Bad Art Friend

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kidneygate made mistakes in their original correspondence with Brennan. They were too overreaching, and didn't focus specifically on the specific images that kidneygate created, which is the heart of the matter. But Brennan now knows she used images in her piece that came originally from a specific creator, and yet has continued to portray herself as the aggrieved one while at the same time removing the images that came from kidneygate. It is nothing like what Larson did, but it also isn't a great look for Brennan.

I don’t think Kidneygate’s initial email was overreaching at all. And come on, if this saga has taught us anything, it’s that just because the opposite party is, IDK, not adopting the right tone or whatever that makes you comfortable — that doesn’t justify your objectively wrong actions against them. Some people really live in a universe where social etiquette trumps all right/wrong, which is weird.

In the original letter, kidneygate stated that very single image came from their Twitter account. That isn't true, as kidneygate acknowledged later.on Twitter. (Kidneygate alleges now that it is about 90% of the images.) Also, kidneygate talked about the entire piece as coming from the kidneygate account, and that isn't true; Brennan clearly did much of her own analysis. So, yes, kidneygate did overreach in the original letter.

That having been said, Brennan is more in the wrong here, because she used images from someone else and didn't attribute them. The images are too identical to not be copies. That is disappointing.

[Anonymous]

PP here. Also Brennan is coming across as disingenuous because she kept tweeting about how she read all the documents and did her own analysis, but that doesn't actually change the fact that she used images that aren't just simple screenshots and that weren't originally hers, and didn't highlight that. Like I said, it's unfortunate.

[Anonymous]

DP, but her subtweets about kidneygate being a trolll and if you’re a kind person you don’t expect stuff like this are off also, like, kidneygate is not a troll, these are reasonable questions. Stop. STOP. You are hurting Dorland!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP, but her subtweets about kidneygate being a trolll and if you’re a kind person you don’t expect stuff like this are off also, like, kidneygate is not a troll, these are reasonable questions. Stop. STOP. You are hurting Dorland!

Yes, agree. Brennan needs to knock that off. It isn't making her look good.

[Anonymous]

Do we need to hold an intervention for blue check literati to help them get off social media?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP here. Also Brennan is coming across as disingenuous because she kept tweeting about how she read all the documents and did her own analysis, but that doesn't actually change the fact that she used images that aren't just simple screenshots and that weren't originally hers, and didn't highlight that. Like I said, it's unfortunate.

Agreed.
Ugh, all these people.

[Anonymous]

Sorry but I think people are conflating Brennan with other bad actors in this story, unfairly. Brennan has been one of the people (and “blue check marks”) speaking out against what Larson and others did from early on. Kidneygate came out guns blazing, accusing her of several things she had not done and threatening to “put her on blast.”

Brennan is someone who is always kind, thoughtful, and generous on social media. Her work is heavily researched and she is a skilled and talented writer. I think kidneygate got caught up in the plagiarism of it all and came at Brennan with lots of demands, incorrect accusations, and no effort to understand what had happened. Kidneygate has around 3k followers. There is absolutely no reason to assume Brennan had even seen the account or that it was where she got these screenshots.

Don’t indict Brennan because if your anger at others. She is one of the good guys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but I think people are conflating Brennan with other bad actors in this story, unfairly. Brennan has been one of the people (and “blue check marks”) speaking out against what Larson and others did from early on. Kidneygate came out guns blazing, accusing her of several things she had not done and threatening to “put her on blast.”

Brennan is someone who is always kind, thoughtful, and generous on social media. Her work is heavily researched and she is a skilled and talented writer. I think kidneygate got caught up in the plagiarism of it all and came at Brennan with lots of demands, incorrect accusations, and no effort to understand what had happened. Kidneygate has around 3k followers. There is absolutely no reason to assume Brennan had even seen the account or that it was where she got these screenshots.

Don’t indict Brennan because if your anger at others. She is one of the good guys.

I agree with this completely. I just wish she would have given a source credit to kidneygate right off the bat and avoided this whole meta-mess!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but I think people are conflating Brennan with other bad actors in this story, unfairly. Brennan has been one of the people (and “blue check marks”) speaking out against what Larson and others did from early on. Kidneygate came out guns blazing, accusing her of several things she had not done and threatening to “put her on blast.”

Brennan is someone who is always kind, thoughtful, and generous on social media. Her work is heavily researched and she is a skilled and talented writer. I think kidneygate got caught up in the plagiarism of it all and came at Brennan with lots of demands, incorrect accusations, and no effort to understand what had happened. Kidneygate has around 3k followers. There is absolutely no reason to assume Brennan had even seen the account or that it was where she got these screenshots.

Don’t indict Brennan because if your anger at others. She is one of the good guys.

She may be one of the good guys, but it isn't up for debate at this point that (a) she used unattributed images in her story that (b) have since been identified as originating from kidneygate given that they are pixel by pixel identical and (c) that Brennan has quietly replaced all those unattributed images but (d) Brennan hasn't acknowledged that she used unattributed images in the first place, or credited the original creator, who she now knows. She also has unfairly referred to kidneygate as a troll (kidneygate is not a troll, and those images were originally created by kidneygate), and is now posting self-pitying posts on Twitter. It doesn't really matter whether, when Brennan was writing, she did or did not know about kidneygate (though I would be surprised if she didn't). There isn't much question now that she used images that were not created by her in the essay, but she did not identify as not created by her.

It's objectively not great behavior.

[Anonymous]

The screenshots were identical to what kidneygate posted, down to the pixel, so Brennan certainly stole them without proper credit and should do so rather than stealthily replacing them. That is not being one of the good guys. And by creating this mini scandal, Brennan is improperly drawing attention away from where it belongs, making us all seem like unhinged idiots, and she should do better. Though I am sorry about her dad.

[Anonymous]

Brennan could also fix this easily by acknowledging that in her original work, she mistakenly included images that were unattributed, but that she now knows the source. Instead she is posting awkward posts about how she is a good person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The screenshots were identical to what kidneygate posted, down to the pixel, so Brennan certainly stole them without proper credit and should do so rather than stealthily replacing them. That is not being one of the good guys. And by creating this mini scandal, Brennan is improperly drawing attention away from where it belongs, making us all seem like unhinged idiots, and she should do better. Though I am sorry about her dad.

This, all of this. The stealth replace is bad, period. It is not one of the good guys. Could have so easily explained, too. Good guys recognize error, explain, apologize, attribute.

Mad Boston Book Festival lady, where are you — we need you to smack all of literati into shape.

I’m so grossed out.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but I think people are conflating Brennan with other bad actors in this story, unfairly. Brennan has been one of the people (and “blue check marks”) speaking out against what Larson and others did from early on. Kidneygate came out guns blazing, accusing her of several things she had not done and threatening to “put her on blast.”

Brennan is someone who is always kind, thoughtful, and generous on social media. Her work is heavily researched and she is a skilled and talented writer. I think kidneygate got caught up in the plagiarism of it all and came at Brennan with lots of demands, incorrect accusations, and no effort to understand what had happened. Kidneygate has around 3k followers. There is absolutely no reason to assume Brennan had even seen the account or that it was where she got these screenshots.

Don’t indict Brennan because if your anger at others. She is one of the good guys.

Sounds like you are Brennan’s friend and have a blind spot here TBH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but I think people are conflating Brennan with other bad actors in this story, unfairly. Brennan has been one of the people (and “blue check marks”) speaking out against what Larson and others did from early on. Kidneygate came out guns blazing, accusing her of several things she had not done and threatening to “put her on blast.”

Brennan is someone who is always kind, thoughtful, and generous on social media. Her work is heavily researched and she is a skilled and talented writer. I think kidneygate got caught up in the plagiarism of it all and came at Brennan with lots of demands, incorrect accusations, and no effort to understand what had happened. Kidneygate has around 3k followers. There is absolutely no reason to assume Brennan had even seen the account or that it was where she got these screenshots.

Don’t indict Brennan because if your anger at others. She is one of the good guys.

Sounds like you are Brennan’s friend and have a blind spot here TBH.

I don’t know her and have never even read any of her books, but I follow her on Twitter and over the summer subscribed to a series she did on “women of the night” in Paris. I think kidneygate is being really harsh and severely overreacting, and I think the writing in Brennan’s post is 100% original, whereas kidneygate accused her of stealing their work. This was false.

She also didn’t stealth replace the images. After kidneygate challenged her, she put up a separate post explaining her sourcing and replaced the screenshots with her own to make it clear and avoid further conflict.

Screenshotting a public work is not a copywritable act.

[Anonymous]

Oh, PP.
She literally took screenshots of kidneygate's work. No, it's not copywritable. But the ethical move would have been to give credit in the first place. Kidneygate is not being "really harsh," but having the visceral reaction that ... gee, I don't know ... is probably not unlike the way Dorland felt when she heard someone else reading from her letter?
I know a writing group in Boston that would love to have you.