Harriet Johnston is a terrible "journalist"

ICYMI:  UPDATE:  Mail responded again, acknowledging the complaint, making changes - and compensation!!!!     thank you everyone for your support  Definitely no originality here. She just likes to have her clicks!. Late Sunday evening  I received a message from a friend with the news that Prince Andrew Romanoff, the grandson of Grand Duchess Xenia, died in California a few hours earlier.  I thanked him for the scoop. I went upstairs to my office to grab a file (Russia - Princes, and Princes), several books, including Andrew's autobiography.  The laptop was turned on and I wrote my article.  It was about an hour later when my source messaged me again to say I could now send the post as Andrew's death had been shared with family members and others. The link to my article on Prince Andrew's death was tweeted and retweeted.  I also posted my link on several Facebook pages. This is what I do with all my posts. I received numerous comments, but then came the concern when my source and several other people messaged me asking if I had seen the Daily Mail article.   I did, and I was not happy.  Harriet Johnston plagiarized my article and used chunks of my text.  That is illegal  If you plagiarize at the Washington Post, you get fired.  The Daily Mail looks the other way. I filed a complaint with the Mail.  All I want is an apology and compensation.  I would settle for £1000.  So how did the Mail respond?   Here is Michelle Core's response.  She did not address my complaint about plagiarism even though she saw the side-by-side comparison of the two articles.   My complaint was not about details but about the blatant stealing of my words.  Word for word.   I told Michelle that I used a plagiarism checker for Harriet's article.  The result showed the "significant plagiarism" of my article.  Michelle has not responded.  This does not surprise me.  She nor Harriet Johnston have no morals or ethics.  They live for their clicks. Sorry, Michelle, fobbing me off with a "goodwill gesture" of putting a link to my article at the bottom of Harriet's is not appreciated at all.  I do not want to associate with a "newspaper" that has no integrity or ethics and hires "writers" who are too lazy to do research beyond a Google or a Twitter search.   I am sure Michelle thought I would be flattered by her gesture.  No, dear, I am not. You have copped out of being moral and good by rewarding Johnston's bad behavior.   For many reasons, I expect, Johnston keeps her Twitter account locked.  I have called her out for numerous royal mistakes in her articles.  Never a thank you and "get me rewrite!" to fix them.  She is lazy and sloppy.  She does not care about her work.  Apparently, neither do her editors & bosses. If Harriet Johnston actually cared about her work, she would have contacted me directly.  I would accept an apology and perhaps, an Amazon gift card.  She was paid to write an article that was largely written by someone else.  Me.  The Daily Mail made money every time someone clicked on her article.   I am grateful to my source for the scoop and thank you to all who alerted me. Everyone knows that Harriet did the wrong thing and does not have the morals to make it right.  Used toilet paper has more value than Harriet Johnston or Michelle Core.  They prostitute themselves for Associated Newspapers. At some point, Johnston & Core will receive their just desserts.  
http://dlvr.it/SDm1JD