Get LISNews via email! Enter Your Email Address:
ALA President Camile Alire has been caught plagiarizing and possibly using a fake signature by me, SafeLibraries. Before the usual crowd piles on, you have to see the evidence for yourselves:
ALA Double Standard on Accuracy in Texas State Board of Education Proposal on School Book Content; ALA President Plagiarizes to Promote Matter Outside ALA Purview
1. it's an ALA-created document, signed by the president of ALA[*]; how is it plagiarism?
2. do you take issue with the contents of the letter?
2a. if you have problems with the content of the letter, wouldn't it be more effective to highlight the problems?
3. what is your opinion of the contents of the letter?
*The Chair of the Intellectual Freedom Committee wrote the IFC draft of the letter, which was developed through IFC internal processes, and forwarded it up through the internal-process-chain within ALA. The ALA Executive Board approved it (and probably wordsmithed it; wordsmithing is common practice in ALA) and The ALA President signed it (as the public voice of ALA) and submitted it.
Let me say again, the ALA's Executive Director said, "The Board has been waiting to hear from the Intellectual Freedom Committee. President Camila Alire will be sending a letter including the statement to the Texas DOE this week."
So even the Executive Director expected her to write her own letter and "include" the IFC statement. Instead, she chose to plagiarize.
1) I explained the reasons in the body of the blog post and in responses here.
2) 2a) 3) The substantive contents of the letter was not discussed by me in detail in the blog post. Be that as it may, I'll say now that the letter was rather empty. It started with conclusive statements, was filled was complimentary things about the wonders of school libraries, then closed with conclusive statements. I could not find any statements of fact related directly to the issue which the ALA is seeking to prevent. People have been saying I write poorly, but that letter was fact-poor, and it is supposed to represent the ALA's best effort to affect children nationwide.
So, setting aside its being plagiarized, it really says very little anyway, other than concluding the ALA opposes the Texas SBOE's effort to improve education. And a library association has no standing to suggest what should or should not be taught to children in public schools.
It's an embarrassing letter substantively and procedurally, let alone its being plagiarized.
Yeah, this is a complete non-story with a pretty obvious bias. ("Outside ALA Purview?" Please.) Attaching your signature to what is basically reworking of a letter intended for this purpose can hardly be said to constitute plagiarism.
Your use of the word plagiarism: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2y8Sx4B2Sk
It's plagiarism. See how she added a few words. See how she rearranged paragraphs. See wholesale copying. See that nowhere is credit given where credit is due. Notice even Fiels said she would submit the Garnar letter when she submits her own. She did not do that. She just chopped his up and submitted it as her own.
This is out and out plagiarism. This is theft. That's what plagiarism is. This is disgraceful. If I were still an ALA member, I'd feel embarrassed.
She is writing, supposedly, about the school environment. No way would schools allow plagiarism. A student would suffer serious consequences. If a professor did this, firing might be appropriate.
This is inexcusable. It does not make a difference who she is or how high she sits. If I were an ALA member, I would immediately seek her immediate removal, not for the signature, but for the plagiarism. The signature is a nonissue, expect to the extent it shows a lack of professionalism, among other things. You can't sign a signature on a letter to a state agency in a matter such as this?
No. She could have so easily done what Fiels said. Or she could have easily provided attribution where attribution was due. Her plagiarism substantially misleads a Texas state agency into believing the source of the letter is the ALA when in reality if is only one committee within the ALA, and even then not everyone is in agreement. The ALA is only writing one letter to the Texas SBOE, so using the same thing twice as some organizations do wouldn't even apply even if that idea excuses plagiarism, which it does not.
All you "anonymous" writers are supposedly free speech advocates, yet here you are advocating people ignore my pointing out the ALA's plagiarism. Your personal attacks avoid the issue, which is your purpose, and in doing so, you evidence my claims have merit.
"Silly cultural imperialist", "truly worthless", "ridiculous", "very odd", "crazy." Sling some more at me. It doesn't change the facts. The ALA President is a plagiarist and there should be serious consequences.
Of course, all this is my opinion, but comparing the two letters side by side should convince anyone.
Dude, I hate the ALA and it would be easy to sell me on something anti-ALA. Problem is your piece against the ALA in regards to plagiarism is incoherent. What are you saying is plagiarism? How do you know that the letter was not used with permission? You gotta make your case man. We can't make it for you.
"How do you know that the letter was not used with permission?" Permission to plagiarize? Hmmm, I wonder if getting permission absolves plagiarism. I doubt it. "Hey, Bob, may I steal your answer and submit it to the teacher as mine own?" "Sure, but if you get caught, I can't help ya." I think that is still plagiarism.
"You gotta make your case man. We can't make it for you." Actually, I provided the text of both letters and the surrounding context such as the Fiels email so people could figure this out for themselves. My "case" is irrelevant. What is relevant is the facts of this matter.
Alire, by the way, has made no response despite my emailing her. In the other ALA plagiarism case, the plagiarizer admitted, explained, and corrected the situation, and it turned out to be not so visible/serious. What is Alire hiding? If she wants to amend her response, she better do it soon as the comment period is closing Thursday, I believe.
>Alire, by the way, has made no response despite my emailing her.
It makes sense for her not to respond. What good will come from refuting specious allegations? We have been refuting your allegations and we are getting nowhere. And our getting nowhere is not because you are right.
I am no ALA clone. If the ALA president did something ethically or legally wrong I would be more than willing to see a point made of it. Your allegations do not meet my criteria of a legal or ethical issue. In fact you used up what very little credibility you had with me.
>>My "case" is irrelevant.
>>What is relevant is the facts of this matter.
But when you present them in a manner that no one knows what the f*** you are talking about they don't really matter. I read your stuff. It makes no sense to me. I am anti-ALA and willing to give you the benefit of the doubt. I read your stuff and the facts you present don't convince me of anything.
How would you write it? You use foul language to describe my writings and you bend over backwards to excuse plagiarism. You claim you are "anti-ALA," so why don't you take the facts I presented and more you may find and write up your own explanation of the plagiarism?
I doubt you are "anti-ALA" since your writing here is a naked effort to make me the target, not the plagiarism by the ALA President. You act as if plagiarism is absent if I personally don't write well.
Dude you are so dense. If you have permission it is not plagiarism.
"Hey Bob I see you wrote a letter critical of that company. I want to write a letter to that company also. Can I use the language in your letter?"
"Sure Doug go ahead and use my letter."
New person to conversation named Phil:
"Bob someone used the language in your letter."
"Yea I know. It was Doug I said he could use the letter."
"Oh, gotcha. But isn't that plagiarism?"
"Who cares? I wrote the original and I said Doug could copy it. I am the only person that could gripe about Doug using the letter and I am the one that gave him permission to use it. For me to complain about Doug using my letter would be pretty stupid."
I hadn't heard of SafeLibraries before this post... Now that I've read your arguments and learned about your agenda, I will most certainly avoid your posts in the future. I get my quota of crazy at work.
Thanks for the heads up.
I don't think its "plagiarism" to sign your name to a letter that one of your subordinates (or a committee of subordinates) drafted. In fact, I would pretty much call that standard operating procedure.
Also...you allege she plagiarized her own signature. I don't even understand what this means--unless its a very odd attempt at humorously undermining your own argument.
And truly worthless. I am sorry I clicked that link. The ALA has no educational agenda? What about libraries ISN'T educational?
I'd rather not provide hits to your website, you silly cultural imperialist, you.
Hosted By ibiblio XML Twitter!