[texasbluebell]

You got it.

We should just paraprase the living heck out of their stupid articles, being certain to note who the original writer was.

If the original writer doesn't like how s/he was paraphrased, too darn bad.

It's their tough luck, and their fault, if they don't like the turn of phrase we use.

[supercat]

We should just paraprase the living heck out of their stupid articles, being certain to note who the original writer was.

One of the difficulties with any sort of excerpting or paraphrasing is that the source being excerpted or paraphrased can complain that their words were distorted or taken out of context. Unless the original (and unaltered) source is available for comparison, there's no way for the person who excerpted or paraphrased the work to defend against such a charge.

If I try to tell others that e.g. the L.A. Times said something hateful and someone accuses me of taking their words of context, how can I show that I didn't take their words out of context but am not allowed to include the full context in which they appeared?