New York Magazine Ends Ross Barkan’s Column Amid Plagiarism Allegations

New York Magazine announced it has ended its relationship with columnist Ross Barkan following an investigation into plagiarism allegations. The publication revealed on Friday that it had conducted an independent editorial review. This review found that Barkan did not meet their editorial standards in his work, which led to the decision to update 67 columns lacking proper attribution of language, information, or sourcing.

According to a statement obtained by Semafor, New York Magazine expressed its commitment to transparency by updating its archives. These updates ensure all articles reflect proper attribution, highlighting any necessary adjustments. The magazine regrets the situation and has apologized to the affected writers, stating they will discontinue publishing Barkan’s column. They are also open to addressing any further instances should they arise.

In a statement to Fox News Digital, Ross Barkan expressed his regret over the errors made during his tenure. He acknowledged his oversight in citations across almost 250 pieces and vowed to be more diligent in the future. Barkan also shared plans to introduce a new column in September.

The situation came to light in May when Drew Harwell, a Washington Post reporter, accused Barkan of borrowing from his report on Ben Shapiro and The Daily Wire without proper credit. Following this revelation, New York Magazine updated their article with an editor’s note, crediting the Washington Post. Despite the update, Harwell remained uncertain about the exact details of the incident.

The controversy deepened when NPR correspondent Bobby Allyn discovered further instances of similarity between Barkan’s work and articles from The Intercept and Compact Magazine. Allyn pointed out that several passages in Barkan’s reports closely resembled or matched sections from these sources.

Barkan initially rejected the plagiarism accusations, declaring to Fox News Digital that he had not plagiarized and criticizing the claims as unfounded.

The case signals the continued seriousness with which media outlets treat issues of plagiarism and the importance of maintaining high editorial standards.