5 ms·
Well, if they had been reading one single article they found online, and just reading it aloud and making jokes about it, I might accept (though still be annoye
by DamnInteresting 8y ago
Well, if they had been reading one single article they found online, and just reading it aloud and making jokes about it, I might accept (though still be annoyed by) the "oops we forgot to attribute" defense. But if you look at what The Dollop actually did, they took 5-6 paragraphs from one article, 7-8 paragraphs from another article, a few solitary paragraphs from others, and just glued it all together and never said a word about where the text came from. Cribbing segments from various places like that, and "forgetting" to attribute, that is classic, flagrant plagiarism.
Like you say, MBMBaM credits their source. They're also using 1-2 sentences from a public forum, not a dozen paragraphs from a competing podcast.
- Kye 8y agoI don't now what The Dollop was like four years ago when this happened. What I do know is they list all their sources now, and I can't find any issue with the ratio of quoted material to original. You obviously put a lot of work into your project. It's not to my taste, but there's a place for a plain telling of history. It's unfortunate The Dollop's early missteps still affect you all these years later. I know what it's like to get hung up on something for long enough that everyone else thinks you should have moved on.