Constant Content

I am sure this must have been discussed to death but you know what forum search engines are like...

What constitutes plagiarism?

Obviously writing directly from experience is good but most writers will have to research many topics and then present what they have learned in their own words.

What if you want to write an article on an obscure (or even fairly obscure) topic or study and there really is only one research paper, book, etc. on the matter (from which all other articles, Wikipedia etc. draw upon)?

You read the research paper, internalize it and then write it (or salient parts) in your own words.

Is this plagiarism and, if it is, how do you avoid it?

Plagiarism is rampant on the Net. I've done a bit of historical research in my time and it's funny to see the same wording on a dozen sites, none of them citing any reference and passing it off as their own. I often wonder if the source material was correct or not

Well if it violates copyright you have a problem. You can not copyright ideas though, so writing up a concept or an idea in your own words is fine. Facts are facts so you can restate facts all day long.

This is a good topic to explore. I was contacted by a writer not too long ago who asked me to look at his article. He was convinced his article was completely original ("I wrote it myself," he said), but apparently it was flagged for plagiarism. A quick check using one of the free online plagiarism checkers showed the problem. I then compared his text with the source text using Word's Compare tool and saw that he had used some other article as a base and then substituted a few words and phrases here and there. From what I can tell based on the conversations we had, he really didn't understand that you can't just take a chunk of text and replace a few words with synonyms and then call it your own. "But this topic is common" was one thing he said. The context of the article was identical, the ordering of each key point was identical, and the wording was nearly identical. Seeing the comparisions side-by-side made it obvious that this was a copy and paste job that had been slightly altered.

That's just one example of a no-no. After explaining my findings and that it was obvious that the content was not original but rather a copy-and-paste/minor rewrite job, the writer seemed genuinely surprised that this wasn't okay. He was from a developing country so there's a possibility that some of this problem is due inconsistent standards but its a problem in the US as well. And these are just the ones who don't know better and aren't necessarily trying to game the system.

I'm sure we'll discuss other forms of plagiarism as well, but it's nearly midnight here so I'll stop at just that one example and look forward to the rest of the discussion. In a nutshell, if you have to ask yourself if something you are writing could be construed as plagiarism, your gut's probably right. It's fine to write an article on a topic that's been done to death, but use your own words. Don't copy and paste and then edit the content because that's not writing. It's also fine to write an article that has few references. Just make sure that you use your own words, organize it in your own way, add your own original insights or angles, and cite as needed.

Celeste, I agree of course. I hope authors here are beyond such things as "rewrites" - at least in the manner you describe.

With a little editing I could turn Celeste's post into a good blog post... but that would be plagiarism. I could, however, ask her permission to use her copyrighted work and give her full credit. Much better plan. (I'm also serious about the request - it would make a great topic on my blog.)

Sorry Jade, it's going in mine

You're both too late. I've put it in mine.




Just kidding!

All kidding aside, while I plan on writing a post about plagiarism, I don't plan on copying and pasting the aforementioned post. Also, writing about plagiarism is not off limits for JadeDragon or anyone else reading this thread. You just can't take my text, change it up a little, and pretend you wrote it. If properly cited, you could take a small excerpt and post it such as:
Celeste Stewart recently discussed plagiarism on the Constant-Content forum. She said, "I was contacted by a writer not too long ago who asked me to look at his article. He was convinced his article was completely original ("I wrote it myself," he said), but apparently it was flagged for plagiarism. A quick check using one of the free online plagiarism checkers showed the problem. I then compared his text with the source text using Word's Compare tool and saw that he had used some other article as a base and then substituted a few words and phrases here and there. From what I can tell based on the conversations we had, he really didn't understand that you can't just take a chunk of text and replace a few words with synonyms and then call it your own."

From there, you could expand on the topic along the lines of:
While Stewart's experience illustrates a real problem, there's much more to discuss. For example, did you know that. . .

The above example would not be plagiarism. The below example would be:
I was contacted by an author a few weeks ago who asked me to look at his article. He was convinced that his article was uniquely original (he said "I wrote it myself"), but that the article was flagged for plagiarism. Using one of the free online plagiarism checkers, I saw the problem. I compared his text with the original document using Microsoft Word's Compare tool. I saw that he had used some other article as a starting point and then substituted several words and phrases. Based on the conversations we had, he really didn't understand that you can't just take a chunk of text and replace a few words with synonyms and then call it your own.

While the first example would be technically fine, it could show up as a plagiarism flag with plagiarism checking software. That's where a human editor would need to take a look and make a determination as to whether the excerpt was properly cited or falls under the "fair use" category. The second example would likely get picked up as well but even if it was changed up enough that it didn't, it's still wrong.

Dear fellow CCers,

I just submitted an article for a public request about an eBay listing. They wanted me to rewrite the article. I loosely based the article off their article -- using the same information -- but rewriting it for the most part (maximum direct quotes were 3-4 words) and re-organizing it completely. However, it was a request to REwrite an article -- am I going to get rejected for plagerism? Also, is it okay to submit "weirdly formatted" articles. This looked like an eBay listing versus a normal article...

*crossing fingers*

Amy

Amy,

If you wrote an article, product description, etc, using your own words and presenting your own unique perspective and structure, you should be fine. For example, if the requester is selling widgets on eBay and he shows you a description of widgets that he likes to help you understand the product better, you should be able to gather the information that you need and create a decent description that doesn't infringe upon the original writer's work (especially if you look up other sources of information and use your own experiences as part of the writing process). On the other hand, if you simple copy and paste that description and change the phrases around, then you could have a problem. Who wants to do that anyway?

One thing to keep in mind with "rewrite requests" is: is the requester requesting that you rewrite a draft that the requester himself wrote or is he requesting a rewrite of something he just found on the Internet? Helping a client fine-tune his draft is different than reworking something he pointed you to. When a customer suggests a rewrite of something he didn't originate, it's best to use that as an example of what the customer likes. It lets you know what he considers a good product. For example, if a customer points to an article detailing the latest grocery store marketing techniques, you could understand by reading the article that he's looking for a positive (or negative) spin on these techniques as well as what some of the newest innovations he may want you to discuss. While the original article may give you an idea of the techiniques to discuss, don't just rewrite the article point by point. Create your own arguments about how grocery store marketing is changing, how it affects consumers, and so on. Do a little research and find something more than what original article presented. Discuss the benefits or challenges, place the reader into the situation, appeal to the reader, etc. Add your own touches and make the topic your own and you won't have a problem.

Thanks so much, Celeste! Was hoping that you would be the one to respond.

Will definitely keep this advice in mind for the future... apparently Ed accepted this draft so that is good news for me. But, I will probably do a little more customization for the next re-write.

Thanks again!

Amy

AmyT wrote:Dear fellow CCers,

I just submitted an article for a public request about an eBay listing. They wanted me to rewrite the article. I loosely based the article off their article -- using the same information -- but rewriting it for the most part (maximum direct quotes were 3-4 words) and re-organizing it completely. However, it was a request to REwrite an article -- am I going to get rejected for plagerism? Also, is it okay to submit "weirdly formatted" articles. This looked like an eBay listing versus a normal article...

*crossing fingers*

Amy

I just wanted to come back to this post because I think it's the same public request I have just submitted to, and I found - by a simple ebay search - that the client has himself plagiarised ALL of his supposed original content - that's obviously why he wanted to have this rewritten! However his plagiarised content is already on ebay for all to see, and he hasn't even amended any of it, so he's not afraid of plagiarism per se! The worry is that if any of our submission still contains even a smattering of 'our client's wording' (which of course we believed was his) simply because it was well-stated originally and needed no improvement.....we'll now find these words never were his after all! So whoever gets their article purchased will have to go back to ebay and do a thorough search against similar listings, to check that there's truly no unintended duplication! I cannot believe any seller would have the nerve to lift, word for word, their sales copy from another seller's site.

Luckily I found out he had plagiarised the whole 'original listing' copy before I made my submission.

You'd be surprised what some people do in marketing. When I was working as a writer in that field for a few months I had someone ask me if I could write them some testimonials! Needless to say, I told them that they would need to find someone who had used their product

I would be concerned that the "buyer" might just use the submissions he gets through CC. Good luck.