A recent storm of controversy has erupted around Vice President Kamala Harris, with allegations of plagiarism surfacing in her 2009 book, “Smart on Crime: A Career Prosecutor’s Plan to Make Us Safer.” This has ignited a heated debate about double standards in media coverage, particularly when compared to the reaction to similar accusations levied against Joe Biden during his 1987 presidential campaign.
The New York Times, known for its liberal leanings, has taken a seemingly softer stance on Harris’ alleged plagiarism. In an article addressing the accusations, they quoted an expert who dismissed the violations as “minor” and described them as an “error and not an intent to defraud.” This expert also blamed Harris’ plagiarism on technical difficulties, suggesting that she simply wasn’t familiar with the intricacies of proper attribution in the digital age.
However, the Times’ coverage of Biden’s plagiarism scandal in 1987 painted a starkly different picture. The publication described the revelations as “damaging” and even referred to Biden’s actions as “thievery and disinformation.” The accusations of plagiarism, which stemmed from Biden’s lifting of excerpts from other politicians’ speeches and a plagiarized law school paper, forced Biden to withdraw from his presidential campaign amidst a public outcry.
The stark difference in coverage has led many to question whether the media’s approach to plagiarism accusations is influenced by political bias. Conservative activist Christopher Rufo, who spearheaded the accusations against Harris, has been particularly vocal in his criticism of the media’s handling of both cases. He argued that the media has gone to great lengths to downplay Harris’ plagiarism while simultaneously highlighting Biden’s.
Rufo further pointed out that the Washington Post, another prominent news outlet, seemed to prioritize technical explanations over intentional deception when it came to Harris’ plagiarism. The Post suggested that her errors were a result of the challenges of navigating digital research during the late 1990s to early 2010s, a period when plagiarism detection tools weren’t as readily available. This stands in stark contrast to the Post’s coverage of Melania Trump’s speech in 2016, where they criticized her for “lifting a few turns of phrase” without offering similar explanations or excuses.
The contrasting narratives surrounding Harris’ and Biden’s plagiarism scandals have ignited a broader discussion about the role of media in shaping public perception. Critics argue that the media’s tendency to prioritize narratives aligned with their political leanings can distort the truth and create a sense of bias. This has raised concerns about the media’s ability to hold individuals accountable for their actions and ensure a fair and unbiased public discourse.
It remains to be seen how the public will ultimately react to the allegations against Harris and whether they will significantly impact her political career. However, the different approaches taken by the media in covering these two scandals highlight the complex and often politically charged nature of plagiarism accusations, especially in the current political climate.