• bort@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    guy covers historical event doesn’t rewrite history, instead takes what someone else has written about event doesn’t use own fotos, uses someone elses foto instead makes mistakes

    I am not saying this is a big nothing burger, but his only real mistakes was not to list his sources.

    • d2k1@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah, no. He almost entirely verbatim copied the text and wording on the original article and shuffled some words around to try and make it less obvious (and failed). It is blatant plagiarism, there is no other way to call it. This was no innocent mistake of forgetting to list a source. Watch the hbomberguy video segment about it, it paints a very clear picture.

      • bort@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        It is blatant plagiarism

        yes, and a solution could have been to cite sources.

        This was no innocent mistake of forgetting to list a source

        I don’t think, that not-citing-sources is an innocent mistake.

        Watch the hbomberguy video segment about it, it paints a very clear picture

        I did. I does paint a very colorful picture. Full of opinion and sarcasm and rhethoric.

        Here is a rule-of-thumb to decide if an argument was convincing because it had good content, or because it was well written: If the content was good, it will be easy for you explain to a 3rd party. If only the presentation was good, then you will have a hard time convincing others.