Problematic prose: GOP Senate candidate Sheehy’s book appears to contain four plagiarized portions (dailymontanan.com)

submitted 6 hours ago by usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml to c/politics@lemmy.world

4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

For context: the montana senate race is one of the most competitive and important senate races this year

It's the most likely to decide control of the US senate

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] yesman@lemmy.world 13 points 6 hours ago

If you read the article, this is minor plagiarism. Four sections, of about 2 paragraphs each have been shown to be copied. However, the content copied were factual: dates and definitions, not ideas or the thesis. It's reasonable that all of this is explained by the bad sourcing of an ameture author.

[-] usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml 12 points 6 hours ago

There's also other problems with the book not in thr headline

Even the book itself has come under scrutiny: It promises that all of the proceeds from telling the story of aerial firefighters will go back to supporting them. However, as other media outlets have reported, including Business Insider, it appears that the proceeds of the book go back to an aerial firefighting lobbying company which Sheehy himself founded, which in turn, works on behalf of his own company, raising questions about whether the money is really being funneled right back to him.

this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2024

65 points (98.5% liked)

politics

18904 readers

3010 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News