Originally Posted by nstygma
She responded to this too:
Not to speak for cosmo, but I think the point is that the blog post author's words were not used in the Maddow piece complained of. The just used the same historical reference (which happens all the time, since our country has a shared history, people will regularly point out how current events remind them of historical events, and occasionally people will think of the same historical event because they are logically connected). The point is plagiarism is using someone else's words
as your own. Not referencing the same idea. Not referring to a movie. Not using video obtained by someone else.
And more importantly, as she correctly points out,even if she had done it, attack the messenger isn't a valid way to respond to substantive allegations, particularly when many other news sources have covered this now too (attack them all?).