#1) From potential to performance by Dileep Premachandran, which I read last night on Cricinfo. It is dated November 16.
#2) Has the worm finally turned for Yuvraj? by Satya Siddharth Rath, which I read this morning in DNA, issue of November 17.
From #1:
- Just over five years ago, Yuvraj Singh announced himself to the cricketing world at large in the best possible fashion, with a devastating 84 against Steve Waugh's all-conquering Australians. An attack that boasted Glenn McGrath, Brett Lee and Jason Gillespie ... was treated with disdain as Yuvraj breached the field almost at will on his way to an 80-ball 84.
From #2:
- A little over five years ago, the Punjab left-hander had announced his arrival in explosive fashion with a devastating 80-ball 84 against Steve Waugh’s Australians, treating the likes of Glenn McGrath, Brett Lee and Jason Gillespie with disdain.
From #1:
- But another 16 matches were to pass by before he crossed 50 again, compiling a dazzling match-winning 98 against Sri Lanka in Colombo.
From #2:
- But it took him another 16 matches to cross 50 again — a match-winning 98 against Sri Lanka in Colombo.
From #1:
- The inconsistency was all the more infuriating ... and that celebrated 69 in the NatWest Trophy final...
From #2:
- Another inconsistency break, and he arrived again with that celebrated 69 in the NatWest Trophy final against England.
From #1:
- ... by the time the current season started, the sand was trickling inexorably towards the bottom of the timer. In 44 innings since the World Cup in 2003, Yuvraj had managed just 1167 runs at 29.17.
From #2:
- ... by the time the current season started, even a spot in the team began to look doubtful. In 44 innings since the 2003 World Cup, Yuvraj had managed just 1167 runs at 29.17.
From #1:
- After striking his maiden century against Bangladesh at Dhaka in April 2003, he had managed only one more three-figure knock, a stunning 139 against Australia at the SCG in January 2004.
From #2:
- After striking his maiden century against Bangladesh in Dhaka in April 2003, he had managed just one more three-figure knock, a stunning 139 against Australia at the SCG in January 2004.
From #1:
- ... Rahul Dravid was so irked when asked at Mohali whether Yuvraj deserved a place in the side.
From #2:
- Dravid, in fact, got irked when asked a few days back whether Yuvraj deserved a place in the side.
Finally, a quote from Samuel Taylor Coleridge that may or may not be relevant.
"Plagiarists are always suspicious of being stolen from."
11 comments:
Good observation!
Last week, DNA discontinued service of a journalist (or was he a guest columnist?) after it was found that the aritcle on Dollar in business section, was lifted from The Economist.
At least, they have shown some corrective action, as opposed to the other news paper which continues to have their movie critic who was found guilty of plagiarism.
--shashi
Amazing.
DNA is really not different from the Times of India. Ironic when you consider the hype that surrounded the paper before it was launched.
Nice quote about the plagiarists always being suspicious.
As easy as it is to plagiarise, it is even more easy to spot the plagiarism. It is stupid to assume otherwise.
I suppose that's why they are plagiarists.
Just a guess Dilip, is Satya writting under pen-name of Prem or vice versa? Shouldn't be big deal then. Else, I see a potential law-suit on horizon.
It's quite clear this Satya fellow stole Premachandran's copy: the Cricinfo piece is dated November 16th, as Dilip (D'Souza, that is) has pointed out. Quite likely the DNA chap was waiting to copy-and -paste Cricinfo's report as soon as it was put online. You could forgive him - grudgingly - for stuff like 'inconsistency break' and 'just a few days back', but really, something has to be done about the fact that ethical standards are also as unimportant to our newspapers as aesthetic ones.
*TTG: It's 'whom' - sorry, had to get that out of the way :)
This is bad, why do people do it when it is so easy to find out! And it makes DNA look incredibly stuid in the meanwhile. I hope they do something about it.
TTG, TOI? TOI isn't part of this episode, unless you know something I don't...
Ashok, I tend to agree. It is so easy to spot the plagiarism. Why do they do it? The word "laziness" springs to mind.
Rama and Mridula, there will always be plagiarism and plagiarists. In that sense, I'm not sure there's something we can "do" about it. But yes, you can inform the papers responsible that you are sorely disappointed and are cancelling your subscription.
I can only smile at how naive people are expecting DNA to be radically different from TOI.
Pradeep Guha, Dileep Padgaonkar, Ayaz Memon... all top guys in TOI till a year ago, now run DNA.
Dilip wrote: But yes, you can inform the papers responsible that you are sorely disappointed and are cancelling your subscription.
Agreed. The best way to get back at a corporation is to make it hurt economically. If enough people cancelled their subscriptions, then these papers would be forced to improve their content and not tolerate plagiarism.
But most people will continue subscribing. If you want news, don't read Indian newspapers. Go online or read a book. If you want Page 3, you know where to find it.
I can only smile at how naive people are expecting DNA to be radically different from TOI.
Smile away, but where in these comments do you find these "naive people" who are "expecting DNA to be radically different from TOI"?
TTG, is that "whoops" or "whomps"?
Having known Dileep (Premachandran) for a while, I know for a fact that the guy is a decent writer. It is sad to see that the DNA scribe has done what he has.
Hopefully, Ayaz Memon will take some quick action against him.
Post a Comment