Ironically, the so-called errant article was published in today's edition of the daily.
Malaysiakini columnist Josh Hong pointed out that second paragraph of the editorial bore stark resemblence to an editorial published by Taiwan's Economic Daily, published on June 16.
A check byMalaysiakini also revealed that the third paragraph of the same article appeared to be very similar to the fourth paragraph of anotherEconomic Dailyeditorial published on January 30.
However, some Facebook users have also alleged plagiarism in an editorial published by the Sin Chew Daily on July 4.
They claim that the first half of the editorial was similar to an editorial which appeared on Taiwan's Commercial Times, published on March 13.
Further checks by Malaysiakini revealed that this the second half of the editorial resembled an editorial that was published by Taiwan'sUnited Daily News on April 13.
In a related development, Facebook users have queried Sin Chew Daily on its fanpage on why its apology notice did not appear in its newspaper.
"I strongly urge Sin Chew to publish the apology," wrote Facebookuser Leng Bing Shu.
"Sin Chew is practising selective apology on Facebook. In simple terms, they are only apologising to Facebook users.
"What about the majority of Sin Chew readers? Don't they have a right to know?" wrote Ooi Leng Heng.
However, there are some Facebook users who quickly came to Sin Chew's defence.
"When these critics make noise, they do not respect the company's rights a sovereignity in dealing with this matter," said Tiong Teck Lang.