If the material in the screenshots isn't plagiarism, then what could possibly be? We're looking at word-for-word copying of existing articles. And for an account posturing as a news source, I expect them to at least provide links. What good-faith reason is there for them to not link a source?
Lots of people including reporters paraphrase other journalists. There are only so many ways to phrase a factual account of events. Fwiw I never saw them claim that they are journalists only that they work for the govt. Nothing that they talk about is breaking news. They aren't scooping anyone.
I could write all the same posts they do just by watching Parnas and then waiting 24-48 hours. It's not even necessary to read anything and they might not be doing so. They are great at aggregating data and getting people engaged. It's an important service. No one confuses them for journalists.
I beg to differ. Lots and lots of people treat AltNPS as a primary news source, and frequently thank them for providing "inside" information that they think they can't get anywhere else. Take a look at their Facebook comments sometime if you want tons of examples.
I've seen the FB comments. If there are people so out of the loop that that's the only place that they see that info then it's a good thing they are seeing it somewhere. It's 2025. Fascism is here. If Wired isn't getting views it's because of the algorithms not because AltNP used some of their copy
This is not a paraphrase. This is direct, unambiguous theft of an entire article from Wired. If not journalists, they absolutely claim to be government insiders with a frankly impossible amount of information. They're the Park Service. Why would they have inside information about, e.g., ICE?
Then all anyone has to do to find it is google the text. If you include the link FB will shadow ban the post and no one will see it. FB sux like that. I hardly ever include links in the body of the post. It doesn't take much to be a govt insider. Lots of people work for the feds. 🤷🏻♀️
Are they saying it's insider info? That every post is insider info? To me, they serve to help get news out that maybe not as many people would hear otherwise. It's social media, not academia. Journalists do copy each other. I've seen mistakes get published across news sites from copying each other.
They may or may not be NPS employees. Maybe they were seasonals or former staff. But most fed government employees are completely in the dark about what is going on. Only those at the top get any info as they're the ones who are carrying out dealing with it (like the EOs).
Look me in the eye and tell me there's a good-faith reason for AltNPS to never provide a source for any of their claims. They spent MONTHS without giving a single link, and only started giving sources three weeks ago. Those citations are still often wrong, and often look AI-generated.
They should try to always give a source. Not because of plagiarism, but so the public is able to evaluate for themselves if the information came from a reliable source.
Well, also because of plagiarism. I agree that citing sources is what they should be doing. So why didn't they do it? Why spend all that time deliberately rewriting the content of news articles instead of just posting a link to the site they got it from? They wanted take credit for themselves.
In the linked article, I dig into some of the account's more egregious examples of plagiarism. They grabbed entire paragraphs from an article in NPR. They took whole sections verbatim from Wired. At what point does this stop being "resistance" and start being something we can criticize?