The May Harper's has a review by Wyatt Mason of a book by Christopher Sawyer-Laucanno which charges the author with engaging in plagiarism.
"Sawyer-Laucanno's biography is jammed with instances of wholesale borrowing," Mason says, "--remarkable parallels of language and information."
Whoa! Is Mason talking about Sawyer-Laucanno's book-- or previous Harper's articles?
When one looks at the nine examples of Tom Bissell's plagiarism (covered on this blog in January), and the plagiarism by Jeff Tietz of a David DeKok book in another Harper's essay (covered on this blog in February), one sees Wyatt Mason discussing the very same thing.
Kind of schizoid behavior on Harper's part, don't you think? They point out plagiarism by others, when they've done the same thing. I can't see the difference between the examples given in the Wyatt Mason article of reworded sentences and unattributed secondary sources, and what Harper's writers Tom Bissell and Jeff Tietz did.
The last paragraph of Wyatt Mason's article, in extremely vague language, seems to be saying that plagiarism is everyplace. "--we are drowning in information--" Is the current Harper's article a way of excusing their own behavior?
Regardless, plagiarism is plagiarism-- and only a total fool would buy Sawyer-Laucanno's (or Tom Bissell's) explanation that he didn't have his source open in front of him-- it all just happened accidentally.
I'd like the demi-puppets who supported Bissell-- Maud Newton, Daniel Radosh, Mark Sarvas, Bondgirl, Galley Cat, and company-- to comment on THIS article please.