PDA

View Full Version : Jayson Blair Working Again


Clever Login Name
Dec 11th 2006, 07:19 AM
Plagiarist reporter back in business
By Jessica Heslam
Boston Herald Media Reporter

Sunday, December 10, 2006

After a humiliating plagiarism scandal that rocked the New York Times [NYT], Jayson Blair is quietly resurrecting his journalism career by writing about the very subject he says brought him down: Bipolar disorder.

Blair, 30, has been lending his expertise to 3-year-old bp (bipolar) magazine. He wrote a first-person piece about bipolar disorder and the role it played in his downfall that bp magazine ran last year.

“It went through a very rigorous editing process,” said Editor Nancy Tobin. “We just have a very rigorous editing process and a great deal of fact checking.”

Tobin admits she was skeptical of Blair at first. “When I first got a call from Jayson Blair I was very surprised,” said Tobin, who didn’t know he’d been diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Before he wrote for them, Tobin said she “made very careful verfications that he was who he said he was” and had him fax her his diagnosis from his psychiatrist’s office.

“I was not a fan of Jayson Blair or what he had done,” Tobin said.

But after spending a lot of time talking with Blair and having him outline his story, the magazine agreed to publish it. “If we weren’t going to publish his story, what good where we?” asked Tobin, pointing out that the publication is about the disorder - and recovery.

Blair, who agreed to talk to the Herald via e-mail, said he’s also among several dozen writers and others bp editors routinely turn to for feedback. He continues to pitch them stories but had to quit working on a second piece earlier this year because he said he “was not up to doing a fully reported piece.”

When asked if he worries that people might think he is plagiarizing again, Blair said, “Why concern yourself over something you cannot control? The bottom line is that if it rings true, it will reach people.”

Blair “doesn’t think” he’ll ever work for a newspaper again but last year he wrote an editorial on bipolar awareness for the weekly Virginia newspaper, The Centreville Times.

“I can imagine doing those things,” Blair said.

Blair wrote about the death of his dog for the recent Depression and Bipolar Support Alliance newsletter. He says he’s currently working on a writing project but can’t talk about it.

Published in 2004, Blair’s memoir about the Times scandal sold only 4,000 copies, according to Nielsen BookScan.

The single Blair says he’s self-employed and working full time in a “profitable retail business.” He’s also working toward a college degree in business communications.

Shortly after the scandal, Blair, who also plagiarized while working at the Boston Globe, was diagnosed as bipolar, and he’s taking lithium and other secondary medications to treat it.

Blair said his bipolar disorder played a “huge role” in the plagiarism flap but he’s quick to point out that his “personality and character flaws” did as well. Blair said he chooses to write about the disorder because“understanding bipolar disorder is an important part of understanding me.”

When asked how he feels about losing a job at the New York Times [NYT], Blair said: “It was a terrible loss that I mourned and grieved and have accepted.”

Diplomat
Dec 13th 2006, 06:52 AM
I read Blair's book (checked out from the library) and also Seth Mnookin's about the NYT scandal. That whole mess was much worse than I thought.

If Mary Mapes can lecture on ethics on journalism at colleges, then Jayson Blair should also have an opportunity to redeem himself. At least he is showing some remorse for his transgressions.

Tripe Face
Dec 13th 2006, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by Diplomat:
I read Blair's book (checked out from the library) and also Seth Mnookin's about the NYT scandal. That whole mess was much worse than I thought.

If Mary Mapes can lecture on ethics on journalism at colleges, then Jayson Blair should also have an opportunity to redeem himself. At least he is showing some remorse for his transgressions.How can you equate the two. Mapes went to air with ONE story she believed to be true (many of us STILL believe the basic premise is true) albeit with less than fully substantiated evidence.

Blair printed things he knew were lies.. repeatedly... Time and time and time again.

I don't care if he says he's bi-polar... I read Seth's book too and I just think Blair was lazy and had no scruples.

SpxGrunt
Dec 13th 2006, 01:01 PM
We all know Dip. Mapes attacked Bush. It's a political thing. He's not so much equating Blair and Mapes but rather taking a dig at a "liberal" media member. Rememeber, Dip, there's a whole other forum for that business.

Diplomat
Dec 13th 2006, 01:06 PM
Originally posted by SpxGrunt:
We all know Dip. Mapes attacked Bush. It's a political thing. He's not so much equating Blair and Mapes but rather taking a dig at a "liberal" media member. Rememeber, Dip, there's a whole other forum for that business.You and Tripe are making it political. Nothing to do with that.

The two are easily comparable. Both put together stories that were false. Both committed ethical lapses and also flat-out lied about aspects of putting together those stories.

Both should've been fired from the get-go.

I will give CBS credit for one thing, though. They got rid of more people involved in their scandal. More people at the NYT besides Raines and Boyd knew and aided and abetted what was going on.

Pro
Dec 13th 2006, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by Diplomat:
Both put together stories that were false. Both committed ethical lapses and also flat-out lied about aspects of putting together those stories.No. There is no evidence that the Bush National Guard story was false. It was unsubstatiated. Evidence used to back it up may or may not have been fabricated. But it has not been proven that the story itself was false. Or true, for that matter.

And how did Mapes lie? Obviously she was guilty of not being through enough and by believing those who possibly lied to her. But where did SHE lie?

Diplomat
Dec 13th 2006, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by Pro:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Diplomat:
Both put together stories that were false. Both committed ethical lapses and also flat-out lied about aspects of putting together those stories.No. There is no evidence that the Bush National Guard story was false. It was unsubstatiated. Evidence used to back it up may or may not have been fabricated. But it has not been proven that the story itself was false. Or true, for that matter.

And how did Mapes lie? Obviously she was guilty of not being through enough and by believing those who possibly lied to her. But where did SHE lie?</font>[/QUOTE]She gave conflicting statements about where the memos came from. She also claims she talked to some ex-Guard officials who say they never talked to her. And didn't she also initally deny acting as a go-between for one of her sources and Joe Lockhart?

She also said she could prove the story was true. She could not and has not.

Her story was different from Jayson Blair's. But both are frauds and disgraces to the profession.

[ December 13, 2006, 02:34 PM: Message edited by: Diplomat ]

insiderknowing
Dec 13th 2006, 03:06 PM
Maybe Blair could make up quotes that he himself never said and publish those?

ha ha ha...

what a JERK.

Marty McFly
Dec 13th 2006, 03:10 PM
From Pro:
...There is no evidence that the Bush National Guard story was false. It was unsubstatiated. Evidence used to back it up may or may not have been fabricated. But it has not been proven that the story itself was false. Or true, for that matter. Typical. We can't PROVE it's true, but that doesn't mean it's false either!

No wonder columnists, bloggers and talk radio can have a field day with the media! It's so easy!

CKMD
Dec 13th 2006, 03:10 PM
Is it 2004....AGAIN?

Pro
Dec 13th 2006, 03:17 PM
And columnists, bloggers and talk radio show hosts are respected? Hardly. They're mostly mockers, entertaining thier like-minded audience.

There is no proof one way or another on this story. Therefore it is a non-story.

The CBS-commissioned investigation on this was correct. It should not have been reported with what they had. Mapes acted irresponsibly. She used bad judgement. But did not knowingly decieve, as in "I know this story is wrong, but I'm going to run it anyway." She believed it to be verifiably true. She was wrong. And it cost her.

[ December 14, 2006, 02:22 AM: Message edited by: Pro ]

Marty McFly
Dec 13th 2006, 03:39 PM
And columnists, bloggers and talk radio show hosts are respected? Hardly. They're mostly mockers, entertaining thier like-minded audience. It's that type of 'elitist' attitude that is driving viewers AWAY from television news.

Anyone NOT on television is a mocker and so are the easily entertained goons that like listening to them.

Michigan J. Frog
Dec 14th 2006, 11:01 PM
Originally posted by Tripe Face:
How can you equate the two? Diplomat can equate the two because he is perfect, has never made a mistake or error of fact, and can thus judge anyone who has as being forever unworthy of being trusted ever again.

Kace
Dec 15th 2006, 06:00 AM
And columnists, bloggers and talk radio show hosts are respected? Hardly. They're mostly mockers, entertaining thier like-minded audience.Some even get really cool photoshopped images made for 'em at MediaLine.

Diplomat
Dec 15th 2006, 06:52 AM
Originally posted by Michigan J. Frog:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Tripe Face:
How can you equate the two? Diplomat can equate the two because he is perfect, has never made a mistake or error of fact, and can thus judge anyone who has as being forever unworthy of being trusted ever again.</font>[/QUOTE]No, that's you, Frog. You always believe you and you alone have all the answers to everything. And you cannot stand anyone to question or dispute what you say.

I pointed out how the two situations are comparable. I don't think Dan Rather willfully did anything wrong but I don't have that confidence about Mapes, given some of the ethical lapses she committed along the way and some of the comments she made in her book and in interviews after she was caught.

And again, CBS booted a bunch of people who may or may not have been involved in its scandal. The Times only booted two and several articles and at least one book have indicated a lot more people knew about Blair's shenanigans and did nothing, and those people are still at the paper.

Someone can regain trust--but there has to be some repentance. So far, there has been little from Blair and none from Mapes.

Michigan J. Frog
Dec 15th 2006, 07:27 AM
Originally posted by Diplomat:
Someone can regain trust--but there has to be some repentance. So far, there has been little from Blair and none from Mapes.How high-handed of you.

rootboyslim
Dec 15th 2006, 07:28 AM
I am not an expert on bipoalr disorder, but I do know a little about it. His coworkers would have picked up on his odd behavior---think about CHarlotte weather guy. Also, even if he was bipoalr, I fail to see how that made him lie and make up sources and quotes. It is a true cop out, to me.

Mr. Pratfall
Dec 15th 2006, 07:29 AM
Gee, someone will use any excuse to talk about Mary Mapes.

Diplomat
Dec 15th 2006, 09:08 AM
Originally posted by Terps Champing it up in Disney:
I am not an expert on bipoalr disorder, but I do know a little about it. His coworkers would have picked up on his odd behavior---think about CHarlotte weather guy. Also, even if he was bipoalr, I fail to see how that made him lie and make up sources and quotes. It is a true cop out, to me.I read his book and think you're on to something. There were other issues involved with Blair. Many other issues.

Clubbeat
Dec 15th 2006, 09:44 AM
While I hat the fact that Blair did what he did, and the folks at the NYT and CBS didn't cover their asses, I believe in given people another shot.

After all, Ollie North, G. Gordon Liddy and a host of others were given second chances, so why not Mapes and Blair. Sure, they have a long way to go to redeem themselves, and if they blow it again, then I say throw the bums out, but I think they should have the chance again.

Max Schumacher
Dec 18th 2006, 12:46 PM
Uh, Ollie North and G. Gordon Liddy? They're political opportunists...convicted felons, although I believe North's conviction got thrown out.
Don't confuse losers who spout political propaganda (from either end of the spectrum) with journalists, real or alleged.

The Mockingbird
Dec 18th 2006, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by Pro:
[QB]And columnists, bloggers and talk radio show hosts are respected? Hardly. They're mostly mockers, entertaining thier like-minded audience.
[QB]You talk as if mocking were a bad thing... graemlins/eusa_shifty.gif