Plagiarism

So nobody’s talking about plagiarism any more [Guardian to Reuters: Sorry for editing mistake]. How about “dishonest appropriation of someone else’s work?” The Guardian claims it should have credited the article to “staff & agencies”. From the paper’s investigation it appears that the article was almost entirely by Reuters. So why does “staff” get first mention? And what “agencies” in the plural? No other agency is mentioned. The honest, correct credit was “Reuters & staff reporter”. It is regrettable that The Guardian should join in this widespread seedy deception which deprives Reuters and its journalists of credit for their work. Leveson, you still there? ■