Copy Cat

It was just a stupid concert review.

As a reporter for The Kansas City Star, Glenn E. Rice mostly covered the Jackson County Legislature; his byline rarely, if ever, showed up on the paper’s entertainment pages. Here at the Pitch, we’re still trying to figure out why he ended up reviewing jazz singer Dianne Reeves’ performance at the Gem Theater a year ago in May — whether he was merely on weekend duty and some editor who cared jack about entertainment writing just handed him the assignment, whether he’s really a jazz expert who volunteered to cover the concert, or whether something went wrong for some other reason we can’t quite fathom.

This much was obvious, though: Rice lifted entire paragraphs of his concert review from an article published a couple of weeks earlier in a Fort Lauderdale, Florida, newspaper.

In some sentences, Rice changed Sun-Sentinel arts writer Matt Schudel’s wording — but not much. “No singer in jazz has a better voice than Dianne Reeves,” Schudel wrote in the April 23, 2002, Sun-Sentinel. “Few jazz singers possess a better vocal quality than Dianne Reeves,” Rice wrote in the Star on May 13, 2002.

Other passages were nearly identical. Schudel: “She has a vocal range, depth, color and free-flowing sense of invention that other singers can only envy.” Rice: “She has an incredible vocal range that is layered with depth, texture and a free-flowing sense of innovation that most singers can only envy.”

Schudel: “Her concert Saturday at the Kravis Center in West Palm was a tribute to her musical idol, Sarah Vaughan. Reeves displayed pipes that would have made Sassy proud.” Rice: “Her concert Saturday at the Gem Theater was a tribute to her musical idol, Sarah Vaughan. Reeves displayed pipes that would have made Sassy proud.”

It went on like this for a while before Rice’s assessment of Reeves’ road show diverged from Schudel’s. Schudel wrote that Reeves made regrettable decisions in choosing to perform an “abysmal” disco song, a “bombastic” Brazilian tune and “her own banal feel-good ditty about childhood.”

Rice just spread love: Reeves, he said, performed “a program of standards, contemporary material and originals” that “enhanced [her] status.” Clearly out of his element, Rice wrote weasely descriptions that passed as concert reviewing: “The quartet offered the appropriate touches to Reeves’ singing.”

It was just a stupid concert review, more than a year ago. But, dude, it was plagiarism — the kind of thing that gets journalists fired and, way more important, stinks up a whole industry that has enough trouble convincing people it’s trustworthy.

That’s why we spit out our morning coffee on Sunday, June 22, when Star Editor Mark Zieman graced the editorial pages, writing directly to readers.

Ostensibly in response to the recent Jayson Blair meltdown at The New York Times, Zieman wrote an editorial headlined “Readers can help newspapers stay on ethical path.” He announced that the paper had posted its ethics policy online, encouraged readers to call editors’ attention to errors, and introduced the paper’s new readers’ representative, Yvette Walker.

“Like The Times, The Star has had to change our practices, terminate employees, even write about ourselves when our own failings made news,” he wrote. “But we remain vigilant, armed with an array of ethical standards and policies that we discuss, update and distribute on a regular basis. Our credibility demands it.”

The Star‘s ethics policy, as posted at kansascity.com, is pretty clear on plagiarism. “Do not borrow the work of others. Plagiarism includes the wholesale lifting of someone else’s writing, research or original concepts without attribution.”

What it doesn’t spell out is what happens to someone who would do something so dumb.

Zieman wasn’t eager to tell us when we contacted him last week to ask about Rice’s apparent plagiarism. “As I wrote in my Sunday column, we appreciate it when ethical issues are brought to our attention at The Star, we take them extremely seriously and we investigate them thoroughly,” he wrote in an e-mail to the Pitch on Friday, June 27. “We take strong action when it is warranted, with the level of discipline based on the facts of each case. Generally, however, I cannot comment on specific personnel issues.”

So much for being “armed with an array of ethical standards and policies that we discuss. “

From what we can tell, it appears that part of Rice’s punishment was to be banished from the Jackson County government beat — many reporters probably would have considered that a reward — and sent to cover the booming northland. Early last fall, Rice’s byline started showing up on a wide range of stories from north of the river rather than on snoozy dispatches from Jackson County legislative meetings.

All of which insults the Star‘s readers up north, if you ask us.

Matt Schudel is insulted, too. “This is, in my view, a textbook example of plagiarism,” he told us last week. Up until then, Schudel didn’t know there was an overzealous fan of his work in Kansas City. “I find the whole episode rather appalling,” he said.

Rice did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

If it had fired Rice, the Star stood to lose at least one thing of significant value. Rice is treasurer for the National Association of Black Journalists, and that looks mighty good on the Star‘s diversity résumé. Rice’s second two-year term on the board of that important industry association won’t expire until this August.

Maybe it’s presumptuous of us to suggest that race is the reason Rice kept his job. But we’re not the ones who originally suggested that possibility — that honor falls to the person who told us about it a few months ago, an anonymous tipster, presumably from inside the fortress at 18th and Grand. It’s pretty clear who our Deep Throat thought was ultimately responsible. He or she sarcastically signed the letter “Mark Zieman.”