ACCUSATIONS have been flying around the web over the past few days that The INQUIRER is guilty of plagiarism, and that as Editor, I enforce this as a policy.
Here's a very quick response to the accusations, for anyone who's been following this saga.
The INQUIRER doesn't plagiarise other sites. All the information in the article in question was based on either an alert sent to us by AMD or told to our reporter by AMD's Jan Guetter during a phone interview, including the references to Nvidia and Via. Feel free to confirm this with AMD. We were unaware of other articles stating the same points until after publication.
We haven't got a list of sites that we steal information from and then deliberately don't link to. Whenever we can't confirm the material ourselves, we link to the originator of the article.
However, I strongly encourage my reporters to talk to the original source as a follow up to any stories they see on the web, rather than just taking the 'facts' from a third party source, whether a competitor of ours or not. This is because I want The INQUIRER's articles to contain facts that we've verified, rather than blindly trusting other sites, and also because I want the writers to talk to as many sources as possible to work towards exclusives rather than just parroting other people's news.
Lots of other technology editors have been happy to use the plagiarism accusation as an opportunity to state how they would never condone such practices, as it's just not ethical journalism. However, nobody has approached me or anyone else at The INQUIRER to ask for a response or confirm whether this is true before stating their thoughts. Surely, isn't that the first rule of journalism?
Author: Madeline Bennett
Hello, feeling lucky? Sorry. What's your emergency?
Arrives just days after firm slams Android security as 'lacking' compared to BB10