Thursday, April 21, 2016

Shaun King's story about the Daily Beast Plagiarism is not adding up

For the past two days Shaun King has been battling accusations that he plagiarized an article that was posted on The Daily Beast.  The New York Daily News and King's editor have said it was an editing error, and everyone took their toys and went home...except, of course, me.  It doesn't sit right, at all.  So I did a little digging, and here is what I think proves King is, once again, lying.

Shaun posted a video receipt showing his email to his editors as PROOF he is not lying about giving attribution to the Daily Beast author in the first place.  At exactly 9:43 am, only 13 minutes after the time Shaun King's email was sent to his editor, he posted the story on Facebook. This poses a problem for the excuse he, his editor, and the New York Daily news is giving in response to the plagiarism accusation by The Daily Beast.

Here would be the sequence of events according to King, NYDN, and his editor, Jotham Sederstrom:

4/19 9:00 am:  King posts the link to his NYDN post on twitter (I have a SS also). This is 30 minutes prior to his email to his editor. (The time on the tweet will be YOUR time zone)

4/19 -9:29 am:  (1)Shaun emails his story to his editor Jotham Sederstrom (allegedly), containing attribution for the Daily Beast article.  His email also contains the sentence, (2)"When we say black lives matter, we say such a thing because these names and these stories speak of a system that says otherwise."  This will come back into play further down this page.

4/19 -Approx 9:00 am:  King's article is posted to the New York Daily News site. The time now shows 3:00 pm on the article now, but that is due to the edits made after plagiarism accusations.

4/19 -9:43 am:  King posts his article on facebook - notice the grammatical edit made by his editor to the paragraph below from his email is included in this post 13 minutes after he sent his story in.  How, if King never saw the published article, did he know the changes to that sentence within minutes?
Also from his same (now edited) initial facebook post, there is NO attribution for the Daily Beast author, it was added only after the accusations surfaced.  Again, this is posted (allegedly), AFTER he sent his email, with proper attribution, to his editor, but before the questions of attribution arose.  To see these edited versions, click the drop down arrow at top right of THIS post.

If King never reads his published articles, how does he already know the link to the article when posting to his facebook at 9:43? (see above link)

Then there's the screenshot I took from King's facebook video where he is trying to prove he sent in his attributed email to his editor at 9:30.  It shows as (4) "inbox", and King even says it is in his inbox, even though he clicks on "sent".  This happens when you send an email to yourself. Additionally, he is asking Dylan Beyers (who was tweeting about the plagiarism) to (5)"please reply to 538", meaning the authors of another article he was accused of plagiarizing.  He wasn't accused of plagiarizing the 538 article until the Daily Beast accused him of copying theirs.  And finally, the 538 article was published on 4/12, but according to this screenshot, he (6) sent it to his editors AFTER he sent in the Elliott Williams article.

There's some real fuckery going on here.  Just our opinion. 

Click HERE for more info on Shaun King