> It all sounds very serious and yet they mention someone he accused was found to have not plagiarized Johannes Hahn was indeed "cleared of plagiarism" for his

> It all sounds very serious and yet they mention someone he accused was found to have not plagiarized Johannes Hahn was indeed "cleared of plagiarism" for his 1987 dissertation by the university which bestowed him with his PhD, but consider that this fact doesn't really mean much. University leaders may have other motivations than upholding academic integrity, and in this case the university was actually open with the fact that Hahn's dissertation would be considered plagiarism were it written today, but not in 1987, as the standards were supposedly lower back then. This explanation is indeed something I've already noticed in other cases where politicians were "cleared of plagiarism". Note that Weber's group found that 17.2% of Hahn's dissertation was plagiarized. Wikipedia link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Hahn#Doctoral_thesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannes_Hahn#Doctoral_thesis > It's not clear to me how many of these situations include intentional plagiarism or how serious it is. Again, it's up to the university to revoke a PhD, and it shouldn't be surprising that plagiarists don't lose jobs or social standing, that's the society we live in, sadly. I'm glad that Weber is trying to change that. EDIT: I looked into the most recent plagiarism find now, against the Green politician, and in this case Weber is acting a bit absurdly (something he's getting paid for, though). He's literally applying the same standards that would be applied to an academic paper to some political statement books, which is ridiculous. Now, I'd like it if ghostwriters were always credited (even in books by politicians and celebrities), but Weber's analyis is simply dumb.