House Editorial: Eickel's Apology

President of SGA is a victim of his own actions

Posted on September 6, 2007

A few weeks after SGA president Brandon Eickel apologized for stealing campaign ideas from two students at William and Mary, he probably wants to eat his words.

Changing a word or two from his work doesn’t mean he can slap a copyright mark on his “original.”  Even if Eickel’s copyright was for his Web design, he should have at least made that abundantly clear on his Web site, and attributed his ideas to Zach Pilchen and Valerie Hopkins.

Reviewing another student’s campaign to brainstorm for your own campaign is fine. Putting both hands on another student’s campaign, grabbing it and running with it is a completely different story.

Eickel realized he made a mistake when Pilchen and Hopkins contacted him – about six months too late.

Eickel’s actions are a poor reflection on JMU, the SGA and himself. He has defamed his name and reputation as a representative of the student body. Not only that, but he has made the entire university look suspect when it comes to honesty and integrity.

This was not a miscommunication, as Eickel would have us believe. There was no communication between Eickel and the William and Mary students until they got in touch with him. A quick look at the two platforms is almost shocking. How could Eickel think for a second he could pass the ideas off as his own?

This raises the broader issue of plagiarism among college students. Plagiarism does not strictly mean lifting a passage, word for word, from a source.

Using another’s thoughts as your own is a clear violation of JMU’s Honor Code, which defines plagiarism as the deliberate copying, writing or presenting as one’s own the information, ideas or phrasing of another person without proper acknowledgment of the true source.

Perhaps Eickel’s actions are the direct result of a generation of students rephrasing Wikipedia entries and calling it their own “research” and rarely getting caught.

Unfortunately, Eickel is safe from the Honor Council, because the punishments for honor violations are course-related.

The SGA, however, should treat Eickel’s actions with no less seriousness than an academic honor violation.

Allowing Eickel to spend the year executing campaign promises that were not his own would tarnish the student government’s reputation, within and outside of JMU.

At press time, the SGA said a discussion of the issue was not on the agenda for Tuesday’s meeting. Expecting students to just forget about Eickel’s actions is a mistake. It is our responsibility to ensure that Eickel is held accountable for his dishonesty and we suggest that the SGA take immediate action in order to restore accountability to JMU’s student government.