Plagiarism in the Modern Era
There here always been a fine line between an original idea and an idea that is plagiarised. In theory, one could argue that each and every phrase in writing is plagiarized from another source written in past in one form or the other. The advent of the digital age has further contributed to blurring this line as information is more readily available than ever before, remarks Trip Gabriel. With this context, it’s very important to properly define the term “plagiarism” and how it should be enforced given the unique circumstances of the current day and age.
There is no denying that the democratization of knowledge via the internet has led to a massive outpour of knowledge. One could know what’s happening in London LIVE while sitting somewhere in Africa. Almost all of the knowledge known to mankind rests on the hand of an ordinary person, never before has knowledge been so readily available at this scale. However, as uncle Ben once said: “With great power, comes great responsibility”. The youth of today has had the gift of technology silver-spooned to them since their childhood. Hence, the term “plagiarism” is an alien concept to most of them, To the general public, the internet is a “vortex of information to mash up a new creative work”, having no idea about the price to pay (Trip Gabriel).
The process of classifying a case as plagiarised or not was difficult before, near impossible now. With its general user unaware of the repercussions of “making a deal with the devil”, I dare say, the courts are filled with cases with student suing back their college after being alleged of plagiarism. No one was prepared for such an explosion of knowledge and its availability, leave alone the courts. The “crime” of plagiarism is a serious offence and offenders pay dearly to it, “Students can fail classes, be suspended or even expelled. Students who previously graduated can even lose their degrees years later”(Jonathan Bailey). The result is loads and loads of court cases that financial and emotional drain both the parties. We have a face-off, on one side we have the legal bodies against plagiarism and on the other stands its oblivious offenders. Signing a treaty would require adjustment from both the sides else this chaos will only further ensue.
To adapt to the changing times, the concerned authorities have adopted the necessary software to fight against the explosion of plagiarism. A well-known software “Turnitin” seamlessly compares a document with millions of writings in its database. This software has been used extensively by university professors to catch plagiarism. Due to their ease of use “Plagiarism detection programs have become increasingly popular on college campuses” (CBS News). The world of plagiarism has always been ruthless, merciless to those who dare try to oppose her. If caught by the software, as a student you have no way to retaliate. You can plead and beg all you want, they’ll only fall to deaf ears. This is a classic case of handing too much power to select entities. The software itself claims that it doesn’t necessarily check for plagiarism, but only its similarity with the database it has and hence shouldn’t be blindly used as such. In this setting, it’s only wise to use the software as a mere tool and not as the final judgement.
This “war” could have been easily averted if its youth has been properly educated about plagiarism. According to a survey “77 per cent said they didn’t think such cheating was a serious issue” (CBS News). It’s clear that in the majority of the cases where the act was committed, the offender hadn’t any idea that it was a serious crime to begin with. Throughout highschool cheating in exams and copying assignments is considered taboo and left at that. The shift of seriousness towards “cheating” is just too sudden for the student, who only realise their undoing when the damage is already done. I believe the education system is as much to blame as the student. Behaviour against plagiarism should be nurtured from a younger age, one simply cannot expect the students to realise cheating is bad given they were relatively unpunished for it throughout their life. Colleges should go out of their way to instil the sense of authenticity before judging them for violating it. As said, both the parties should need to make reparation and stop blaming each other.
In the end, we’re left with the question of what exactly is plagiarism? Where exactly do we draw the line? How do we define authenticity? Aren’t the words we use now also used by someone else in the past, in that sense almost all of what we write is “plagiarized”. There’s no end to these questions and there never will be. It is our duty, therefore, to continuously update the definition to suit the circumstances and grow. I’ll end this with a quote by John F. Kennedy, “Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.”