Martin Peretz, who owned and managed The New Republic at the time of the fabrications, testified on Glass's behalf and had developed a charitable view of his misconduct by the time of the California State Bar hearing. He blamed himself and, even more, the magazine's editors for encouraging Glass to write zany, shocking articles and for failing to recognize the improbability of some of Glass's stories. He found the harm of the scandal to the magazine to be minimal. He had renewed social contact with Glass in the past few years and believed that Glass had been harshly treated. He would not rule out hiring Glass again as a journalist. He explained that in his experience as a professor “[t]he most brilliant students plagiarize,” complaining to the Committee‟s counsel, “I actually find your pursuing him an act of stalking.”
Monday, January 27, 2014
Marty Peretz Walks Into A Bar .... Hearing
Somehow, this wasn't helpful:
This explains Marty's contribution to American journalism of the period.
ReplyDeleteAnd what does Marty know of stalking? Inquiring minds want to know (Note: plagiarized from the gal next to me).
ReplyDeleteHe explained that in his experience as a professor “[t]he most brilliant students plagiarize,”
ReplyDeleteThat explains Harvard's effect on the destruction of the American economy. Though in this case, it's students who are taking Marty Peretz's classes, so I doubt those are the "most brilliant" at the school.
I suspect Marty believes he was one of the most brilliant students back in the day.
ReplyDeleteDear god ... where my wife is a professor plagiarism is cause for punitive action up to expulsion. Brilliant? I don't think that word means what Marty thinks it means.
ReplyDeleteGlass sounds like a textbook sociopath to me. They are masters at manipulating others, including those whom they have victimized. Take heed, Marty.
ReplyDelete