Best take on Maureen Dowd's sticky wicket comes from Brad DeLong. He is quite right: her "explanation" is actually a lot more damning than admitting to one act of semi-intentional plagiarism would be. We are all frail, lazy creatures, but I have yet to ever hear an "explanation" for any act of plagiarism that made much sense (to me, as a columnist with a very heavy workload by industry standards). Just once I'd like to hear someone say "Sorry, I just completely blew the fuck up; it was a cry for help."
Comments (1)
> Just once I'd like to hear someone
> say "Sorry, I just completely blew
> the fuck up; it was a cry for help."
Nothing to add, just like the way it looks and wanted to see it again... Don't mean to claim credit for it or anything. Cosh said it! Here, on this blog, earlier today!
Goldfarb makes a fascinating point about the punctuation in Dowd's explanation, especially in light of McArdle's theory that the lift was a cite bungled by an assistant: Exactly how much editorial support does this women need to work as one of the most "inconceivably well-compensated" columnists in the country?
Posted by Crid [CommentCrid@gmail.com] | May 18, 2009 8:26 PM
Posted on May 18, 2009 20:26