Citing Public Information currently, available, however, derived, reports

mouse123

Hi Every1
I am currently reviewing my answers to a Ellen Mock Exam Ethics part. I am a little confused with one of the questions.
18. To avoid plagiarism an analyst must dislcose:
A. The sources of widely available public information
B. The sources of summaried reports of other analysts.
C. The sources of both widely available public information, and summarized reports of other analysts.
The Answer Is C, however, i thought you did not have to cite information which was derived from a widely public source?
Thanks.

KungFuPanda

No. the answer is not C, it is B. You are right in not citing public info source.

brainsX

Ok, good it’s what i thought, The answer totally confused me

giorgio10

I think I would have answered C.  Look at the ethics book, page 43, example 10, it’s an example where even using a generic description of a P/E ratio, it would need to be cited if its someone else’s description. That could be described as widely available public information.  Best practice I’d think would be to cite sources wherever there’s doubt.

NakedPuts00

I think it’s cause A is too generic. So, even if it’s some work that’s widely available to the public, as long as it belongs to someone else, you have to cite.

ayaz_mahmud369

Ok I change my answer to A. I(C) doesn’t explicity mention the need to cite public info sources. The example 10 on page 43 is about verbatim use of public information - which is a different thing.
But i recall seeing something on not citing S&P or other standard financial sources if they are used in making a report - can someone who knows this chip in with their take?

willsucceed

from what i remember reading, there was definitely something said that WIDELY READ PUBLIC INFO like Wall street journal did not need to cited as a source. then again, this was a question on Schweser practice exam 3:
Ann Smith, CFA calls Bill Jones, CFA, and tells him her research shows that Biokem Company is underpriced and EPS will exceed $3.00 this year. Jones never heard of Biokem but knows that Smith is widely considered to be the best analyst in her sector. Smith’s research has been released publicly and Smith tells Jones he’s “welcome to it”. After their conversation Jones arranges a conference call with his portfolio managers and announces that Biokem is underpriced and will likely earn more than $3 this year. He does not reference his conversation with Smith. According to the standards that concern misrepresentation and diligence and reasonable basis, Jones violated:
a. both
b. one
c. neither
Obviously diligence and reasonable basis is violated, but considering Smith’s information is publicly released and Smith is widely considered to be the best analyst in her sector, I thought this would constitute her to be a well known public source, so he needn’t cite her. But the answer is both, meaning I was wrong
I guess only if it is mentioned that it is a newspaper or some finance monthly publication, we can’t take anything to be a well known public source.

SeanWest

thanks guys. this is a schweser question though. anyways, just read that even if its a finance publication, you should cite the source, so im thinking if there is a question on this, then i’m pretty sure they would make it clear that everyone in the finance industry knows about this news information, and in that case you don’t need to cite the source, but otherwise you do

DoubleDip

Ok, So on the exam just make sure to pick the option which states citing both sources lol?