Melania Trump plagiarism?
One of the more difficult aspects of being a professor is dealing with plagiarism issues. I ask you to compare Michelle Obama's and Melania Trump's speeches, and decide for yourself. Be objective.
For your information, many professors require students to submit their work electronically so that it can be checked for plagiarism via turnitin.com. While such software checks do check for similarities in words and phrases, the analysis that the software performs does not give proper credit to the student when the student does give proper attribution.
If Mrs. Trump were taking a class from you, would she pass or fail, after last night?
For your information, many professors require students to submit their work electronically so that it can be checked for plagiarism via turnitin.com. While such software checks do check for similarities in words and phrases, the analysis that the software performs does not give proper credit to the student when the student does give proper attribution.
If Mrs. Trump were taking a class from you, would she pass or fail, after last night?
Besides, a speech full of that kind of empty generalities doesn't have much in the way of real content to steal.
I flunk the so-called journalist who "caught" this, and everyone else who thinks it's even important.
Here is the WIFE of a CANDIDATE, who is NOT a politician, whose 4th or 5th language is english, isnt a polished speaker, and probably had NO idea of what Michelle Obama said (who cares about what Michelle Obama said anyway), and probably got help writing the speech from one of the thousands of speechwriters out there that had better use of the english language--- and she gets pounded???
She gave a good speech and conveyed the ideas she wanted to get across.
And they they pound on Trump for NOT using pre-prepared speeches.
I would think that Michelle Obama might have easily spouted words that SHE heard somewhere. People give speeches every day, and it becomes harder and harder to know what was said by who and when.
Its completely off the point anyway. We want a president who will effectively perform the jog, and thats what should be talked about. Not this nonsense.
Funny thing is that very often the people who copy really dont get anywhere. They tend to NOT understand the important design elements incorporated in the things they copy, and therefore make an inferior product.
In College, my daughter was told she copied a research paper, but professor could not produce from where. Another professor came in and told him to set her down, give her any topic and tell her to write in in front of him. He did, she did, and he was blown away, and told the other professor he had never seen a student in his class with such a vocabulary and grasp of how to use it. Sometimes professors get goofy.
B.S = Bull Shit
Masters = Master of Bull shit.
Ph.D = Master of Bull shit piled higher and deeper.
Edited to add thought and fix spelling.
Also, I find it interesting how academic elitists, like to apply their academic elitist application of plagiarism rules to NON-ACADEMICS then treat paraphrasing though be it closely as though they were serial killers who ate children.
Here is ONE Academic definition of paraphrasing.
"Quoting: To quote is to include the identical wording from the original source in your paper. Quoted material in your paper is distinguished from your own words by the use of " " or by indenting the quoted text (if quoting a longer passage). In addition to quotation marks or indenting, all quoted material should also be cited, using either footnotes, endnotes, or in-text citation.
Paraphrasing: To paraphrase is to include the ideas or information from an original source in your paper by rephrasing those ideas or information in your own words. The key to successful paraphrasing is to use as few words as possible from the original text--be mindful not to change the meaning that you are trying to convey as you rephrase--and to cite your paraphrase. Without proper citation, your paraphrase could be construed as plagiarism." (http://www.plagiarism.org/citing-sour...)
Now if you compare word for word, and use academic acceptable standards, this was BORDERLINE, but not done for profit.
Next, I suppose using the phrases"Your word is your bond", "Work hard for what you get", "My parents passed on their values to me", Values need passed from generation to generation" in my opinion are phrases that fall into the PUBLIC DOMAIN.
So you can nit-pick all you want. the long and short is that Milania, speaks 5 languages fluently, and English is her 5th language not first or second. Milan is IS a first generation LEGAL immigrant to this country and is a naturalized citizen and has NEVER degraded out country by claiming this is a mean country like Michelle has.
Next, I took Milania's speech and ran it through 2 plagiarism checkers one being Grammarly and her speech came up with a 29% similarity with both averaged.
Next and to your last point, SHE IS NOT TAKING AN ACADEMIC CLASS FROM YOU for some academic grade!! Or ANY professor so this is really irrelevant and does not in any way subtract from the FACTS of her life.
ˈplājəˌrizəm/
noun
noun: plagiarism; plural noun: plagiarisms
the practice of taking someone else's work or ideas and passing them off as one's own.
synonyms: copying, infringement of copyright, piracy, theft, stealing; informal cribbing
"accusations of plagiarism"
It's a common practice and relatively easy to get away with. Anything that is older than the copyright laws allow your safe. They are something like patents in that respect. Words I beleive have to be more exact especially in the public arena where they were meant to be listened to, thought about, and hopefully adopted. This particular case follow at least degrees of that. Was it exactly word for word? No and no one with any brains at all would have knowingly cribbed something wihich in effect shows admiration for thiier mental ability in this case. Did someone slide an unattributed piece of work in to the pile of suggestions? I would believe that
A full blown case of intentional plagiarism of thoughts and ideas for profit does exist in this country in the writings of George Lakoff whose 'system; may be attributed directly to the philosopher Plato and many of his linear descendants and he claims in doing original thinking and makes a profit at doing so. That was my evaluation of his writings which are also sophomoric to my thinking and evaluations. Yet he no one has stood up for the original authors and thinkers and filed a counter claim. In my personal estimation he is a a fraud and he is at the level of a secular 700 club.
I rather thought the left was a bit wiser than using this as some sort of point scoring device considering their own background but then that applies to so many many talking poiints,. Economics, morality, treatment of the military, women's movement, equal opportunity, civil rights, various 'isms, The are so used to getting away with it they don't think of fact checking and finding out as others did the name of Eleanor Roosevelt was involved.
No. just mark it down to the current campaigns version of Bimbo Brigade Babes.
Unless you wish a full blown he said, she said war and that is one thing the left cannot survive.
i find it hard to condemn anyone for plagiarism in short bursts of well-worn over-polished nuggets of average wisdom.
Reading that speech, had I listened to begin with I doubted she had written a single word. Of course that was with the sure and certain knowledge that important people don't have to do such mundane unimportant work as truthful conversation with the people they hope will elect them.
I wonder how many of these could write a speech as short and as meaningful as that beginning with "Four score and seven ....'
Count them on the fingers of one hand? Why do I not feel defrauded? Because no one expects much from Genus Politicas these days. It also explains why I don't listen to debates or conventions. If they can articulate verbally they cannot speak truthfully. Normally the two reside in the 'can't' column.
The plagiarism was so blatant, I wonder if one of the speech writers, or possibly even Donald or Melania Trump, put the copied language in the speech for some strategic reasons: to get the subject onto a mini-scandal instead of something else, to undermine secretly the campaign, or to make those supporters who felt not so smart in school sympathize with the Trump family as underdogs.
.
Michele definitely said what she knew their wider audience would approve of, regardless of how false the content. (And it was largely a pack of lies.) I don't know Melania's history, so she may have been speaking the truth, too.
Michele flunks on ethical grounds, the lying whore.
Virtually none of the scum who write speeches today have any ethics so why should we expect them to create original content? Flunk the speech writers.
I have to give Trumps wife one thing. She was gutsy to get up there and give a speech not even in her native language. Its no wonder why she might have wanted some help writing it.
As to the content, she just wanted to give the people there an idea of what Trump is like as a person when not in the political arena being pounded on from ALL sides by competitors and media.
Trump is a lot stronger than I am. I would have told everyone to fu$% off long ago and forgotten about the job of president for good.
Interestingly enough, I thought his son Don Jr and particularly Ivanka are really pretty cool. Maybe THEY should run, particularly Ivanka
President Reagan's "Shining 'City on a Hill'" is from Mathew 5:14 quoting Jesus' "Salt and Light" parable from the Sermon on the Mount, it was also used by John Winthrop the 1st Gov. of Mass. Bay Colony in 1630. "My word is my bond" is Act III Scene II of "Midsummer Night's Dream" by Shakespeare in 1600. Did Michelle Obama credit the Bard?
http://ilovemyfreedom.org/everyones-c...
Having worked in IT support for a number of years at Universities and Community Colleges. I often tell professors to not trust TurnItIn, but they being human essentially are lazy and want a push button solution to their work issues.
I had a Prof once who just ran them through and wanted to give Double F's if TurnItIn popped on it. He didn't last long as a Prof.
She would pass.The liberal press has blown this out of proportion.
College students do not have other people do their paperwork that they may or may not have to recite from before the class. At least the honest ones don't.
Now if colleges allowed students to pick people to do their paperwork, I might give Melania a F for choosing a lousy writer.
Or in real life I guess I could give the Trump campaign a F for hiring a specific lousy speech writer.
Maybe I would also give Trump and F for not accepting the speech writer's resignation, but I don't know what was entirely behind all that.
All in all, I hate to see any blown opportunity for beating the evil hag, though I heard one pundit say that this avoidable mess won't affect anyone's vote at this point.
Well, I don't know about that. I imagine there are independents out there with willy-nilly thought processes that would make Ayn Rand's head hurt due to talking to them.
so that I could provide for myself and my family ...
and have fun doing real work, to be productive.
the degrees were harder to get than the knowledge.
and everyone -- it seems -- tries to stop productivity. -- j
.
By the way, (it could have used more seasoning).
That's why I roar sometimes.
Watter's World is supposed to be funny; but after some cringing over people's ignorance, I usually snap, voice some profanity and go channel surfing.
Oh, new thought inspired by you~
Bet a lot of those idiots have degrees.
I realize people liked the speech when Obama gave it but, I didn't really care for it. It didn't get any better the second time around. Michelle Obama has the better voice and, is the better public speaker. Melania Trump's voice isn't as good and, perhaps since she's not speaking in her native tongue, her speech is less strong, more halting.
I didn't think schools of science would be so at risk for this or, are you considering their basic studies and humanities courses, which would now have to be nightmares for teachers. Hell, they can call up Shakespeare on their smart watches now.
The problem is really with the colleges. Not everyone should go to college, and if they do it should be to LEARN, not just get a paper degree.
Efficient adsorbtion of methane presents us with a big market. CNG vessels are expensive and a bit dangerous and hold limited volumes. Vessels capable of adsorbing methane could make CNG a much more popular motor fuel since, per BTU methane is much cheaper than gasoline.
Any thoughts? Anyone in your department working in that area? If you think it's possible, we might get state funding for research since, low natural gas prices are crimping lots of state budgets.
As for adsorption of methane, I do know some professors who work in this area. Certainly the one who is the leading expert is Omar Yaghi.
http://science.sciencemag.org/content...
Amoco (now part of BP) had a really solid group working on this in the late 1980s and early 1990s led by Rodney Mieville. Rodney passed away in 2013.
See p. 591 and the articles that follow in
https://web.anl.gov/PCS/acsfuel/prepr...
Allow me to suggest what may not be a viable solution: Make your students video themselves doing the labs and writing the reports. They video themselves doing everything else, including things they're not supposed to do, why not video themselves doing something they're supposed to do? Then have them hand the low res video in with their work.
I believe her speech writer has already confessed (well, what passes for a confession these days) and apologized.
That was the original question; not whether she's bright, brave or, a good linguist or good speaker; just whether her speech plagiarized Michelle Obama's. It did. It would be nice if Melania Trump would admit it and attribute those paragraphs of her speech to Michelle Obama.
And how come Michelle Obama gets away with it, when the same language was used by someone else earlier?
I think you should drop it. Melania's speech writer admitted the offending paragraphs came from Michelle. I'd say that's as close to definitive as you can get - the author said she plagiarized someone else.
The smart and decorous thing for Melania to do is apologize and credit Michelle, or Michelle's speech writer. That's always the best thing to do in public matters, be smart and decorous. I know it's not Donald Trump's way but, that doesn't mean Melania and his kids can't be smarter and more decorous than him. In fact, I'd say his kids are.
This isn't about get out of jail or blame, this is about what's smart. Apologizing and attributing and thanking would be the smartest thing to do. If Melania doesn't then, she's not as smart as I hoped she was.
And, that's enough. Banging the same old nail over and over again isn't productive. If you don't and can't understand the best way for her to respond to the controversy, then my time is wasted.
Goodbye.
The questions for these excellent goals are why one failed to attain them while the other has probably got fourr years to prove their worth.
"You have heard Condoleeza Rice speak eloquently of America’s place in the world.
I, too, wish to address our nation’s security tonight.
I speak not of military weapons, but of moral ones, of the defense of values as well as territory.
Long before there was an American dream, there was a dream of America as liberty’s home and refuge.
It was for this, that a million heroes fought and bled and died.
Not alone to protect land on a map, much as they might cherish their home and hearth; nor to encroach on other lands or menace other peoples, or impose our way of life on anyone — but merely, heroically, to ensure freedom’s survival in a hostile world.
Let us be clear: the success of freedom can never be measured in material terms alone.
For one day, each of us will be held to account not for the money we made, but for the difference we made.
Not for the worldly status we may have enjoyed, but for the stewardship we provided.
Freedom empowers the heart.
It levels walls and shatters ceilings — including glass ceilings.
Ladies and gentlemen, in my eight years as President of the American Red Cross, I saw things that will haunt me the rest of my life — the evil that humans can inflict on one another — saw it in the dim eyes of starving children in Somalia and in the paralyzing grief of parents in Oklahoma City.
But I have also been uplifted by the extraordinary power of the American heart — by those armies of compassion, who are willing to cross town or cross the globe to minister to those they’ve never met and will never see again.
People who go where government cannot, and others will not, who carry our values of peace and democracy around the world, putting service before self. Such kindness and generosity are not legislated by any Congress.
They arise from faith, neighborliness, and yes, occasional saintliness.
Indeed, I learned long ago that you don’t have to be a missionary to be filled with a sense of mission.
The 20th century was America’s century—not because of our power, but because of our purpose.
Today, millions of Americans — of both parties and of no party — are seeking a politics of purpose.
The next President of the United States must defend both America’s interests and America’s ideals.
No one, no one understands this better than Governor George W. Bush!
In an era of rampant cynicism and indifference toward government, he is determined to bring civility to the public square and restore our pride in our leaders.
Throughout his career, he has appealed to the best in people, bridging our differences rather than exploiting them.
As president, he will put an end to the smash-mouth politics of recent years and to the name-calling that tarnishes our trust and alienates so many real people whose real problems can never be solved in a focus group or soothed by a spin-doctor.
George W. Bush will be a different kind of leader!
He will use words to inspire, not inflame.
He will move beyond the stale labels and sterile confrontations that all too often divide the American family.
And, make no mistake, there are divisions in liberty’s home.
Tonight too many of our neighbors are hurting.
At a time of economic prosperity, there are too many American homes without hope — too many street corners where despair reigns — too many classrooms where children are being left behind.
Like any good conservative, Governor Bush deplores waste — above all else, wasted lives.
He will repair the frayed strands of community.
And he knows that sometimes the best way to do this is through non-profits, businesses, civic and religious groups, schools and charities.
George W. Bush understands there is power — and there is a higher power.
He knows there is no strength without integrity; no security apart from strong character.
For these timeless values form our first line of defense.
Let this be our mission and our mandate — to defend frontiers of the heart, armed with faith and steeled by conviction.
Today, America resembles nothing so much as Joseph’s many-colored coat, and in our diversity lies our strength.
With that strength comes a matching responsibility — to make wrong into right … hope into reality … in the old, biblical words, to “let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream.”
Here, my friends, is the standard we raise.
This is the faith of our fathers and mothers, the American cause we hold sacred, our politics of purpose.
In the words of that great hymn:
America! America!
May God thy gold refine
Till all success be nobleness
And every gain divine!
May God bless us in this great endeavor.
And may God bless America.
Sponsored Stories
Of course, CNN would never let this information out, as it upsets their hidden liberal agenda.