Hello new readers - This story is several days old and a lot of info has come to light since it was originally posted. Please read ALL of the updates and ALL of the comments before posting any new comments to this thread, especially if your comments are criticizing any of the folks involved with this on any level. I'm sick of reading comments and blog posts from people demanding something be done that actually happened several days ago.

Go read this post by Xeni Jardin on BoingBoing (which went up Friday), and now go read this story on the Washington Post by Brian Krebs (that went up Saturday). Look familiar? Notice anything missing from the WaPo story? Like, any mention that they took the whole idea directly from BoingBoing? More from Violet.

UPDATE: I pointed out this in the comment thread on the WaPo site and shortly there after. Unfortunately his comment brings up more questions than it answers. Here's Krebs' comment:

Sean,

I'll admit I parachuted in on this story when a mutual friend of Mr. Soghoian's pinged me at 6:50 p.m. last night to tell me what was going down, but "plagiarize?" I don't think so.

I spent several hours tracking down FBI field agents, Mr. Soghoian himself, and gathering data from his blog and from other news outlets, no fewer than three of which I cite in the blog. That said, anything taken from those articles was put in double quotes and called out. The main reason I posted my story when I did was that no one who'd covered it had managed to speak with him around the time of the FBI visit and confirm that.

I saw the BoingBoing piece like everyone else, but I never read past the first paragraph. Frankly, I was more interested in the graphic they ran on the top of that post, as even though I'd mirrored Soghoian's site before he took the form down, the PHP back-end code was not mirrored and I was unable to reproduce the boarding pass I'd generated from Chris's site just prior to my calling him for the first time.
I had no idea that BB broke the story: had I been aware of it at the time, I'd have sourced them as the origin.

I am very careful to cite other blogs and writers when I am using or referring to their work. You, too, should be more careful before accusing reporters of such serious charges. Is there a particular paragraph or phrase or quote you'd like to call attention to?

Thanks for reading.

I responded there but I'll point out the same thing here and more. First off this makes no sense at all, Krebs is a reporter who when tipped off about this story he begins actively looking for info and comes across BoingBoing and never reads past the first paragraph? Does anyone believe that for a second? What kind of a reporter wouldn't read past the first paragraph of an article they came across covering a story they are looking up? But since he asked for similarities I thought I'd point out an obvious one that isn't in the first paragraph:

Also, as Metroblogging DC notes there is noticeable mix up in the timing of this issue. According to Soghoian's own blog he was visited by the FBI twice, once at 3:45 PM and once after 2 AM when he wasn't there. The BoingBoing story also says 3:45. Yet Krebs claims to have not heard about the story until 6:30 PM and then says he was on the phone with Soghoian when the FBI showed up at his house.

UPDATE 2: Krebs has now posted comments on the WaPo as well as on this post admitting that both BoingBoing broke the story and that he didn't credit them for it. He claims he didn't realize at the time that they broke the story which is an easy out as it's his word against everyone else's at this point. Personally I don't believe for a second that he only read the first paragraph of the BoingBoing post as he claims, either that or he's the laziest journalist I've come across all week. I mean really, what kind of a reporter is following a story, finds an article already written about it and doesn't read that article? BoingBoing's piece went up Friday afternoon, Krebs' went up Saturday afternoon and he didn't get any info from them at all? I guess anything is possible but this is really had to believe. Saying he read the BB piece only for the Graphics is akin to saying you read Hustler only for the articles. But more importantly - Why does any of this matter? It matters because people still assume blogs aren't covering real issues. It matters because this is a perfect example of bloggers doing serious work, breaking stories and reporting on things that major media hasn't even picked up on and other people piggy backing on that and taking all the credit. It matters because BoingBoing is not indexed by Google News, the WaPo is. With no mention of BB in the WaPo story Krebs gets all the credit and all the links. It matters because Google's reason for not indexing BoingBoing is that they only cover stories other people are talking about. It matters because when bloggers make mistakes they actively work to correct them, yet when a reporter for the Washington Post neglects to mention who did the work to actually break a story he thinks all he has to do is leave a comment saying "A thousand pardons. "

CONTINUING UPDATES: Quinn Norton has written a timeline of events which shows that several journalists (including Xeni Jardin and Bryan Krebs) were working on the story at the same time. This is entirely possible and while I'm sticking by my accusation that Krebs borrowed, or rather "was inspired by" Xeni's post, I never am no longer questioning what work he did or didn't do on his own. It's entirely possible he called the people he said he did, and did plenty of his own legwork. As I stated in the comments on Ryan Singel's blog and as I noted above my major issue has become that Krebs admits he saw the BoingBoing post which was published a day before his, yet that he didn't read it. He's a reporter, working on story, and finds an article about this story on arguably one of the top blogs on the internet and doesn't bother to read it? I don't believe that for a second. Krebs could simply add a credit to BoingBoing (The way Xeni has done at the bottom of this post) and this issue would go away, his denial that he read Xeni's post and his reactions to people questioning it are only fueling the fire.

FINAL UPDATE: Violet Blue, who was the first person to publicly point out the similarities between the WaPo and BoingBoing pieces has a follow up post here. At this point I've corrected my initial accusations on so many blogs I've lost count, yet the issue of the WaPo not linking or mentioning BoingBoing is just as valid as ever. I've been in constant contact with people from all sides of this argument since before I ever said anything and at this point everyone involved considers the discussion over and there is nothing else to say on the subject.