Getting to the bottom of it…
Regarding the e-mail I sent about the Government: In and Out of the News report, I received this reply (quoted in part):
1. The study was quite extensive. Did you read the introduction to the study? The study was explained there. If you could narrow the scope of your question, I would be able to better provide you with the information you need.
2. The proper citation for (Robinson and Sheehan 1983) is:
Robinson, Michael J., and Margaret A. Sheehan. 1983. Over the Wire and on TV: CBS and UPI in Campaign ‘80. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
I replied that the information provided in the report does not give enough detail about, for example, the encoding criteria and procedure. The citation is helpful.
I’m fascinated by the fact that, as of 10:20 a.m. CDT, the citation error in the report remains uncorrected. This is a thesis-length report intended to help “journalists better understand and report on government.” Shouldn’t such an important undertaking be taken seriously enough to put someone immediately on the job of correcting this?
I’m not being nit-picky. Citation errors are a very big deal in academic work. Certainly errors occur in complex work such as this. But once discovered and acknowledged, this error should have been corrected before the end of the day yesterday.
I tell students this story to reinforce the importance of accurate citation. The most clever case of plagiarism I every caught happened because a student wrote something that I found interesting and informative for my own research. I looked up the material based on the citation because I wanted to read more from the source document. And it didn’t exist. The student had fabricated the citation (all of them!) I explain to students: Citations provide a pathway to knowledge and understanding. They are valuable resources. Eggheads like me use them every day.
