Plagiarism Allegations Against Harris ‘More Serious’ Than Previously Believed, NYT Consultant Says

The proverb “imitation is the sincerest form of flattery” does not hold true when plagiarism is involved.

Now, The New York Times’ plagiarism consultant Jonathan Bailey is reporting that allegations of plagiarism against Vice President 👤Kamala Harris are “more serious” than originally thought.

Bailey released his “full analysis” regarding the allegations Wednesday, Fox News reported.

“At the time, I was unaware of a full dossier with additional allegations, which led some to accuse the New York Times of withholding that information from me,” Bailey wrote on Plagiarism Today. “However, the article clearly stated that it was my ‘initial reaction’ to those allegations, not a complete analysis.”

“Today, I reviewed the complete dossier prepared by Dr. Stefan Weber, whom I have covered before. I also performed a peer review of one of his papers in 2018,” he wrote.

“With this new information, while I believe the case is more serious than I commented to the New York Times, the overarching points remain. While there are problems with this work, the pattern points to sloppy writing habits, not a malicious intent to defraud,” he said.

“Is it problematic? Yes. But it’s also not the wholesale fraud that many have claimed it to be. It sits somewhere between what the two sides want it to be,” Bailey said.

While Bailey said some of the work is merely sloppy and not malicious, he pointed to two paragraphs that were copied from Wikipedia, and therefore, were textbook examples of plagiarism.