A war of words has erupted between two news outlets after UK News in Pictures (UKNIP) fired back at The Sentinel Current, following accusations of content theft and plagiarism by crime and justice correspondent Andrew Clifford.
The Sunderland-based journalist recently claimed that UKNIP lifted and republished a version of his article detailing a March 23 cyclist attack in Sunderland, accusing the outlet of failing to credit his work. But UKNIP has now hit back, branding the allegations as “hypocritical and laughable”, and accusing Clifford of frequently lifting stories originally broken by UKNIP.
UKNIP: “Pot Calling the Kettle Black”
In a sharp rebuttal, sources at UKNIP said Clifford’s plagiarism allegations were “a desperate attempt to create controversy on a slow news day,” adding that The Sentinel Current has a history of lifting content UKNIP publishes and passing it off as original reporting.
A UKNIP spokesperson said:
“It’s ironic that a so-called journalist who regularly rewrites and republishes stories from UKNIP and other outlets is now crying foul. This isn’t the first time Mr Clifford has mimicked content. We’ve consistently supported national newspapers with leads and breaking stories, including the recent Heathrow Airport substation fire chaos — a story we broke well before it made its way to The Sentinel Current.”
A Battle of Headlines
The dispute gained traction after Clifford accused UKNIP of mimicking his article about a moped attack on a cyclist in North Bridge Street, Sunderland — claiming that structure, quotes, and specific wording were used without attribution.
However, UKNIP refutes these claims, stating that basic facts of public incidents are not owned by any journalist, and accused Clifford of trying to position himself as a “victim of journalism theft” while conveniently ignoring his own sourcing practices.
The back-and-forth raises larger questions about content ownership in digital journalism, where multiple outlets often publish similar stories based on police reports, eyewitness accounts, and public social media posts — sources widely accessible to all.
An Industry Divided
The spat between UKNIP and The Sentinel Current highlights growing tension in the fast-paced online news space, where news aggregation, rewriting, and republishing blur the lines between original journalism and content repurposing.
While plagiarism — particularly of quotes and structured narratives — remains a serious ethical issue, UKNIP maintains that Clifford’s accusations are overblown and lack context, given the routine nature of shared news sources.
The Bigger Picture
UKNIP also pointed to its track record of supporting national outlets and breaking key stories ahead of rivals, asserting its role as a credible grassroots news source that has served readers across the UK with first-hand reports and visuals.
The outlet dismissed Clifford’s claims as “sour grapes,” adding:
“Journalists should support each other in raising awareness of real issues affecting communities, not engage in petty turf wars over who was first to write what.”
Where Does Journalism Draw the Line?
This media feud underscores a broader debate about journalistic credit, fair attribution, and the ethics of re-reporting shared information. With regional newsrooms under pressure and online platforms chasing clicks, the lines between original storytelling and content adaptation continue to blur.
Whether this latest tit-for-tat ends here or sparks wider industry reflection remains to be seen — but one thing is clear: in the age of digital news, the battle for the byline is far from over.
