The line between attribution and plagiarism is the reporting, not the wording: facts once published are shareable with attribution, but the work of gathering them — the exclusive interview, the leaked document, the records request — belongs to the outlet that did it, and using that work without credit is the offense even when every sentence is rewritten. The Society of Professional Journalists' code is unambiguous that plagiarism is a firing offense, and the industry's publicized cases keep teaching the same boundary. For a small newsroom, the rule is also self-interest: uncredited borrowing is what allows larger outlets to strip a small paper's scoop and starve it of the recognition that funds the next one.
What are the actual rules on the desk?
Four, teachable to a new hire in ten minutes:
- Attribute the outlet that first reported it, in the body, by name — not "reports say."
- Do your own verification before relying on another outlet's facts where the story matters: get the document, call the source. Aggregation without verification inherits invisible errors.
- Never lift distinctive phrasing, structure, or framing. Rewriting someone's lead with synonyms is still taking the thinking.
- Link, generously, to the original. The link is the attribution the reader can check.
What is not plagiarism?
Common facts and public records: a council vote, a storm total, a statute's text belong to everyone, though the newsroom that surfaced a record through a records battle deserves credit for the finding. Idea overlap is not plagiarism either — two outlets pursuing the same public question is journalism, and the sin begins only at taking the other's specific work product: quotes you did not elicit, documents you did not obtain, phrasings you did not write.
What about quotes from other outlets' interviews?
The clearest rule in the gray zone: a quote belongs to the interview. Crediting the outlet — "X told the Reporter" — makes quoting legitimate; presenting the quote as if gathered by your newsroom, even with credit to the speaker, misleads readers about your reporting and can burn the source, who agreed to talk to a different journalist. Where a quote is load-bearing, the professional move is to seek your own interview; where it is context, attribute cleanly and link.
How should an editor handle a suspected case inside the newsroom?
As an investigation, not an ambush: check the similarity against the source, listen to the reporter's account of how the work was produced — deadline pressure and sloppy note-taking produce cases that look worse than they are — and grade the response to the actual offense, from coaching to correction to termination, published where publication is owed. The outlet that quietly fires a plagiarist while leaving the borrowed story live keeps both the sin and the evidence. The same transparency standard that governs corrections governs this: readers of the affected story deserve the annotation.
Why is this sharper for small outlets in both directions?
Because small newsrooms are simultaneously the most frequent victims — metro and national desks aggregate local scoops with thin credit — and the most tempted offenders, when staffing is thin and the regional paper's story is sitting there. The same rule answers both: credit visibly, verify independently, link. A local outlet that practices strict attribution is owed the same practice from above, and is positioned to demand it publicly when it is not given — a demand readers and funders increasingly back, as the industry's norms on link credit have hardened over the past decade.
Frequently asked questions
Is AI-assisted writing plagiarism?
A separate offense with the same root: presenting work you did not do as yours. An AI-drafted passage is disclosed as AI-assisted; a passage copied from another outlet by a tool is still plagiarism, and the disclosure policy does not launder it.
Can we credit a competitor we'd rather not name?
Credit is not an endorsement; it is a record. Outlets that hide a rival's scoop behind vague sourcing teach readers to trust neither outlet.
What about press releases?
Copying them verbatim is not plagiarism — the sender wants it — but publishing them as journalism is worse: an unaudited advertisement. Rewrite, verify, attribute the claim to its source.
For more context, read Writing a Conflict-of-Interest Policy a Small Newsroom Will Actually Use.
For more context, read How to Build a Corrections Policy Readers Can Find.
For more context, read What FOIA's Nine Exemptions Actually Let an Agency Withhold.