Home
A Teaching Moment
Michael Kittross
Earlier this week, as I was uncapping a red pen to work on page proofs, the final step for this issue of Media Ethics, I was sent an AP story with the upsetting headline "Journalism Professor Admits Plagiarism." Upset gave way to shock when I saw who was named as the journalism professor. The story, picked up by the Romanesko and Regret the Error blogs, immediately moved beyond being of interest only to a small city in Missouri and flew around the country.
John Merrill is a friend, co-author, and sparring partner of mine (see our disagreement over the concept of "professionalism" in Media Ethics, 18:1). This doesn't mean that, if the evidence showed that he was guilty of robbing the local bank, I couldn't be objective if I sat on the jury that convicted and sentenced him. I'm sure he would be able to do the same thing if I had pulled a Willie Sutton ("because that's where the money is") on the bank.
Because Merrill has written a dozen articles for Media Ethics, and serves on our roster of contributing editors, I felt we couldn't ignore this situation. But, because we won't publish a "regular" issue next spring (see p. 26), I felt that-if this situation was to be of use to our readers-it would have to be discussed in the issue now on my desk. That immediately put a limit on the amount of space available and the time that could be taken to prepare an analysis, commentary or research report.
I've edited magazines and journals for more than 30 years and had my first full-time job in a newsroom more than six decades ago, so I tend to be very cautious about accepting at face value what I read, even AP stories. So, I put aside Media Ethics' page proofs while I rummaged through the Web for details, and exchanged E-mails with a number of academics, journalists and others.
Merrill, author of some 30 books and innumerable articles, has been called many positive things over his more than 60 years as journalist and educator. Like all academic leaders he also has been criticized. But I've never seen the P-word applied to him and, I daresay, neither has he.
John Merrill is a friend, co-author, and sparring partner of mine (see our disagreement over the concept of "professionalism" in Media Ethics, 18:1). This doesn't mean that, if the evidence showed that he was guilty of robbing the local bank, I couldn't be objective if I sat on the jury that convicted and sentenced him. I'm sure he would be able to do the same thing if I had pulled a Willie Sutton ("because that's where the money is") on the bank.
Because Merrill has written a dozen articles for Media Ethics, and serves on our roster of contributing editors, I felt we couldn't ignore this situation. But, because we won't publish a "regular" issue next spring (see p. 26), I felt that-if this situation was to be of use to our readers-it would have to be discussed in the issue now on my desk. That immediately put a limit on the amount of space available and the time that could be taken to prepare an analysis, commentary or research report.
I've edited magazines and journals for more than 30 years and had my first full-time job in a newsroom more than six decades ago, so I tend to be very cautious about accepting at face value what I read, even AP stories. So, I put aside Media Ethics' page proofs while I rummaged through the Web for details, and exchanged E-mails with a number of academics, journalists and others.
Merrill, author of some 30 books and innumerable articles, has been called many positive things over his more than 60 years as journalist and educator. Like all academic leaders he also has been criticized. But I've never seen the P-word applied to him and, I daresay, neither has he.
Be the first to comment on this story