In his seven years in the U.S. Senate, New Jersey's Robert Menendez has never distinguished himself as much of an orator.

Nonetheless, the distinguished senator was more than happy a week ago to promote in a blast email, the eulogy he "was honored to be asked by his wife, Bonnie, to deliver at the memorial service" for departed comrade Frank Lautenberg.

One reason that Sen. Menendez was so eager and confident to share this particular speech was that parts of it had been "road-tested;" that is, lifted from the remarks of another formidable speaker at another high profile venue.

In his rousing peroration, Sen. Menendez declared, "Those of us who loved, admired or respected him -- and who take him to his rest today -- will hope to see that what he stood for, what he fought for, will come to pass for all he served."

Sound familiar?

It should ring a bell to anyone old enough to recall Sen. Edward Kennedy's stirring tribute to his brother, Bobby, at St. Patrick's Cathedral almost 45 years to the day. Said Sen. Kennedy, his voice wavering, "Those of us who loved him and who take him to his rest today, pray that what he was to us and what he wished for others will some day come to pass for all the world."

Presumably, Sen. Menendez -- or his (I bet young) speechwriter -- felt that they could get away with pilfering from the memorable Kennedy speech without getting nabbed. Others -- most notably, 1988 Presidential candidate Joe Biden, who was forced to quit the race after being caught plagiarizing the words of British politician Neil Kinnock, Sen. Hubert Humphrey, and also Robert Kennedy in his speeches -- haven't been as lucky.

In journalism, the Rogue's Gallery of 21st century plagiarists runs from the well-established -- New York Times' Maureen Dowd, Boston Globe's Mike Barnacle, author Doris Kearns Goodwin -- to the up-and-coming --  The New Yorker's Jonah Lerner -- to the obscure-and-never heard from again, like the New York Times' Jayson Blair and Washington Post's Janet Cooke.

But what about plagiarism in PR? What are the rules or standards that govern public relations professionals in using the words and works of others in their speeches and writings?

In a general sense, PR writers should make it their business to keep files of the best writing samples in their industries or specialty areas. Speeches of other CEOs, commentary from the media about industry issues, clever turns of phrase from gifted speakers and writers -- all should be retained for future use.

The problem arises when these retained gems are trotted out to appear in PR-authored writings.

While there are no hard and fast rules, PR people should generally follow these guidelines to avoid even the appearance of stealing someone else’s work without attribution.

· Speeches

Speechwriters should always opt on the side of attribution -- with facts, studies and memorable quotations.

Quoting noteworthy individuals in speeches adds credibility and gravitas to the speaker’s point. Moreover, quoting a memorable phrase from an honored philosopher or scholar or politician suggests that the speaker him or herself is a learned individual, knowledgeable of other notable individuals who share the speaker’s view on issues.

Likewise, citing the research of others helps to "prove" the speaker's arguments and give them support. Three or four such attributed quotations in a 20-minute address are the norm.

In quoting others, speakers must be careful about two things: one, avoid using quotations or humor that is so well known to have become clichéd and two, whenever using a particularly well-known phrase, always apply attribution lest you be accused of pretending to be smarter than you are,  e.g. "Those of us who loved him and take him to his rest today etc."

· Trade Articles

The same general rules apply to public relations writers ghosting op-eds, case histories or features for print or 'Net, in behalf of clients.

Quoting others -- particularly smart others -- adds heft to any article. An op-ed of 500 or so words may contain two attributed quotes to corroborate the writer's arguments; longer features may allow greater attribution.

Again, the cardinal rule is to attribute, especially if not doing so might open the writer to charges of plagiarism; an allegation that poisons the reputation of any public relations person.

Examples in recent years of PR firms anonymously "ghosting” articles for working journalists in order to support clients is the most egregious example of what not to do.

· Scholarly Articles/Books

In the 21st century, public relations authors -- of primarily professional articles and books –- have proliferated.

The rules for attribution in such scholarly works differ from those in trade media. Since scholarly books and articles must shine as exemplars for students in the field, their allegiance to attribution must be beyond reproach.

In quoting others in such scholarly tomes, public relations authors have a choice in terms of attribution. The traditional method, of course, is to footnote attributed works and identify the source of the passage quoted at the end of an article, chapter or book.

Scholarly articles today, however, where the flow of the manuscript is most important, have adopted another equally-acceptable standard. The best such articles gather information from diverse sources and then synthesize that information to allow for the free flow of copy, uninterrupted by footnotes or authors' names, dates and citations.

In such cases, as long as attribution to authors whose material is used is found in the text and a bibliography, listing those authors, is provided -- this technique is perfectly acceptable and even recommended, in order to enhance copy flow and readership.

The key remains to cite somewhere in the text, the author and material that is borrowed to help make your arguments. The only time there is a problem is when no attempt is made, anywhere in the text, to acknowledge the use of the works of others.

Hopefully next time, Sen. Menendez and his speechwriter will remember this simple rule of attribution.