Plagiarism and Joe Biden - Essay Example

Section/# Plagiarism and the Case of Joe Biden Any individual that decides to run for political office faces a myriad of challenges. One of the first challenges that they necessarily face has to do with the fact that both their personal and professional career is examined extraordinarily closely by those individuals within their own party and those from the opposing side. The underlying reason for this overall level of scrutiny has to do with the fact that political opponents will use any and all opportunities to disparage the representation of an individual and to ultimately decrease the potential that they might win an election. Current VP Joe Biden faced to such circumstances during his own political career. Whereas it is invariably true that Joe Biden also experienced a litany of other political setbacks and challenges, the primary focus of this particular essay will be to discuss and analyze the way in which accusations and ultimate proof of plagiarism within the words and published works of Joe Biden ultimately harmed his political prospects and haunted him throughout much of his political career. Additionally, beyond merely providing a level of focus on Joe Biden, the analysis will also delve into the issue of whether or not plagiarism is taken too seriously and whether or not some individuals are held to a higher standard as compared to others. It is the hope of this author that such a level of analysis and discussion will be beneficial in defining the means by which plagiarism, and the accusation of plagiarism, has the potential to Harrison individual long after they have left a given scholastic institution, published an article, or even given the a speech with un-credited lines. As Joe Biden prepared to run for office in the late 1980s as a Democratic candidate for president, it is doubtless that he had little fought for the potential of indiscretions of his years to come back to haunt him in a particularly spirited contest between several other hopeful Democratic candidates. Whereas it is unclear which individual was ultimately responsible for reviewing the records and finding proof that plagiarism in fact existed, by it was forced to answer the charge of plagiarism during the election season and to admit fact that he had lifted entire pages of text directly from other sources without due citation (Wheeler and Anderson 169). As the story unfolded, it became clear that Biden had been caught at the time and had received an F in the course. Yet, this death was only an initial reaction that the University gave to the charge and proof that Joseph Biden had actually plagiarized a large portion of his work. Essentially, it was also strongly consider whether or not he should be dismissed from the program. Interestingly, his grade point average and his overall standing with his class was also visible. In many cases, individuals have remarked that he was in the bottom 10% of his class at Yale and was ultimately in danger of being on academic suspension. As a result of unknown factors, Joe Biden was allowed to continue his education and retake the course in question fully one year later. Additionally, subsequent analysis reveals the fact that the initial F that he received in the course in question was struck from his record; as if the incident never even occurred. However, this was not enough to discourage a level of focus on this particular issue in terms of the primary election season in the late 1980s (Witcover 19). As a response to this, Joe Biden issued a series of explanations. One of these explanations was that the plagiarism was entirely inadvertent and he had merely failed to accurately cite the information that was ruled to be over and clear plagiarism. Whereas this defense might necessarily work in terms of a small portion of a paper or analytical response that was inadvertently plagiarized, the scope and depth of Joe Biden’s plagiarism in terms of the article in question was so broad as to make such a statement all but laughable. Essentially, if it were indeed the case that Joe Biden had merely forgot correct citation and was suffering a momentary lapse of judgment in terms of the way in which a correct paper should be written at a gradual level in one of the most prestigious universities in the United States, it still does not explain the fact that he would have been forced to review his work and ensure that no such oversights were exhibited. Nevertheless, within the documentation was released during this primary season, in the late 1980s, Biden also released a letter that was written to the academic office of integrity at Yale University. Within the letter, Joe Biden repeatedly made reference to the fact that the scope of the plagiarism was so overt and obvious that he could not have possibly made a mistake in the hopes of passing off this level of plagiarism as his own work. Time and time again, Biden referred to the plagiarism as something that would have been “too stupid” for him to do. Although an accurate representation of the oversight, the degree and extent to which this can ultimately be believed is obviously suspect. Yet, even though this particular defense might have worked well in terms of the way that it was received on the campaign trail, a further analysis of Biden’s defense for his plagiarism does not stand up to scrutiny. For instance, the article that he was proven to have plagiarized only included one footnote in terms of the actual article that he through the information from. Nevertheless, subsequent footnotes were found throughout the article clearly indicated that Joe Biden understood the concept of relevant citations means by which it should be applied. If it were indeed his intention to stipulate that he had inadvertently plagiarized as a result of the fact you understand the way it citations should be provided, one would reasonably expect to find the fact that this paper lacked any citation or comprehension relevant citation whatsoever. Yet, the fact that the paper itself was heavily cited and failed to indicate that the entire portions uncredited work were in fact a result of another’s analysis, the defense that was provided falls apart. Although the case in question occurred fully 20 years prior to it being discovered by politicians and making domestic news headlines, it should be clearly noted from this example that plagiarism provides a potential to destroy the career and reputation of an individual long after the act itself has been perpetrated. The long and short of this particular situation should be understood in terms of the fact that the plagiarism was initially likely conducted in full knowledge of the fact that Joe Biden was attempting to cheat the system and to provide a quick paper so that he could pass a requirement and move on Ages education and professional life. Although this is not likely uncommon in terms of the way that many students engage with their scholastic studies, such a tactic oftentimes comes back to haunt the individual later in life. As a direct result of situation that has been described above, Joe Biden’s reputation, popularity, and overall prospects of success in life were significantly hampered (Dundes 44). Whereas it is true that he ultimately came to be a powerful senator and subsequently president Barack Obama’s choice for vice president, the situation outlined above could have potentially sidetracked his entire career and were eligible to a miniscule role within America’s political history. The danger that is inherent within the case above has to do with the fact that the risk of plagiarizing anything and the risk of cheating one’s way through either an academic or professional setting is no way worth the ultimate risk that could be reflected at such a point in time in which fact checking and analysis of the record is of paramount importance (Tyrell 99). This is a worthy note for any individual that considers cutting corners and ultimately cheating themselves of the educational experience that doing their own work and properly citing sources might necessarily affect. Further, it must also be understood that the indiscretions of Joe Biden’s youth necessarily contributed to an even further level of fact checking in terms of his opponents and the means by which they understood his credibility. Once it was discovered that he had definitively plagiarized sections of his work at Yale, the statements that he made during the political campaign season were also subject to an even further level of analysis; specifically as it related to the overall level of black citation of sources and similarity statements may have to other individuals. As a direct result of this, Biden was also caught repeating key phrases and lifting entire sections of speeches nearly word for word from previous politicians. Whereas plagiarizing a spoken context is oftentimes not the as seriously as plagiarizing from the written context, Biden was once again run through the scrutiny of both politicians and the press; further disparaging his credentials and ridiculing the fact that he was so incapable of developing his own thoughts and ideas that he had been forced to regurgitate those of others as a means of staying relevant (Dukakis et al. 5). Whereas many of these criticisms were inherently unfair, the die had been cast and Joe Biden’s reputation had already been determined as a result of the previous accusations which were proven to be true. Essentially, the issue boils down to one of credibility. As Biden’s credibility had been effectively destroyed as a result of the proof of plagiarism during his graduate time at Yale, the degree and extent to which the remainder of his professional and personal life was scrutinized was of a heightened nature. For instance, individuals, inclusive of the press, were quick to pounce upon the fact that relevant citations were not provided in terms of campaign speeches that Biden was giving. However, it has been widely noted that individuals, inclusive of the beloved John F. Kennedy, regularly repeated the work of other individuals without effective were correct citation. To his credit, Joe Biden point this fact out as a means of seeking to salvage the campaign and to indicate that he was performing the same standards that revered predecessors before him had done. Nevertheless, the perception of the Biden is a cheat and as a dishonest individual was already set; making it almost an impossible task for him to climb out from such a label and definition. Regardless of what one may think of Joe Biden, where the political party for which it stands, the facts of this particular case speak for themselves. Firstly, it was clear and apparent that Joe Biden had indeed plagiarized section of his postgraduate work at Yale University. Secondly, it is clear and apparent that he was punished for this, received an F for the course, was forced to retake it, and subsequently passed it with a B average. Similarly, a secondary take away that can be had is in terms of the fact that even though proper and effective disciplinary action was administered, the situation itself was enough to haunt his political career fully 25 years after the event itself took place. Likewise, it should also be understood that the mere existence of plagiarism and proof that it in fact took place was sufficient not only to dissuade individuals voting for him but also to encourage his political opponents defined further proof that he was continuing this practice within the current time (Reader 20). Whereas the plagiarism charge, in terms of the Yale University issue, was sufficiently damaging to his political career, it was ultimately the connection between the past and present that allowed for the situation force Biden’s withdrawal from the presidential primary (Benson 29). Whether it is fair or not, it is clear and apparent that the lack of faith in his character and the understanding that he was potentially continuing these practices into the present time was sufficient to castigate the image he was attempting to project to the electorate. Likewise, it must be understood cheating is something of a social phenomena within the world. Although the impacts of cheating within scholastics have only recently come to a broad level of understanding, the fact of the matter is that cheating is a type of social problem that traces its origins back to the innate desire for an individual to gain a competitive advantage over his/her peers with the least amount of effort. Ultimately, the human spirit is one that continually seeks for self betterment and a level of advantage over their fellow students (Bing et al. 29). Oftentimes, this desire to be better engages the individual to try harder and exert their selves more fully. However, oftentimes, the case is that the individual seeks a shortcut with regards to maintaining an advantage and reaching a desired goal. This shortcut can either be the reduction in the overall quality of the work that they represent or it can be referenced with regards to the fact that the seek to cheat in one form or the other as a means of providing themselves the benefits that had previously been mentioned (LaRochelle 918). Regardless of the way in which cheating is defined, it must be understood cheating is not localized to the University or secondary education systems. Rather, from an early age, children are made aware of the fact that cheating is very much a part of adult life (Strickland 920). From the way in which a colleague takes advantage of another and claims his/her own work as their own, the manner in which the government is cheated out of taxes (and individuals brag about this), or the manner through which deception is utilized in business deals, the young stakeholders presented with a litany of different situations in which cheating is both allowed and even promoted. Recognizing that cheating is a defensible approach to effecting the goals that they wish to accomplish, students engage in this process with not nearly enough reservations with regards to the negative ramifications of such a process can necessarily engage. In conclusion, the information that is thus far been provided denotes that cheating represents an inherent harm to the system of education as well as an inherent danger to the level of goods and service quality that are represented throughout the economic environment. As illustrated within the case of Joe Biden, cheating is a process that is easily an issue that can come back to haunt the career or integrity of an individual long after the act itself has been committed and forgotten. Likewise, using this case as an exemplification of cheating behavior and consequences, the reader can accurately denote the fact that the repercussions of plagiarism and cheating far outweigh their perceived and immediate benefit at the time in which such behavior is actually perpetrated. Whether or not one feels as if the gamble is worth it, the case of Joe Biden illustrates the ongoing and pervasive adult challenges that past plagiarism can denote. Works Cited Benson, Thomas W. "New Political Journalism." Postmodern Culture 5.3 (1995). Bing, Mark N., et al. "An Experimental Investigation Of An Interactive Model Of Academic Cheating Among Business School Students." Academy Of Management Learning & Education 11.1 (2012): 28-48. Business Source Complete. Web. 30 Nov. 2013. Dukakis, Michael S., et al. "United States presidential election, 1988." Dundes, Alan. "Six Inches from the Presidency: The Gary Hart Jokes as Public Opinion." Western folklore (1989): 43-51. LaRochelle, Joseph M., and Allison R. King. "Editorial-Avoiding Plagiarism."Hospital Pharmacy 46.12 (2011): 917-919. Reader, Capitol. Summary of Promises to Keep: On Life and Politics-Joe Biden. Primento, 2013. Strickland, Cooper J. "Dark Side of Unattributed Copying and the Ethical Implications of Plagiarism in the Legal Profession, The." NCL Rev. 90 (2011): 920. Tyrell Jr., R. Emmett. "The Clown of Campaign 08." American Spectator Dec. 2008: 99. Academic Search Complete. Web. 13 Nov. 2014. Wheeler, Debbie, and David Anderson. "Dealing with plagiarism in a complex information society." Education, Business and Society: Contemporary Middle Eastern Issues 3.3 (2010): 166-177. Witcover, Jules. Joe Biden: a life of trial and redemption. HarperCollins, 2010. Read More