suggesting journalistic norms are more important than a collectivist orientation. Attribution was more likely to be embraced by those who see principles as more important than expediency, affirming research that plagiarism is hardly a monolithic concept. Overall, journalists in the two nations did not vary significantly in their attitudes toward plagiarism, despite vast differences in culture and politics as well as evidence that in some other fields China is more accepting of reusing material without attribution. The data show that among journalists, attitudes toward plagiarism are shared across national boundaries, reinforcing related research showing that a journalism culture exists and is shared at least in part across national boundaries.
... Despite the ethical importance given to attribution to avoid plagiarism (Lewis and Zhong 2013), journalists do not agree on whether or not a press release should be cited as a source (Procter 2006). Of 36 newspapers' ethics codes, only four of them mentioned press releases at all, but these codes recommended that the press release should be credited (Lewis and Zhong 2013). Conversely, some broadcast news textbooks (e.g., Smeyak 1983) suggest that less attribution should occur in broadcast news so as not to interrupt the story's flow. ...
Publicity may be considered "covert marketing" when the audience believes the message was created by an independent source (journalist) rather than the product marketer. We focus on one form of publicity—video news releases (VNRs)—which are packaged video segments created and provided for free by a third party to the news organization. VNRs are usually shown without source disclosure. In study one, viewers' beliefs about and perceptions of credibility in a news story (that is actually a VNR) are altered when they acquire persuasion knowledge about VNRs and learn that the source of the story was an unedited VNR. Study two results show similar patterns despite the fact that source disclosure of the story was provided on screen. Importantly, the perceived ethics of VNRs impact perceptions of credibility.
-
![J.H. Snider]()
In academics, idea plagiarism is a sin of the first magnitude, whereas in business and politics, it is considered, well, academic - of no practical significance. Where do think tanks fit on that spectrum? Are they fish or fowl, or neither? Compared to academic scholars, think tank scholars have a greater incentive to plagiarize ideas. The pressure to claim credit in both scholarly communities is great, but the pressure to give credit is relatively weak in think tanks. One reason is that the problem-solution structure of think tank work doesn't include a contribution-to-literature section. Another reason is that think tanks don't publish their work in peer-reviewed publications, which are well-designed for cost-effectively weeding out idea plagiarism. Think tanks may claim to respect original work as much as universities. But that doesn't mean it's in their self-interest to act in accordance with those values. This paper provides eight case studies related to such behavior. The paper assumes that if think tank scholars, like academic scholars, claim to provide original work, then they should be held accountable for proving that they in fact do so. The author hopes that others will investigate the limitations of such an assumption.Unfortunately, the two traditional approaches to discouraging idea theft, passing intellectual property law (primarily used in commerce) and relying on private institutions to cultivate social sanctions (primarily used in academics) are not well suited for think tanks. An alternative approach is a hybrid policy where law is used to strengthen social sanctions. For example, libel and transparency laws pertaining to think tanks could be reformed to encourage a more robust market in evaluations of public policy credit claims.
- Marcus Messner
-
![Bruce Garrison]()
The influence of blogs stems mainly from the attention traditional news media journalists pay to the opinions of the blogosphere as a means to assess the mood of the country. 1 Today, not a week goes by in which traditional news media fail to refer to reporting or editorializing of blogs. 2 However, the focus of the traditional news media is generally only on "A-list bloggers, those whose thoughts are heard and quoted far beyond the blogosphere and in mainstream media." 3 Subsequently, the question arises as to what degree blogs influence the traditional media's news agenda as sources. Agenda-setting is one of the most widely applied theories in mass com-munication research. 4 McCombs pointed out that, in addition to studying cor-relations between news agendas, examining the sources of media agendas is becoming increasingly important in a news environment that is dramatically changing and diversifying through the Internet. 5 Researchers have turned their attention to the media as news sources for themselves. Under the concept of intermedia agenda-setting, researchers study how journalists "rely heavily on each other for ideas and confirmation of their news judgments." 6 The purpose of this study, therefore, was to explore the intermedia agenda-setting relationship between traditional news media and blogs by analyzing the influences of sources on the respective media agendas. The concepts of This study, which explored the source interaction between elite traditional news media and political filter blogs, found traditional news media frequently cite blogs in their coverage, but the source attribution to the blogs is often vague.
- D.H. Weaver
- R.A. Beam
- B.J. Brownlee
- G.C. Wilhoit
An authoritative and detailed illustration of the state of journalistic practice in the United States today, The American Journalist in the 21st Century sheds light on the demographic and educational backgrounds, working conditions, and professional and ethical values of print, broadcast, and Internet journalists at the beginning of the 21st century. Providing results from telephone surveys of nearly 1,500 U.S. journalists working in a variety of media outlets, this volume updates the findings published in the earlier report, The American Journalist in the 1990s, and reflects the continued evolution of journalistic practice and professionalism. The scope of material included here is extensive and inclusive, representing numerous facets of journalistic practice and professionalism, and featuring separate analyses for women, minority, and online journalists. Many findings are set in context and compared with previous major studies of U.S. journalists conducted in the 1970s, 80s, and 90s. Serving as a detailed snapshot of current journalistic practice, The American Journalist in the 21st Century offers an intriguing and enlightening profile of professional journalists today, and it will be of great interest and value to working journalists, journalism educators, media managers, journalism students, and others seeking insights into the current state of the journalism profession. © 2007 by Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. All rights reserved.
- C. Cotter
Written by a former news reporter and editor, News Talk gives us an insider's view of the media, showing how journalists select and construct their news stories. Colleen Cotter goes behind the scenes, revealing how language is chosen and shaped by news staff into the stories we read and hear. Tracing news stories from start to finish, she shows how the actions of journalists and editors - and the limitations of news writing formulas - may distort a story that was prepared with the most determined effort to be fair and accurate. Using insights from both linguistics and journalism, News Talk is a remarkable picture of a hidden world and its working practices on both sides of the Atlantic. It will interest those involved in language study, media and communication studies and those who want to understand how media shape our language and our view of the world.
- Donna M. Randall
- Maria F. Fernandes
This study examines the impact of a social desirability response bias as a personality characteristic (self- deception and impression management) and as an item characteristic (perceived desirability of the behavior) on self-reported ethical conduct. Findings from a sample of college students revealed that self-reported ethical conduct is associated with both personality and item characteristics, with perceived desirability of behavior having the greatest influence on self-reported conduct. Implications for research in business ethics are drawn, and suggestions are offered for reducing the effects of a socially desirable response bias.
- Barry R. Schlenker
- Marisa L. Miller
- Ryan M Johnson
It is the thesis of this chapter that personal commitment to a principled ethical ideology, as opposed to a more expedient ideology, determines the strength of the relationship between moral beliefs and behavior. Personal commitment links the self-system to moral principles, producing a sense of obligation to perform consistently with those principles, a sense of responsibility for relevant conduct, and an unwillingness to condone and rationalize ethical failures and transgressions. With high personal commitment, a principled ethical ideology becomes a dominant schema for interpreting events and for guiding conduct. As such, the strength of commitment to a principled ideology has implications for a wide range of social activities. The remainder of this chapter will elaborate these ideas. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)(chapter)
- Jane B. Singer
Commitments to truth and to "transparency," or public accountability, are two central normative aspects of professional journalism. This article considers ways in which both are challenged and complemented by popular communicators, particularly bloggers, in today's media environment. While all professions claim autonomy over articulation and enactment of their own norms, definitions of professional constructs are now open to reinterpretation, and oversight of professional behavior is increasingly shared.
Posted by: laurelafollettee0197623.blogspot.com
Source: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236520708_The_Root_of_Journalistic_Plagiarism_Contested_Attribution_Beliefs
