Meet Barbara Anderson, Oregon's Serial Plagiarist

If you stopped by here yesterday, or perhaps scanned the recommended diaries at The Daily Kos, you probably saw my cost-benefit analysis of undocumented immigration that turned into an allegation of plagiarism. To quickly summarize for you: after reading a piece written by Jim Ludwick of the McMinnville-based Oregonians for Immigration Reform, I happened upon the same discussion of the same topic in an online venue called The American Chronicle. In fact, the discussion was so similar I realized that in several places, the two were almost exactly the same. And then when I found a rehash of the second piece in a third publication (by the same author as the second), I figured I had something--a copycat--and her name was Barbara Anderson, a self-described resident of "a large city on the West Coast" and frequent commentator on a host of conservative websites.

Having noted in the original piece that who copied whom--Anderson or Ludwick--was not yet firmly established, I sent notifications to both the McMinnville News-Register, which published Ludwick's piece, and the New Media Journal, which published Anderson's, that something was amiss. (The American Chronicle site was not working well enough to collect a contact email for them). The News-Register editors were rather dismissive of "an anonymous blogger" (I'm pseudonymous, thank you!), but given their interests indicated they would try to check things out. The editor of the NMJ on the other hand, noted GOPUSA hack Frank Salvato, was defensive and evasive from the start. To give you a little flavor of Salvato's way of looking at things, I included verbatim exceprts of our email exchange in yesterday's story.

We went back and forth a bit, but the upshot was that Salvato claimed to have talked to Anderson, and that she claimed Ludwick had freely waived all rights of ownership to what he had written, and what had been published in the News-Register. To him, that Anderson had fully copied Ludwick with his consent meant there was no cause for concern--and to think otherwise just made one a "bomb throwing reactionary" out to smear Anderson for an unknown reason. Salvato repeatedly returned to this defense, that somehow "permission" was an issue in plagiarism. Copyright theft, maybe--but nowhere in the definition does the word "permission" ever appear.

While this was going on I was spending some time trying to get contact numbers for Ludwick and Anderson. I did find Ludwick's finally, and left a message not yet returned. Based on circumstantial evidence that Anderson lived in or near Portland--given her repeated references to Oregon, and Portland being the only "major city" in the state--I found five plausible phone listings; none of the women admitted to being THE Barbara Anderson. But around this time, what looked like a dead end and a relatively minor story about a single case of poor attribution began to blossom--courtesy of the Kossacks commenting in my thread.

It started when our Washingtonian friend Daniel K from On the Road to 2008 researched the cite from the original Ludwick story, The Miliken Group's LA Economy Project, in pdf format. Comparing the report to the two writeups, things actually looked a smidge brighter for Anderson, and somewhat worse for Ludwick. While citing the report, and indicating an intent to begin quoting directly, there are no quotation marks anywhere and Ludwick in fact seems to have copied a paragraph, paraphrased a second, and then copied much of a different paragraph appearing elsewhere in the report, all without letting the reader know which was which. Anderson's wholesale copying of Ludwick nonetheless ends up being an attempt to pass off someone else's work as her own, but whether she knew she was also cribbing straight from the LAEP report is unclear.

So I had a story about plagiarism, made murky by distractions about "permission" and the original source's own trouble with proper attribution. I had enough to write up, but like an adulterer who will cheat twice if they get away with it once, I figured Anderson probably hadn't limited herself to this one transgression. Given how well the Kossacks had dug into short-lived WaPo columnist Ben Domenech's history of ripping off other authors, I knew if I could get my Kos diary enough visibility to bring in the commenters that they'd find whatever else was out there.

The hard part of course is getting your diary noticed, but thanks to strong support it was part of the "recommended list" for most of the day, much of that time in the #1 slot. And as I'd hoped, the community didn't let me down. Out of the blue came Blue Intrigue, who innocently asked, "Does Barbara Anderson also write for PredatoryAliens.com?"

Apprently not. But even if she did, we know she doesn't work for the LA County District Attorney's office, who published these two accounts of murdered police officers. Here's the relevant part of the first one as the DA's office wrote it in 2004:

Officer Atkinson began tailing the vehicle but temporarily lost visual contact. As he turned north in search of the vehicle, 17 year old Felipe Petrona-Cabana emerged from the driver’s side and began filing his .357 caliber revolver. Atkinson was struck twice in the head and died the next day.

Now here's Anderson's version, published in an article just last week:

Officer Marc Atkinson, 28, of the Phoenix Police Department, tailed suspects on drug detail. Seventeen year old Felipe Petrona-Cabana began firing his .357 caliber revolver. Atkinson, struck twice in the head, died the next day.

Although several words are copied directly from the original, there's a fair bit of paraphrasing and the descriptions are mostly factual. (Regardless, Anderson makes no attempt to credit her source for any of it). I guess she got impatient rewording the next story; again, original first:

Detective Arango located three suspects and detained them. As he searched for weapons, illegal alien Bautista Ramirez shot Arango four times. The first shot took off one of his fingers, the second through his thigh. As Arango lay on the ground helpless, Ramirez intentionally fired one round through his badge and then executed Arango with a shot to his head which severed his brain stem.

Now Anderson's version:

Detective Hugo Arango, 24, of the Doroville Police Department, detained three suspects. As he searched for weapons, Bautista Ramirez shot Arango four times. The first shot took off a finger, the second went through his thigh. As he lay helpless, Ramirez shot a round through his badge, then executed him with a shot to his head.

And there you have it, folks: our first example of flat-out copying without any hint of attribution. Just to be clear, here's the relevant part of the usage terms from the LA DA site:

You are also granted a limited, non-exclusive, revocable license to electronically copy and/or print hard copies of the site, but only for your personal non-commercial use or for the purpose of placing an order with the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office to purchase the Software, provided that you do not modify or delete any copyright, trademark or other proprietary notices. Except as expressly provided above, our Website Material may NOT be modified, copied, reproduced, published, displayed, posted, transmitted or distributed in any way or used for commercial purposes without the express written authorization of the County of Los Angeles.[emph mine]

So now we have two separate acts of plagiarism, one of them incontrovertible. Were there any others? You bet. Shall we play the game again? OK, here's James Rosen, last December at Capitol Hill Blue:

Kristin Breitweiser, a New Jersey woman whose husband died in World Trade Center's south tower, said she and other relatives of some of the 2,986 Sept. 11 victims have met with the military officers who worked on Able Danger, which the Pentagon ended in early 2001...

Breitweiser said she is confident additional facts about Able Danger will emerge.

"As more and more information is coming out, more and more Americans are questioning how this attack could have happened," Breitweiser said. "We're finding out we are not being told the truth. A lot of information was known, and the attacks could have been prevented."

Cleverly splicing two ends of Rosen's story together, Anderson writes two months later:

Kristin Breitweiser, a New Jersey woman whose husband died in the World Trade Center’s south tower, says she and other relatives of some September 11 victims have met with the officers of Able Danger. She has expressed confidence that additional facts about Able Danger will emerge. She echoes the feeling that the terrorist attacks could have been prevented.

“As more and more information is coming out, more and more Americans are questioning how this attack could have happened…….We are finding out we are not being told the truth. A lot of information was known, and the attacks could have been prevented”.

Are you tiring of the game yet? Daniel K wasn't--here's one he found, this time (not) citing fellow weirdo SJ Miller (who believes Reagan raised Social Security rates in order to handle all the new citizens from his immigrant amnesty plan), in "The Federal Observer":

Every guest worker plan bill currently in Congress contains this time bomb, no matter the author: McCain, Kennedy, Hatch, Craig, Domenici, Specter, or any of the Congressional panderers.
...
Remember that SSA is an Executive branch agency whose director is appointed by the President. Director Joann Barnhardt is so eager to give US Social Security benefits to Mexicans that she signed the US-Mexico Totalization Treaty in July 2004 and built an SSA building in Mexico! (b)(f)
...
You certainly don't hear Ted Kennedy, Orrin Hatch or John McCain bragging that they voted for the 1986 Illegal Alien Amnesty, much less promoting acceptance of fraudulent documents. But it happened before, and our SSA veteran assures us it will happen again.

In 1986, we were promised that amnesty would be given to 300,000 illegal aliens, but the final count was nearly 3 million. Although the Bush Administration cites 11 million illegal aliens, no one stands by that number when none of the guest-worker amnesty bills contain numeric limits. Even the 2006 Bear Stearns estimate is 25-50 million. Every American knows better than to believe any information on illegal aliens that comes from George Bush or his Executive Branch buddies.

The 1986 "One-Time Amnesty" showed INS and SSA knowingly accepted massive numbers of fraudulent rent receipts, earning records and birth records.

And now Anderson's faithful homage:

This little bomb is currently in every guest worker plan, no matter who is pushing it: McCain, Kennedy, Hatch, Craig, Domenici, Specter or any of the other senate panderers.
...
SSA is an Executive branch agency whose director is appointed by the President. Director Joann Barnhardt is so eager to give U.S. Social Security benefits to Mexicans that she signed the U.S.-Mexico Totalization Agreement in July 2004 and built an SSA building in Mexico: sort of a branch office, paid for by American taxpayers.
...
In 1986 we were sold the same elixir. We don’t hear the leading salesmen, Ted Kennedy, Orrin Hatch or John McCain, who are touting the 2006 rerun of amnesty, bragging about their 1986 votes. In 1986 we were promised that amnesty would be given to 300,000 illegal aliens, and that would be the final, final amnesty. The reality was that the final count was nearly 3 million. Well, we know how things just grow in the atmosphere of Washington, D.C. when you take your eyes off them. The “one-time” amnesty showed INS and SSA knowingly accepted massive numbers of fraudulent rent receipts, earning records and birth records.

If you're wanting to avoid having your work compared to previous publications, maybe it's not such a good idea to GIVE YOURS THE SAME TITLE. Given that, and the similar tone and right-wing-mag provenance between the two, I've got no problem believing that Anderson may have created her column with Miller's knowledge and consent, as she claims to have done with Ludwick...but as we know, consent has nothing to do with attribution, and as long as the reader is being duped into believing that the ideas presented are original ones, something deeply unethical is being done.

Can you handle one more? In the last of the finds by Blue Intrigue, we discover that Anderson is not afraid to step out of the shadows of race-baiting immigration "reformer" networks and rip off an outfit like The Wall Street Journal (yes, I know: some of you may say she hasn't stepped out very far. But stick with me here):

The growing Brazilian presence fuels resentment in some quarters. Critics complain that educating immigrants costs the town $10,000 per student a year, while many parents work for cash and don't pay taxes.

"They've made Framingham an outlaw town," says Joseph Rizoli, 53, a school-bus driver who founded an anti-illegal immigration group called Concerned Citizens and Friends of Illegal Immigration Law Enforcement.
...
Ethnicity and immigration status "are not relevant," concludes Joanne Aliber, a longtime customer of Ms. De Sales. At both her and her husband's high-technology workplaces, they consider immigrants as colleagues, not competitors. Housekeeping is just another aspect of the global economy. "My company employs people all over the world; in India, in Brazil," says Jeffrey Aliber. "As far as I'm concerned, it's the same principle here. You buy the best service."

And now Anderson's reworking:

Critics of the growing Brazilian population have pointed out that educating immigrants (illegal?) costs the town $10,000 per student per year, and many students’ parents work for cash and may not pay taxes. “’They’ve made Framingham an outlaw town‘, says Joseph Rizoli, a school-bus driver.” He is the founder of an anti-illegal immigration group called Concerned Citizens and Friends of Illegal Immigration Law Enforcement.
...
Those who use De Sales’ services have a different view. “Ethnicity and immigration status ‘are not relevant’, concludes Joanne Aliber, a longtime customer of Ms. De Sales.” Housekeeping is just another aspect of the global economy for Aliber and her husband, who both work at high-technology jobs. Her philosophy is that “you buy the best service”.

This, if you can believe it, probably represents the least egregious example of the ones detailed here. Anderson notes the existence of the WSJ article upfront, complete with the author's name and publication date, so you are at least warned that some kind of reference to previous material is being made. But proper citing is more than just saying "Someone else wrote an article I want to talk about" and then not mentioning that source again, acknowledging direct quotes, or even linking to it for more information. Why did Anderson not provide a link? Perhaps because her lifting of full sentences and paragraphs might become too obviously seen? I don't know, and it really doesn't matter. I'm pretty sure Joel Millman won't feel properly credited when he discovers that someone has cut and pasted his article and repackaged it for resale to wild-eyed xenophobes.

So why do they do it? Since he did the legwork in finding most of the examples I showed you, I asked Blue Ingrigue to try answering the question:

The "right-wing noise machine" appears to encourage plagiarism by discouraging original thought and dissent. It is no surprise that a "copy and paste" mentality exists among the intellectually lazy punditry when all that really matters is that a unified front is presented. It's propaganda. It reflects perfectly that the right is devoid of original ideas. I would be very surprised if more examples of plagiarism by other writers on the right is not discovered.

I'll continue trying to get Jim Ludwick on the phone, and see if I can get a working number for Ms. Anderson. I'll also let you know if any of the victims of her serial lapses in judgement have anything to say about her. But for now, I'll leave you with Salvato's words at the New Media Journal, one of several sites apparently willing to pay for second-hand paranoid drivel: "Goodbye, TJ. You're a smear merchant. Publish that." Heh--he wishes it were a smear, and I wish I were a paid merchant. Guess we're even.