Marc Seigel: Defending Goodwin

Doris Kearns Goodwin made a mistake. I'm not condoning her actions, but before we go flying off the handle and suggest that the University should disallow Goodwin from speaking at Penn or face the distinction of "being as guilty as the author herself," we should examine the issue in a sensible and rational manner.

The assertion by Matthew Mugmon that a noteworthy and Pulitzer Prize-winning historian such as Goodwin "lacks credibility" is just plain wrong. She is a former Harvard Professor. She served under Lyndon Johnson as a White House fellow. She was the first female journalist allowed inside the Boston Red Sox locker room.

Her biographies of the Kennedys, Lyndon Johnson and Franklin Delano Roosevelt have been not only successful but are legendary. Her distinctive lectures reveal the personalities and character of some of the greatest political figures of our time. She even served as the political commentator for NBC during the State of the Union Address just two weeks ago.

"I do not wish to make light of plagiarism. The integrity of scholarship requires that sources are acknowledged, but we need some sense of proportion," as Amitai Etzioni, a sociology professor at George Washington University, wrote in The Boston Globe last week. "But [this type of blunder] calls for a slap on the wrist, not public condemnation."

Let's not be so hasty to burn these authors at the stake, treating this as a capital offense. People make mistakes. It's part of our nature. Is pinning a scarlet letter "P" on Goodwin's jacket really necessary?

Etzioni rightly says, "There is way too much self-righteousness among reporters who are known themselves to draw on stories without granting credit to their sources." Plagiarism is serious, but you can't drive yourself crazy over it.

"There's virtually no such thing as a flawless history book. I go back to [Francis] Parkman and Samuel Eliot Morrison, and I see mistakes in those books," says historian David McCullough. "But so what? That shouldn't make us throw our hands up in disgust and disapproval. Look at what they did! Look at what they wrote! Where would we be without them?"

There's absolutely no reason to look at Goodwin's flaw in any other manner. She made a mistake, acknowledged it and corrected it. That should not take away from her expertise as a political analyst.

Hank Searls, one of the historians Goodwin is accused of plagiarizing, notes, "She changed a few words, which seems to me within the bounds of journalistic ethics."

Whether you buy that or not, the bottom line is that Goodwin made a mistake. Mistakes happen. I make them every day. But to deny the Penn campus the insight of a world-renowned historian over an error made 15 years ago, and one that has been resolved, no less, seems to me completely ludicrous.

Goodwin's accounts -- not of herself -- but of presidents are both entertaining and thought provoking. She brings these figures to life with vigor and spirit and offers a unique perspective on what makes an effective leader. What a shame it would be to miss out on an opportunity to hear her speak over a few measly words.

Marc Siegel is a senior Economics and Political Science major from Ballwin, Mo., and student director of the Fox Leadership Program.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.