An editor’s note about “The worst food in Evanston”
To our readers:
On Jan. 25, we published an article titled “The worst food in Evanston.” The article details some of the unhealthiest items on the menus of restaurants, cafes and fast-food stops in Evanston. In this week’s issue of The Weekly, the “Confirmed and Denied” segment and an appended comment from The Weekly’s Editor-in-Chief suggested that there were several issues, with the story and within our editorial board. We would like to address them at this time.
Perhaps most troubling, and urgent to clarify, was the allegation that North By Northwestern editors were removing comments on the article that suggested plagiarism and linked to the article titled “The 20 Worst Foods in America” in Men’s Health Magazine. The allegation that editors removed these comments is not, and has never been, the truth. After a thorough investigation, we discovered that our content management system, WordPress, had a new glitch that caused all comments containing one or more hyperlinks to be automatically removed from public view. Because WordPress removed the comments seconds after they were posted, the editorial board was never aware the comments existed. After reading The Weekly’s story, we went into our content management system and found the moderated comments. We are currently working to fix this glitch in WordPress. In the meantime, the comments have been made visible. We apologize if you were misled about the integrity of our editorial board.
Now that this has been brought to our attention, we’d like to address the rest of the allegations individually:
Calorie-counting is a common topic in lifestyle journalism, one that our writer eagerly explored. We hope the intent of the article was clear: the author set out to identify notably unhealthy food at popular establishments.
However, an important attribution that should have been made was not. In the original article, Chili’s Texas Cheese Fries with Jalapeno-Ranch Dressing was called the calorie equivalent of “16 Taco Bell Crunchy Tacos.” This was originally printed in Men’s Health, and we should have properly credited it in the article. The writer says she saw this phrase on several blogs while conducting her research, and that she did not realize it was the exclusive idea of Men’s Health. We deeply regret that we did not catch this error before publication, and apologize to Men’s Health and our readers.
The Weekly’s “Confirmed and Denied” segment made three other allegations about the integrity of the piece. First, it pointed out that Chipotle’s Chicken Burrito was listed in Men’s Health as an unhealthy item. Second, the Weekly noted that Jamba Juice’s Chocolate Moo’d Power Smoothie was also listed in Men’s Health. We understand why this may raise an eyebrow, and we spoke with our writer, who thoroughly outlined the steps she took and the Web sites she visited when choosing her “worst food” items. Because we believe our writer did original research, we have decided that this is not plagiarism, but an example of both our writer and the Men’s Health writer doing proper research.
Third, The Weekly alleges that a sentence from our article comparing the Chocolate Moo’d Power Smoothie to a milkshake is similar to the description from “The 20 Worst Foods in America” in Men’s Health. We have reviewed this allegation and, having seen this smoothie/milkshake joke used often on the Internet and in common descriptions of the item, we have decided that this comparison was cliché, but it was not plagiarism.
After speaking with Loren Ghiglione, the Richard A. Schwarzlose Professor of Media Ethics at Medill, we have decided to remove the “16 Taco Bell Crunchy Tacos” comparison and recognize it as plagiarism. The rest of the article shall remain on North By Northwestern appended with an editor’s note. We have fact checked the article again, and believe the article contains no more statements of questionable origin.
To reiterate, there were no efforts to hide or delete critical comments. North By Northwestern is open to all sorts of comments, including those criticizing our articles. For example, in the Nov. 19, 2008 article titled “Josh Schwartz: manufacturer of perfect men, ruiner of lives,” commenters suggested that the topic was too similar to writings by Chuck Klosterman. Not only did the comments remain untouched, but the editorial board removed comments by the author defending her work, as we expected it and still expect it to stand on its own.
We’d like to share our comment policy with you. Article I, Section A, of the North By Northwestern Policies and Procedures reads as such:
The [Editor-in-chief] or a managing editor may remove comments from the site at their discretion. Grounds for removal include, but are not limited to:
-Posts that specifically reference the author, but not the content, of a story may be deleted.
-No personal attacks on the writer will be accepted.
-Defamation, libel, racial slurs and other offensive material will be removed.
We know that when you read North By Northwestern, you expect fair, accurate and truthful information, and we are 100 percent committed to delivering that to you. Thank you for the trust you put in us. We again apologize for lapses on our part, and we’re glad we had this chance to clear up any confusion surrounding the article in question. And of course, we’d like to thank the staff of The Weekly for notifying us of these lapses, though we wish that they had contacted us for comment before publication.
Sincerely,
Lisa Gartner
Editor-in-chief
| Print
BOOYAKASHA!!!
Michael McGee
January 29, 2009 at 10:21 pm
If the Daily wants to talk shit, then they should author their piece and not simply say “Weekly Editors”! GROW SOME!!!
René Jovel aka SupaKat
January 29, 2009 at 11:08 pm
Because The Daily has pretty much sucked this year, I was forced to start reading NBN. And to be entirely honest, I hated this site from the get-go. But it began to grow on me. And to credit the work you all have been doing, the quality has been improving all year. But it’s things like this that really show NBN’s true colors. Yes, The Daily may not be the paper it once was, but it is a legitimate, reliable, credible, and ethical publication. There are poorly reported stories that appear in both of these publications, but when there is an issue such as plagiarism that arises, the paper’s editors, managers, and board of trustees make sure the issue is addressed appropriately. In fact, the same way a real publication would handle such an incident.
The way NBN has handled this is abominable. How will NBN deal with the violation and what will happen to this writer? The Daily discharged the writer behind their major plagiarism case a few years ago; what will NBN do? Are you condoning plagiarism if it is only one sentence in a story? That’s asinine. And are you also saying that as long as it appears on a blog in cyberspace it’s OK to copy their ideas and call them your own? No. No it is not, even if it is as banal and poorly written as this one. Just because it appeared in Men’s Health as well as on a few blogs online does not mean the author did legitimate research.
To be entirely honest, I am disgusted. Yes, the way The Daily handled this was mildly unfair and somewhat juvenile, but that does not free NBN from any wrong doing. Ms. Gartner, you handled this poorly as well. That was a long-winded response that said practically nothing. And I hate to say it, but although I have enjoyed becoming a fan of this publication, I will no longer be stopping by to read it. This incident just shows this publication’s inability to be a credible and ethical campus publication, and that is one way The Daily, even with it’s extremely awful content this year, will always remain leaps and bounds above this publication. Great job, guys.
Bob the Builder
January 30, 2009 at 12:30 am
Chill out Bob the Builder…
Sure, there was a problem with the article and NBN was prompt to point out and fix the mistake. It’s your loss if you stop reading. I’m a sophomore now and I’ve been reading it non-stop for about a year – while not all the material may appeal to you at least there’s something for everyone.
Yes, plagiarism is still an issue. The article did not explicitly state what consequences the writer would face yet – so do not be quick to jump to the conclusion that no punishment at all is the answer.
The proper way to continue with this would be to give the writer a leave of absence for a while, just to make the point that plagiarism is unacceptable.
Jim Halpert
January 30, 2009 at 2:31 am
This is all very unfortunate… Because I actually love Texas Cheese Fries! OM NOM NOM!!!
Michael McGee
January 30, 2009 at 2:41 am
In response to Jim Halpert: Jim please note that NBN was not prompt to point out and fix the mistake. The mistake was in the article for days, regardless of whether or not the editors were aware of comments made that directly linked to the original material. They only pointed it out and corrected the article when The Weekly brought it to their attention. And, even then, as I received message after message and e-mail after e-mail from concerned or interested parties, it still took NBN until 10 p.m. to respond.
The proper way to continue, I would argue, is not the way you propose, but rather the way it traditionally works: The writer should be banned from writing for NBN again and the article should be removed rather than simply fixed to remove the plagiarized material. If we can’t trust the parts of the article that have been determined plagiarism, how can we trust the rest of it or any of the reporter’s future work with this publication?
I know that this issue has led to comments and blog posts and status updates and the rest. In the hectic mess that is Web 2.0, things get lost in the mix. If anybody has a specific question about The Daily or The Weekly policy or decisions, feel free to contact me.
Nicholas Jackson
Editor-in-Chief, The Weekly
Nicholas Jackson
January 30, 2009 at 3:11 am
Saying you will no longer read NBN because of a single plagiarism error is like saying you’re going to drop out of Medill (or Northwestern) because of the fiasco with Dean Lavine. Don’t be stupid.
Lady Gaga
January 30, 2009 at 10:47 am
The Bob the Builder above is not real. He is a fake. I am the real BTB. Sorry for any confusion.
Bob the Builder
January 30, 2009 at 12:14 pm
BTB, The first Bob the Builder is probably Nicholas Jackson. HAHA!
I used to read the daily everyday, but now i almost exclusively read North by Northwestern. One is that the forum writers have gotten progressively worse at the daily. The second and most important is that the features on NBN, are so much more thorough and interesting than the Daily’s ESPECIALLY the Weekly.
If any NBN editors are listening, please keep doing what you’re doing in providing quality stories (although i might like a little more stuff on NU.) Thanks
Diese
Editor-In-Chief
The Diese
Diese
January 30, 2009 at 12:27 pm
why did the daily write about this in their gossip column thing instead of acting like journalists… you know, reporting a real story (because plagiarism at a major campus publication IS worthy of a real story, for sure)… contacting nbn’s editors… reporting and stuff. if this note that NBN posted is telling the truth, then isn’t the weekly’s original blurb factually inaccurate/libelous or something, at least in how it accused nbn of purposefully moderating comments?
i don't get it
January 30, 2009 at 1:06 pm
I completely agree with the 1:06 comment. By not including a reaction from NBN in their “story,” or, in short, by not giving the accused party a chance to defend themselves, The Weekly is going against one of the most basic journalistic ethics that we learn very early on in Medill. Their “article” came off as a thinly veiled attack on what is clearly the more dominant form of student media on campus.
Yes, plagiarism is a serious offense, but the way in which it was “reported” was equally unethical. I commend Lisa Garter and the editors of NBN for handling this situation in such a professional manner, despite the blatant disregard for journalistic integrity exhibited by The Weekly.
Bella
January 30, 2009 at 1:19 pm
I love NBN, but one, there was plagiarism in the article and there should be consequences for it, even if it’s a “common phrase online” someone had to do research to figure that out and you can’t just accept what is written online. How was the author to know that it was “the equivalent of 16 taco bell tacos” if she didn’t look up the caloric content of both?
You guys do great work 99% of the time, but there were some missteps in this article.
AK
January 30, 2009 at 1:42 pm
Lisa Gardner’s terrible response notwithstanding, this is plagerism plain and simple. I don’t know how you can read the articles involved and not see that. It happens but own up to it better than this attempt to just obfuscate things further.
Eric
January 30, 2009 at 6:05 pm
It’s spelled Gartner. The least you can do is spell it right, Eric.
David Wright
January 30, 2009 at 7:27 pm
Oops. Looks like I have about as much regard for the facts as she does, doesn’t it?
Eric
January 30, 2009 at 8:31 pm
And to Mr. McGee. Leave if you’re not going to say anything useful. You’re about as good at online commenting as your organization is at doing its job.
Eric
January 30, 2009 at 8:35 pm
You’re a class act Eric. Nothing like a good old personal attack to make one’s point.
David
January 30, 2009 at 8:50 pm
The petty rivalry between NBN and The Daily is really funny to watch. For the casual reader, NBN comes out on top simply because The Weekly’s editor-in-chief is so adamant and pushy about this plagiarism issue. It’s a problem, but your mode of address both in your column and your comments comes off as condescending and unprofessional. There’s a better way to prove a point.
E
January 30, 2009 at 9:30 pm
Oh Eric… can’t have a little fun? Why can’t I state facts? I love Texas Cheese Fries and I would like other people to know it. And thanks for the compliment on the online commenting! I must say I do a pretty good job.
Michael McGee
January 30, 2009 at 9:51 pm
Eric, the petty personal attacks (on other people commenting on this article no less) undermine any point you had and make you come across as a jackass.
AK
January 31, 2009 at 2:19 pm
I hate all of you more than anyone has hated anyone ever.
Eric
February 1, 2009 at 10:27 pm
Can we all at least agree that this place is still way better than The Daily? I don’t really TRUST either publication, but all things considered, NBN is far more provocative, thoughtful, and entertaining.
Sajid
February 2, 2009 at 7:38 pm
Both publications are student-run and will encounter glitches. However, from an alum’s perspective, I still think NBN far exceeds the Daily in quality — even its website is leaps and bounds above the big Ds (I mean really, is that that hard Daily NU to adjust your HTML script to automatically re-size based on the dimensions of the reader’s browser?)… both publications have their quirks, but like Sajid said, NBN just reads better and with less (obvious) bias than the Daily.
Alum
February 2, 2009 at 11:32 pm
Y’all are both stupid.
Anonymous
April 17, 2009 at 11:02 pm