Sabrina Ajmechet, the historian denounced for plagiarism that Bullrich wants as a candidate

Patricia Bullrich proposed as a candidate on the list Together for Change headed by María Eugenia Vidal to the historian Sabrina Ajmechet, which is widely celebrated for its interventions on Twitter. Perhaps the president of the PRO did not notice some academic background of who will make up the list: had complaints of alleged plagiarism in his articles and a committee of the political history magazine PolHis made an analysis of the text and concluded that, indeed, he had used texts from other authors and that “the complaints are valid.”. For this reason, the magazine excluded the Ajmeched article from publication.

The historian is also vice president of the Argentine Political Club and her incorporation to the list is intended to represent the intellectuals in Together for Change. The PRO president tweeted: “The lack of ideas threatens our freedom. We need citizens capable of reversing so much decline. That is why I promoted Sabrina’s candidacy for national deputy @ajmechet, a young academic with experience and a transforming gaze to rebuild hope and the future “.

But he failed to notice some antecedents of the “young academic”. In an opinion of the magazine PolHis to which this newspaper had access, it is indicated that Ajmechet was denounced by two colleagues Silvana Palermo and Adriana Valobra, for the “striking and marked similarities both in form and content, between the claims made in Ajmechet’s article and his own works.” It was an article on women’s suffrage in 1947.

The magazine has among the ethical principles that appears on its website: “The texts will not be published in case of plagiarism. Plagiarism is the omission of the authorship of the copied fragment (s), its inclusion without quotation marks or with minimal changes such as the use of synonyms and the substitution of uppercase by lowercase or vice versa, and the paraphrasing without indication of the original source “.

A committee of the magazine made a detailed analysis and an exhaustive comparison of the texts of the other two authors and of Ajmechet’s article to reach its final opinion. And the conclusion was that “Ajmeched’s article, unconsciously or deliberately transgressing the norms that govern academic production, repeatedly used some of the formulations as his own without giving an explicit account of their origin and, for the same reason, affecting copyright “. That was why the article was first suspended and then definitively withdrawn from the magazine, of which Ajmechet was part of the editorial committee. Today on his website he is no longer part of the members of the magazine.


Disclaimer: If you need to update/edit/remove this news or article then please contact our support team Learn more

Leave a Reply