THE NOELLE McCARTHY PLAGIARISM CASE

Radio New Zealand has now publicly dealt with the Noelle McCarthy plagiarism case, and McCarthy herself has apologised. While RNZ management may have been a little slow off the mark in dealing with the situation, I think their handling of the case is appropriate. I don't think this was a serious enough instance of plagiarism to warrant McCarthy's dismissal from the station. If the lifting of other writers' work had happened to a broader extent in McCarthy's NZ Herald column that might have been another matter, but spoken pieces for radio feels a little different than print.

McCarthy delivered at least three editorial pieces on National Radio that were significantly lifted from other media. I suspect her actions were a looseness around attribution of sources rather than a wilful plagiarism, but her behaviour was certainly not acceptable in broadcast journalism. She showed a naievity and lack of experience that is no doubt embarassing for Radio New Zealand, which sets its journalism standards high.

But McCarthy is in fact relatively inexperienced. I don't think she has had much in the way of formal journalism training. She was something of an overnight sensation in the New Zealand media, coming from nowhere to everywhere fast.

When she was on the way up, the praise that was heaped upon her was far more than she deserved. But strangely, now that she has in effect "made it," the criticism she attracts is also more than she deserves. The knives have really been out for her on this one - far more than they were for the young New Zealand Herald journalist who got in trouble for a similar instance of plagiarism involving a Tawera Nikau profile a few years back. She too was relatively inexperienced, and she too kept her job.

Yes, McCarthy has made a stupid mistake - one I'm sure she won't commit again - but she doesn't deserve to have her radio career destroyed over it. National Radio needs some young fresh blood, and McCarthy does fill that role for them nicely.