According to the standard dictionary, the word plagiarism is defined as “the practice of taking someone else’s work or ideas and passing them off as one’s own.” This concept of plagiarism is one that is often frowned upon, and rightfully so. No one likes for their ideas to be stolen from them. However, sometimes writers have similar ideas, and while this does not give them an excuse to take ideas of other while claiming that they had the same ideas as whom they plagiarized, it can be quite a controversial topic. In fact, plagiarism has caused many writers to feel as though reusing and reiterating another writer’s ideas in a way that is suitable for their audience is inferior. Writer Jennifer Mott-Smith composed “Plagiarism Deserves to be Punished” in aim of shedding light on the reality of plagiarism, and the impact that society has upon this reality using several valid points regarding using the ideas of others. Likewise, further detailing Mott-Smith’s writing, author Malcolm Gladwell highlights the story of Dorothy Lewis and her experience with potentially faulty plagiarisms in his work “Something Borrowed.” Also, through their writings, authors Mott-Smith and Gladwell both argue that while in some cases plagiarizing is indeed faulty, it is very important that one consider the nature of the specific scenario.

Mott-Smith thinks that one’s own ideas are often based upon someone else’s opinions and thoughts, making it difficult to distinguish what idea or opinion came from which individual the author is/was in contact with. She also says that new writers sometimes use the phrases of other, more experienced writers in order to improve their own writing. Mott-Smith uses this understanding to highlight that “…not every verbatim reuse is plagiarism” (Mott-Smith 3). In addition to this, Mott-Smith also includes her stance that when a writer is accused of plagiarism, certain words that appear to have been plagiarized often correlate in the English language. Again, this is because often times, writers possess ideas in their minds that are not entirely original and may have been recycled from a different and sometimes more experienced writer. This means that sometimes writers may possess or adopt conceptions they use in their writing from these other writers or outside influences in general. Therefore, she claims that possessing a completely original idea may be impossible. She states that this is due to the fact that as writers, we “always write recirculated ideas that we have borrowed from others and reworked” (Mott-Smith 2). Here, the author reiterates her idea regarding a writer having a completely original thought that has never been heard of being very unrealistic. Furthermore, while writers sometimes develop the concepts they discuss in their writing from their own beliefs, opinions, or mindsets, even these are based upon things that they have been exposed to throughout their lives. For example, one’s person beliefs could have been affected by one’s family or friends, and therefore is not a completely original thought, as another older, more experienced writer most likely have been exposed to similar concepts or beliefs and included them in their writing as well.  

In his writing, Gladwell explains that there was a play created with a character in it that resembled a psychiatrist named Dorothy Lewis. Lewis was very unhappy to see that someone had used the events of her life for their own benefit. In fact, she believed that she out to file a lawsuit against them. There was an issue in a magazine written about Lewis that the play wright, Bryrony Lavery, had used to form her play. The writer of this magazine article was none other than Malcolm Gladwell. Lavery and Gladwell decided to sit and speak of the play, and while Gladwell understood why Lewis had been upset, there were many differences as there were similarities. Due to this, Gladwell states, “The ethical rules that govern when it’s acceptable for one writer to copy another are even more extreme than the most extreme position of the intellectual-property crowd; when it comes to literature, we have somehow decided that copying is never acceptable” (Gladwell). His words here further explain that society has had a great impact upon the opinions surrounding non-blame-worthy reuse of another writer’s ideas.

Both authors purposefully quoted Stanford law professor Lawrence Lessig’s book “Free Culture,” where Lessig compares one reusing another writer’s ideas in their own writing to his recycling the idea of placing a picnic table in his backyard. Lessig also compares reusing the idea to simply taking someone’s picnic table out of their backyard and putting it is his own, which he implies is similar to faulty plagiarism in which the original thinker is affected. The significance of this comparison is crucial in order for one to understand the arguments Mott-Smith and Gladwell explain in their writing concerning the notion of plagiarism. This is because for one to reuse another writer’s ideas—while also citing the necessary sources—is not the same concept as “cutting and pasting an entire paper from the Internet or paying someone to write it” (Mott-Smith 5). Copying someone else’s complete (or incomplete)  paper from the Internet is faulty because of the fact that the writer is not incorporating any of their own ideas into the paper they are submitting. Similarly, paying someone to write it results in only one individual having benefitted–the person who received money. To make matters worse, the writer assigned with the paper not only turns in someone else’s thoughts and ideas, but also will most likely not receive a satisfactory score on this assignment. In addition, Mott-Smith states, concerning this, that unless one is “out-and-out cheating” (Mott-Smith 5), we should take caution before hastening to punish. She argues that in many scenarios of supposed plagiarism, a more appropriate response would be to allow the writer to comprehend and strengthen his or her source use.

Plagiarism is a very controversial topic in the world of writing, and it is an act that society considers blame-worthy regardless of the scenario. However, writers Jennifer Mott-Smith and Malcolm Gladwell believe that unless unmistakable cheating has taken place, teachers should be more careful before accusing or blaming a student of faulty plagiarism. Often, Mott-Smith argues, writers develop their ideas from the influence(s) of outside sources they encounter on a daily basis. In fact, according to author Lawrence Lessig, if writers use ideas based on outside influences, it is simply the idea that they are reusing for themselves, which do not directly impact the first thinker. It is vital that we, as writers and likewise humans, take the time to observe ourselves and the thoughts we personally possess–especially those we feel that no other individual can claim as their own–and ask ourselves where we first developed these ideas. Often, we learned them when we were merely children, naïve to much of the world we live in. It may have been our friends and family members that exposed these concepts to us in order for us to live accordingly, while always keeping these ideas in mind. As writers, these ideas are incorporated into our thought process and our understanding of the expectations of our readers and audience. If we didn’t rush to consider every reuse of ideas as blame-worthy plagiarism, we would be more open to accept that other individuals were exposed to similar concepts as we ourselves were. It should be something that is of means of comfort in a way, because the writer understands that he can read the writings of authors whose opinions he or she can relate to on a more personal level, and may also feel inspired to write about these ideas (while citing sources accordingly) without the worry of being accused of plagiarism.

Works Cited

Mott-Smith, Jennifer A. “Plagiarism Deserves to be Punished,” in Bad Ideas About Writing. Edited by Cheryl E. Ball and Drew M. Loewe, 247-252

Gladwell, Malcolm. “Something Borrowed.” The New Yorker, 15 Nov. 2004, www.newyorker.com/magazine/2004/11/22/something-borrowed