posted at 8/31/2013 10:55 AM EDT
In response to nyjetssuc's comment:
In response to zbellino's comment:
Ron Borges was NOT fired from the Globe. He did plagiarize. He was a Patriots antagonist after Belichik came here ... speculation as to why is out there (hint: Bill released his sources, closed down access, and benched his best friend/source Bledsoe).
But he stepped down from the Globe, and was not fired.
Here is the story from the Globe itself:
Wrong Z...wrong, wrong, wrong...The Taylor's were always a class act...they gave the clown a chance to get another job and leave with his head up for past services rendered...ever since he's been a pouty , angry little man...Barnicle got the same treatment, then went and did it again with the NY paper...
As Rusty says, can't make this stuff up...
And I had family in BOTH Herald and Globe sports departments....it was all over the journalism business in the City, everyone in the biz knows what happened...
Borges was a pouty, bitter man before the firing. He's had an ax to grind with Bill and the Pats for a while!
Barnicle DID get the option to step down or be fired, but his offenses were spread out over a period of time, he had no credit line to even veil his plagiarism. He outright fabricated stories (about sick children in a hospital). And IIRC Barnacle and the Globe admitted it as such.
It's apples and oranges.
Borges was lazy and dishonest.
Barnacle was just making stuff up all over the place, and was aksed to resign.
Those are two very different degrees of plagiarism. In academia, one is a failed assignment, the other is expulsion from the university.
The resignation story, versus the retirement story, were two totally different textures that matched the severity. One is an offense that warrants suspension, the other warrants termination. Likewise, Barnacle's resignation announcement was about leaving because it was "the best for the Globe," while Borges announcement was about him "to pursue other ventures" or whatever.
One is very likely a forced resignation. The other looks like a decision to part ways.
As far as the 'family' goes, I'm not going to touch that beyond the fact that anyone on the internet can say that they have family and sources anywhere. It happens every day on this forum when people want to win an argument. I'm not calling you a liar, I just don't believe anyone (including some friends) on this forum that claim 'inside information'.
I guess i'd believe you if you provided me with contact information about the 'people' that worked at both departments though.
You'll forgive me, I like your posts ... but really, how many people here would you take at their word about a source? Really?