|
|
|
New York Times L.A. correspondent Charlie LeDuff is in the news again over a plagiarism accusation. This time it's an old one, posted on Romenesko from an upcoming San Francisco Magazine piece by Bruce Kelley.
There are two things you should know about New York Times reporter Charlie LeDuff, who is covering all things California from the Los Angeles bureau in his latest high-profile writing gig. First, he is really good, a fearless reporter and go-for-the-gut storyteller who in nine years, briefly under executive editor Howell Raines and now in the post-Raines, post-Jayson Blair era, has shot through a galaxy of assignments that most reporters don't experience in a lifetime.In a Times career spanning more than 400 articles, he's navigated the streets of New York for five days as a blind person, detailed the emotional fallout of a Brooklyn fire station in the ash of September 11, embedded himself with Marines in Iraq, and worked for almost a month in a tacitly segregated pork slaughterhouse in North Carolina, a story in the Times series "How Race Is Lived in America," which won a Pulitzer Prize.
"Charlie has a singular voice and extraordinary ability," says Orville Schell, dean of UC Berkeley's Graduate School of Journalism, where LeDuff was trained and remains a legend. "He's one of those guys who's always on the edge." In naked contrast to his Ivy League colleagues at the illustrious paper, LeDuff, who is part Native American, has tailored a persona as bibulous scribe of the working class, hanging out in bars and exercising his lush prose. That overwhelming talent has earned him a book deal for a selection of his reports from the streets called Work and Other Sins: Life in New York City and Thereabouts, due out at the end of January.
The second thing to know is that LeDuff, who's in his mid-30s, has been harboring an increasingly loaded secret since his UC Berkeley days. Nine years ago, in a piece he'd freelanced for the Emeryville-based East Bay Monthly, he had been caught plagiarizing another journalist's work.
Though LeDuff's article appeared the same year the Times hired LeDuff in 1995, two weeks ago was apparently the first time the paper's higher-ups had ever heard anything about it. And it's unclear how much they know. Last week, Times national desk editor Jim Roberts said he wouldn't discuss the matter. Meanwhile, former professors of LeDuff's at UC Berkeley also told us they'd never heard of the events.
On the Romenesko letters page, Kit R. Roane replies that LeDuff was a great colleague on the NYT Metro desk: "LeDuff is a first-rate journalist, who can both report and write better than most of those in our field...Yes, LeDuff can let his ego get in the way at times, but from what I know of him he has always done the work to back his ego up."
Earlier: LeDuff chided, but... and Giving opinion a bad name
Update: Keith Kelly rehashes the controversy in his New York Post column (scroll down)
The point is that neither Charlie LeDuff or Jayson Blair would have been hired by the NYT or advanced if they had not been in the NYT's affirmative action program.
Posted by: Luke Ford at January 2, 2004 02:56 PMYou must be joking. That's quite offensive. Was Rick Bragg part of their affirmative action program for Anglos? Was Stephen Glass part of the New Republic's affirmative action program for whites as well? Would they have been hired if they were people of color?
Fact is, people of color continue to be underrepresented in the media -- particularly in radio and wire services locally. It's a sad fact of life in a country where the Fourth Estate struggles to maintain weight and democracy against the increasing demands of the bean counters. So, according to your logic, anytime a white journalist f's up, we should look at the Anglo-centric hiring policies of most media organizations. Your logic also assumes that the bar is lowered for nonwhites, when those of us in this game for years (I'm a third generation Romero in the media) know that you have to work extra hard to be taken seriously. Times two for women of color.
I was accepted to a top university and a top newspaper sans affirmative action, but your assumption would be that I had extra help based on my Latino heritage. Thanks for the credit. I guess Australians haven't done too poorly in American media, but I'm not calling it special treatment. That would be prejudiced -- look into it.
Posted by: Dennis Romero at January 2, 2004 04:46 PMDoes LeDuff live on a reservation, attend pow wows, or look NA? If not, what does it really matter besides either the cheap AA chip mentioned above or as a bio point. Say,NEW! Billy Bob Thornton (1/4 Choctaw). Good for him.
Posted by: Lonewacko at January 2, 2004 10:13 PMI'd say Bragg fills that all-important "redneck, good- ol' boy Bubba who can write rings around those Ivy Leaguers" quota. While I don't know how much LeDuff cares about his Indian heritage (hint: no Indians use the white-boy term "Native American"), but the Times thinks it's cool. Why anyone of any intelligence thinks that minorities are "under-represented" anywhere is beyond me. Are Japanese-Americans "under-represented" in the NBA?
Dennis--are you so sure about that "sans affirmative action" clause in your contract?
The link I provided above was courtesy of the The Native American Channel™
In any case, I'd like to propose a scoring system for use by newspaper editors. Say, on a 1 to 5 scale. LeDuff is only part NA, so he'd get a .3 or .4. On the other hand, many members of a certain group can score a whopping 3 or 4! Can you guess the group I'm talking about? This group is oppressed not just by other Americans, but they're oppressed by Japanese and Saudis, and even by Koreans (who themselves are oppressed by Japanese). Not only that, many of them have Spanish names and Spanish blood, making them not just one oppressed minority (Asian) but two! Plus, their country was formerly oppressed by the U.S., making them a three-fer if not a four-fer. Ladies and Gentlemen of the media, I give you: the Filipinos!
Posted by: Lonewacko Responds Swiftly at January 3, 2004 12:15 PMI have always loved that in the U.S. being a Spanish speaker implies being a minority. While a citizen of Spain, living in Europe is considered no different than a French or Italian, a Spaniard in the U.S. would be considered a minority...ah, Americans can be so bright, NOT!
Posted by: Angry Photog at January 4, 2004 02:56 PMBragg filled a good-writer quotient. He made a mistake, but he's an amazing writer, period.
Japanese Americans are underrepresented in the NBA, but there's a huge difference between the NBA and the Fourth Estate. I think we can all figure this one out without further diatribe.
I'm quite sure I was not admitted or hired under affirmative action at UCLA and the Los Angeles Times respectively. Both had (the Times still does) affirmative action programs under which one can apply (I did not).
Thanks for the credit though. It's nice to know there are such warm feelings for people of color in our so-called liberal media.
Posted by: Dennis Romero at January 5, 2004 11:48 AMEnough. Leave Charlie LeDuff alone. It smacks of professional jealousy, and he doesn't deserve it. Anyone of us who regularly write things that get digested by the public are accused of everything from plagiarism to making up quotes when someone is disgruntled by what we write. An accusation don't make it so.
There's this idea that you have to spend time in the trenches of backwaters and suburbs at midsized rags before you can break into the great papers like the NYTimes. So when someone does it another way, whoa nelly, other journalists just can't stand it. Oh the injustice! The conclusion is never, oh well he/she must have some talent or a diffenent view. Ono, it must be it came because he/she is A) a minority of some sort or B) slept with someone or C) made some shit up.
Charlie LeDuff, as annoying as he comes across, is exactly what a stuffy paper like the nytimes needed. I've reported on same things/people he has and never noticed anything questionable. If he messed up at some point in his youth, well, that's the best time to do it.
Posted by: Mariel at January 5, 2004 12:21 PMLeDuff not only apparently plagerized material but he's also been accused of making up quotes.
Shades of Jayson Blair.
Posted by: Clemson at January 5, 2004 12:31 PMAt journalismjobs.com, there are 291 "Job Listings in Newspapers/Wires," and 135 "Diversity Job Listings." Not that I'm complaining, mind you.
Posted by: Melissa Alonzo at January 5, 2004 09:59 PMThey should all be diversity job listings.
Posted by: Dennis Romero at January 6, 2004 11:44 AMKevin Kelly is the former editor of Wired. KEITH Kelly is the NY Post media columnist.
I return you all to your previously scheduled wanking about affirmative action.
Posted by: Mr. Ricey at January 6, 2004 02:10 PMThanks Mr. Ricey. Duh. Correction made.
Posted by: Kevin Roderick at January 6, 2004 02:17 PMGosh, it's cool to be Native American, isn't it? Problem is, somebody needs to carefully review LeDuffy's "tribal affiliation"..check the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians...check their enrollment procedure (lineage, not quantum) based on the Durant Roll, and check their history..not even a Federally recognized Tribe until 1978 or thereabouts. Right now, the Sault Tribe has over 30 thousand members and it is generally recognized in the area that there are many, many internal problems, including "membership".
Charles has _"minimal"_ Tribal affiliation. Start checking.
Posted by: Drags Blanket at January 7, 2004 03:22 PMGosh, it's cool to be Native American, isn't it? Problem is, somebody needs to carefully review LeDuffy's "tribal affiliation"..check the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians...check their enrollment procedure (lineage, not quantum) based on the Durant Roll, and check their history..not even a Federally recognized Tribe until 1978 or thereabouts. Right now, the Sault Tribe has over 30 thousand members and it is generally recognized in the area that there are many, many internal problems, including "membership".
Charles has _"minimal"_ Tribal affiliation. Start checking.
Posted by: Drags Blanket at January 7, 2004 03:23 PM'Scuse me...forgot to mention..uh, Charlie likes to wave his papers around too.."Lookatme! I'ma card-carryun Injun!"
Poor little Suyiyape'...Never seen an "N.A." do that b'fore! But that wasn't the biggest clue..it's the "I-me-my" perspective. Not very 'Tribal'. Certainly not traditional.
LeDuff grew up in a middle class Detroit suburb w/a 97.6% white population. Minimal tribal affiliation at best is right.
Posted by: Guts Abounding at July 13, 2004 10:00 AM
of LA Observed
"Gotta work in his age and the Native American thing... where can I put it?... How about here? Yeah, that sounds good..."
I've seen two stories on this guy, and both mentioned the NA thing. Aren't large segments of the population part NA, whether the claim is true or not?
Posted by: Lonewacko at January 2, 2004 01:07 PM