41.4 F
Wrightsville Beach
Friday, March 29, 2024

Our thoughts

Must read

By Simon Gonzalez

As we slog through the Dem convention, the biggest talking point from the Republican National Convention was not Donald Trump’s acceptance speech (75 minutes total speech time; 24 minutes total applause! a campaign ad states).

It wasn’t vice presidential candidate Mike Pence introducing himself to America, or the Trump children articulating their dad’s gifts. It wasn’t even Ted Cruz’s non-endorsement/boo fest.

No, the thing that generated the most buzz, animated the network talking heads, consumed hours of airtime on talk radio and blew up social media was Melania Trump’s opening-night speech.

Speeches made by the wife (or now husband) of the nominee are very predictable and rarely noteworthy. They generally consist of a series of obligatory phrases about the wonderful qualities of the spouse, accompanied by predictable applause breaks. Mrs. Trump’s was different, though. The would-be first lady stands accused and convicted in the court of public opinion of plagiarizing the outgoing first lady.

To be specific, two passages in Melania Trump’s convention speech were suspiciously similar to words delivered by Michelle Obama at the 2007 Democratic National Convention.

Plagiarism is serious business. It was serious business in 1987 when Joe Biden, running for president, took excerpts from a speech delivered by British Labour Party leader Neil Kinnock. As Biden’s linguistic larceny came to light, allegations followed that he lifted parts of other speeches from Hubert Humphrey, Robert Kennedy and John Kennedy.

It cost Biden a chance at the presidency; he was forced to withdraw from the race. But it didn’t disqualify him from being Barack Obama’s running mate 20 years later.

Hilary Clinton thought it was serious business in 2008, when her campaign noted that a couple of Obama’s speeches borrowed words (and inflections and cadence) from Deval Patrick, then the Massachusetts governor. Obama’s defense was that he and Patrick were friends who traded ideas frequently, and he essentially had permission.

It’s definitely serious business in the journalism profession. Careers have been destroyed when reporters and columnists have taken the work of others and presented it as their own. We lose trust with our readers if the story under the byline isn’t the product of the writer.

That means it’s serious business when committed on the stage of a national convention.

To be clear, Melania Trump didn’t plagiarize Michelle Obama.

Still, someone lifted the words. It turns out it may be the work of a staffer named Meredith McIver.

“In working with Melania Trump on her recent First Lady speech, we discussed many people who inspired her and messages she wanted to share with the American people,” McIver wrote in a statement released by the Trump campaign. “A person she has always liked is Michelle Obama.”

McIver states that Mrs. Trump read passages from Mrs. Obama to her over the phone. McIver dutifully wrote them down and included them in the salacious speech, without fact checking and apparently without editing or consulting a thesaurus.

Ghostwriting and speech writing is standard practice in politics, and is common in business and even in the nonprofit world. Newsletters, emails, etc., might go out with the signature of the heads of major organizations, but chances are a corporate communications department produced them, attorneys vetted them.

The writer’s task is to compose in a tone and style common to the speaker or author. The organization’s task is to make sure the words are vetted and approved, if not by the person using them then at least by people or aides close to him or her. Free software is available to check that the words are not borrowed from another. These protections ensure the words going out under your signature, or the words you use in a speech, accurately reflect your thoughts and ideas, your phrasing, and your style — not someone else’s.

Obviously it’s OK to use the words of others if they are properly attributed. It would be a non-issue if Mrs. Trump had said something like, “As Michelle Obama said eight years ago …”

Even though she repeated at least one fairly common expression, “your word is your bond,” the coincidence of Mrs. Obama also using those exact same words in 2008 created the issue. The problem with Melania’s speech was it wasn’t properly vetted. This was an easily avoidable mistake.

In the world of journalism and professional speech writing it would warrant an immediate firing of the writer. A career-buster. It is not to be tolerated in the profession. Still, the whole thing has more of the whiff of kerfuffle, than the taint of scandal. After all, unlike Joe Biden, Melania Trump isn’t the one running for office.

We may never know what really transpired, but apparently Mrs. Trump chose not to use the speech written from her by two of the nation’s top writers, but instead went with a DIY approach using the help of someone she was familiar with. It backfired.

The fallout made headlines for far too long.  But indeed it lined up along the predictable factions. The pro-Clinton forces trumpeted it as another reason not to vote for him. The pro-Trump forces declared it of no consequence.

As we continue the long road toward November, it’s unlikely to move any undecided voters.

One thing for sure, it was a lesson learned, a tough one, but learned no doubt.

- Advertisement -spot_img

More articles

- Advertisement -spot_img

Latest articles