MIT prof Neri Oxman, wife of billionaire Bill Ackman, one of Claudine Gay's most strident critics, accused of plagiarism

Well. Ain’t those chickens coming home to roost.

Academia is a lot like "The Crucible."

Let's not forget that Ackman defended Elon Musk after the latter endorsed that antisemitic tweet on X.

And Gay is still on the faculty of Harvard, making $900K a year and STILL blames her firing on racism.

Poor attempt at deflection, R4. Do try to stay OT.

Well, Oxman isn't on the faculty of MIT, so she should she resign as Bill Ackman's wife?

r4 = Bill Ackman, begging you to look away from his plagiarizing wife

r4/r6, do you think Oxman should have doctoral degree revoked? Do you think Ackman should publicly denounce his wife as being a plagiarist just as he repeatedly denounced Gay?

If not, why not? Or do you think the mega-rich are somehow exempt from the consequences they demand others face?

I read her response. She claims to have written 75 papers and 8 chapters in published books. Supposedly the plagiarism is 4 paragraphs Iof her total output. Bit I agree she is not a fit candidate for President of Harvard.

Oxman has now admitted to the plagiarism:

R10, screw The Wall Street Journal. Article archived free below.

All things being equal, Gay plagazrized lot more than Mrs. Ackman. Plus she’s not in running to head Harvard. Why is Gay even allowed to stay a professor if plagiarism is taken seriously?

Has Elsie the cow Stefanik commented yet?

Claudine Gay apologists are desperate, comparing the president of Harvard to a housewife, billionaire's trophy wife who has her plagiarized PHD in the drawer with diamonds.

[quote] All things being equal, Gay plagazrized lot more than Mrs. Ackman.

Oh, then that makes Mrs. Ackman's plagiarism in her doctoral dissertation okay then.

[quote] Plus she’s not in running to head Harvard.

Neither is Claudine Gay. She resigned.

The point in all this is that Bill Ackman keeps tweeting that academics who plagiarize should be strictly punished; and yet, here is his wife, the plagiarist academic.

R15 totally the same thing.

Imagine the situation, for eg. a top surgeon on John Hopkins was caught with false medical credentials and the guy who exposed him has a wife who is MD, but does not practice medicine and who has the same problematic credentials as the surgeon.

And imagine if the surgeon and the hospital administration gloated: Aha, this housewife is as unqualified as our top brain surgeon.

From what I could see from the Business Insider article, Oxman didn't cite her sources correctly, but the citations were there (all 4 instances). Gay just straight up stole others work. But if MIT wants to open an investigation into Oxman, have at it. I don't know how else she could be 'punished' since she doesn't work in academia anymore.

Be that as it may, the standards for president of Harvard should be higher then some billionaire's wife, and ripping Oxman doesn't make Gay look any better.

The ultra partisans don’t seem to understand that screaming ‘hypocrisy!!!!’ is never as bad as the bad acts themselves.

If you want to defend plagiarism then defend it.

If you think black women should be held to lower standards in public life than white people or men then make that argument.

But instinctively defending your side because your opponents are attacking them isn’t noble or brave, it’s just pathetic and weak.

This is really disgraceful! I would never plagiarize.

You're just namecalling, r18. Not impressive.

And who here is defending plagiarism???

What a small world our celebrity sphere is. I remember when Oxman was rumored to be dating Brad Pitt.

R18 Ah the noble white saviors. I truly believe they think she can do no better.

That does it; I won’t support Oxman for Harvard President!

This is how magats roll. Useless.

You stupid smelly ass R24

Integrity is so 2014.

Ha ha!!!! Suck it, racists!

you useless magat kkkunt r25

Only a matter of time before AI unearths all the spoofers.

Business Insider published a new article this afternoon, noting that besides the passages Oxman atoday dmitted to lifting, they found 28 additional instances of plagiarism in her dissertation and other papers.

Oxman even lifted text from more than a dozen Wikipedia articles without attribution.

Academic celebrity--WTF????

R30, Oxman seems to have written quite a few papers, far more than Claudine Gay did in the same length of time, and Oxman had a far briefer academic career, yet the number of instances of alleged plagiarism are far fewer. Moreover, the dubious claims of plagiarism in Oxman's work are just descriptive background aspects, they're not her research findings, as they often were with Gay. As for Wikipedia, perhaps the person who wrote the Wikipedia articles simply extracted from the same original sources that Oxman used (the Business Insider article even admits that for some of the passages it claims she plagiarised, she includes the allegedly plagiarised book/article in the bibliography).

If Oxman is to be chided for such minor instances of apparent plagiarism (which are mostly sloppy referencing), then Gay, with a much more serious plagiarism record, should give up her professorial position at Harvard.

I like this idea of going through people's academic writings, though, especially the work of academics. Academics need to be held to account, especially those who want to have a big role in society, using their academic position to claim the status of expert.

Stop trying to polish that turd Claudine Gay. Just because someone else plagiarized doesn’t negate Gay’s transgressions and failures.

Bill Ackman's wife is the new "but her emails!"

When I wrote my thesis, there were plenty of quotes and plenty of annotations, especially in the theoretical discussion of my hypothesis, and in the methodolgy and data sections: for christs sake, you're properly teaching a class on how to do an experiment , why you're doing it, and why the data shows that your methodology is sound. But I don't understand this business of skipping annotation or failing to attribute quoted studies to their authors. It's just laziness. It's mostly why it takes so long to acquire and advanced degree.

You have to put your money where your mouth is or forget about it.

When I wrote my PhD thesis (in history) in the UK many moons ago a friend of mine (in the department of psychology) copied a paragraph from another author and didn't attribute it (he claims it was in his notes on his laptop and he assumed he had written it) there was a minor scandal. This apparently accidental "plagiarism" was noted by his thesis supervisors before he even submitted his thesis.

I can sympathise a little with a few sentences that sound like they were lifted entirely from somewhere else if they are background description and not part of your main argument or research conclusions, because it's hard to find ways to rewrite basic descriptive or information details. You still need to attribute properly, though.

R32 Oxman’s field is some woke bullshit called material ecology. She made it up, so I’d give little credit to the number of her published “papers.”

"Live by the sword, die by the sword"

" She made it up" - But I thought she was a plagiarist, r38. If she made it up, then it's her own original work.

She made up the speciality, “material ecology,” numnut.. That doesn’t preclude plagerism.

*her specialty

And *plagiarism.

😵‍💫

This woman is not the president of Harvard.

Harvard knew all of this and was shamed into pushing her out only after being caught.

Harvard doesn't really give a shit what anybody thinks until there is a potential loss of donors.

We are talking about Ackman here, not Harvard itself. Catch up.

The excuses people will make for a pretty white woman. According to ackman plagiarism is wrong and people who commit plagiarism should be punished. His wife needs to face the consequences for plagiarizing her work

Really R46? I would sooner say thst days it is more fashionable to make excuses for ugly black woman, as we have seen these days.

She was fired @R47 The same people who wanted gay fired are now making excuses for oxman

Claudine Gay wasn't fired, she was demoted. She's still a Harvard employee, just in a lesser role.

Gay still works at Harvard, making almost a million a year. That's not exactly horrible punishment.

Oxman doesn't work at MIT, so she doesn't have a job to be fired from.

“Part of what makes her human,” Ackman said of Oxman, “is that she makes mistakes, owns them, and apologizes when appropriate.”

So “Rules for you, Rukes for me, Hope we never disagree, But if we do, Fuck You! Rules for YOU!”

R49 she was fired as President. The end.

She’s still at Harvard because she has tenure in the Government dept. Revoking tenure is a completely separate process.

Stop with your misleading posts.

And she no longer makes the same salary she did as President—a large pay cut.

"Deplorable", is too gentle a word to describe these freaks. This is the only thing Hilary was wrong about.

Who cares? The billionaire woman isn’t President of a university that receives public funding. Gay is/was.

But my wife is an Israeli! How can you do this to her? She had MY CHILD and was without a baby nurse! And business Insider only warned me of this article ON SHABBOS and it was already SUNDOWN! How dare you? This is antisemitism at its worst.

Business Insider is owned by a GERMAN media company. Get it? German! They’re after us again. I am the protagonist here. I’m the good guy who got rid of the dark lady. That does it. I’m going to go after everyone at MIT and everyone on staff at Business Insider. And anyone else who I feel has wronged me.

This is an outrage. Didn’t Thiel teach you media whores who you need to bow down to? Billionaires, that’s who. Because we will use our money to silence you. Now SILENCE, I SAID!

WHY are leftists defending Claudine Gay?

She blew her career by giving a mealy-mouthed answer to a question about the rabid anti-Semitism on her campus! She wasn't exactly a profile in courage and this has nothing to do with being a female or black!

I see anti-Semite Joy Reid is all in on making this a black issue. She thinks nobody knows that black people are generally paranoid anti-Semites. Gawd, they need to give this shit a break!

[quote] She thinks nobody knows that black people are generally paranoid anti-Semites

Good think you showed your hand or we never would’ve known you’re a racist name caller.

Pretty much @R56 and@R51

Bill Ackman has said he's going to retaliate by having his employees run every single professor at MIT and the university president through AI to see if they've plagiarized.

Not only is this incredibly vindictive, but it sounds like Veruca Salt's capitalist father making all hof is employees unwrap Wonka bars until they find the golden ticket for Veruca.

The people defending Claudine Gay really are mirror MAGAs.

The Guardian has 2 stories about this.

Published at 17.00: Harvard’s Claudine Gay was ousted for ‘plagiarism’. How serious was it really?

Published at 17.40: Wife of financier who called for Harvard head’s exit faces plagiarism allegations

So is it serious or not? Or is it only serious when your side does it? Or is it more serious if you do it and your husband takes a public stance against it?

Those in Glass Houses...

R57 is wrong…again.

R64, Rufo is certainly taking a victory lap.

Circular logic

Of course he’s claiming victory … that doesn’t change reality

[quote] And imagine if the surgeon and the hospital administration gloated: Aha, this housewife is as unqualified as our top brain surgeon.

That's a stupid analogy. Being Harvard's president is not, and has never been, a critical function like performing brain surgery. This hullabaloo about a position that is basically a figurehead is strictly political, and racist. Dr. Gay resigned because there is nothing about that position that makes it worth the public agony. Harvard will continue to be Harvard, and this storm was just about airing racially-motivated grievances.

[quote]Good think you showed your hand or we never would’ve known you’re a racist name caller.

Oh, ok. I guess you live in your magical bubble and pretend not to notice that many black Americans are culturally anti-Semitic.

Meanwhile, the rest of us don't have your privilege!

So was it racist when they fired the president of Penn when she gave the same dumb answers about antisemitism as Claudine Gay? And she didn't even plagiarize!

[quote]And she no longer makes the same salary she did as President—a large pay cut.

She was making 1.3 million as president, back to $900K at her old job. I weep for her.

I believe she should properly reassemble her dissertation group and advisors, apologize to the college formally, get some sort of propsal together for the Dean of Liberal Arts or whatever her college was, rewrite a FULLY CITED/ANNOTATED thesis, and be willing to appear to defend it. And I believe the advisors and Dean would do well to set a time limit. I don't have a clue if Harvard does things like this, but I believe we would do things in a similar manner before she ever was allowed to defend her thesis. The errant passages would have been caught and she would have been in academic limbo until she corrected those passages.

But then, we're just plain country folk, unlike the Ivy Leaguers.

Inaccurate R71

According to Harvard's newspaper The Crimson, Dr. Gay's estimated base salary as president was approximately $900,000 annually.

Prior to her presidency, she served as Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, earning $879,079 in 2021 and $824,068 in 2020.

She’s now down to a tenured Professor with an endowed chair, well below the Dean’s pay scale.

Is she planning to run for President?

Beyond the rather desperate attempts to compare this to Gay (who has ALREADY RESIGNED and no longer is responsible for research ethics at Harvard), what really interests me is Bill Ackman's response:

[quote] “You know that you struck a chord when they go after your wife,” Ackman posted on X after the Business Insider article was published.

How is that? When Ackman subjected Gay's work to scrutiny, it was a totally legitimate and politically unmotivated exercise carried out in the interests of academic integrity. But when someone subjects his wife to *the exact same scrutiny*, suddenly it's unfair and they are 'going after' her. Surely what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander?

(As a university lecturer myself, I think it's legitimate to scrutinise both their bodies of work for plagiarism. I feel like I should try and bait Ackman into scrutinising my doctoral dissertation for plagiarism, as that would raise its view count on academia.edu nicely).

But Claudine Gay! But the congressional hearing! But her $900k a year! But when will she finally step down... oh that's right she already did.. well... but Claudine Gay still!!!

Anything but talking about the actual subjects of this thread, Oxman and Ackman!

[Quote] Anything but talking about the actual subjects of this thread, Oxman and Ackman!

You must be new to DL R77

I've been here since 2001, r78.

She’s pretty, though.

R79 so why do you seem surprised with the way threads get derailed?

This whole clusterfuck is delicious. It's a shame that they are not really losing anything. They'll still have more than they can probably spend in their lifetimes and in a couple of years, they'll still be influential and filthy rich and laugh about the plebs.

R82 OK, but if it doesn't really matter to them, why is Ackman reacting so furiously? Or is that just the way he always is?

[quote] So was it racist when they fired the president of Penn when she gave the same dumb answers about antisemitism as Claudine Gay? And she didn't even plagiarize!

So you say...

The way it's shaking out we'll all be accused of plagiarism soon enough.

They both look like messy insects.

People are gonna jump off buildings over plagiarism. Make my words.

and speaking of looking like insects R85

[quote] This whole clusterfuck is delicious. It's a shame that they are not really losing anything. They'll still have more than they can probably spend in their lifetimes and in a couple of years, they'll still be influential and filthy rich and laugh about the plebs.

We well know you believe having lots of money is an irrefutable excuse for any kind of behavior, Mr. Trump, and that you remain convinced rich people are superior to everyone else.

Ackman's foundation has donated millions to causes like Planned Parenthood and the Innocence project, and of course to Harvard itself. Is this because he really cares about the future of these causes and this institution? Or, more likely, is it a way to buy social capital and status?

If the latter, then I guess taking away that social capital is one of the few possible ways to hurt him.

Ackman's Wikipedia page (see Neri, I can openly admit my reliance on Wikipedia) states that he is a signatory to 'The Giving Pledge', meaning that he promises to give away 50% of his wealth before the end of his life. I had to lol at this. How exactly does this get measured or enforced???

Ackman doesn't give a shit about plagiarism. He's probably a Zionist Jew. He wants to punish institutions for not shutting down Palestinian sympathizers. Almost 23,000 Palestinians have died in 3 months. The antisemitism of it all!

Rachel Reeves, who is UK Labour's Shadow Chancellor, plagiarised a general interest book she wrote giving portraits of unsung female economists. Generally the same kind of thing as Gay or Oxman: mostly taking language and background details from sources without proper attribution. She basically brushed it off, stating that [quote] “What I wanted to do was to bring together the stories of these women, and if I’m guilty of copying and pasting some facts about some amazing women and turning it into a book that gets read then I’m really proud of that.

She didn't earn a degree or anything for this and I don't think this is serious enough for her to be sacked but I feel like that response grates in its absolute lack of contrition.

[quote]Ackman doesn't give a shit about plagiarism. He's probably a Zionist Jew. He wants to punish institutions for not shutting down Palestinian sympathizers. Almost 23,000 Palestinians have died in 3 months. The antisemitism of it all!

Ackman on record as being a Jew and seeing as the overwhelming majority of Jews are Zionists (ie thinking Israel has a right to exist) then your "probably" makes it sound like have a real problem with Jews.

There are lots of people who sympathise with Palestinians, it's those who support the mass murder and rape of Jews on October 7th who are the problem, the ones Claudine Gay wanted to "contextualise".

And as for the 23,000 dead Palestinians, how many of those are Hamas fighters, the ones who tortured, raped, mutilated and burned over 1400 Israelis and currently hold 130 hostages?

Well, at least she’s (belatedly) honest.

Now, back to, what do you think Ackman [italic] really [/italic] has against women who are not his wife ?

Concerned, come on, comparing president of Harvard to a housewife. This looks desperate.

Besides, Claudine Gay is just a corporate pawn, big money stands behind Harvard. You defend fake left, neoliberal identity politics defending the plagiarist for her skin color.

R95 I'm not the one making the comparison, Ackman's supporters are. I'm arguing against making the comparison.

Also, if I may say this gently: you've been too long online, and you've fallen into the trap of projecting onto other people the views you think they ought to hold. I haven't defended Gay. I think she plagiarised, her plagiarism was at the minor end of the scale of seriousness, but there were so many examples that her position as leader of a university wasn't tenable. I wouldn't accept what she did from my students, and I don't accept it from her.

However, this point is also worth making: a doctorate is awarded when the examiners judge it has made an original contribution to knowledge: be that research findings based on previously unknown data, a new interpretation of existing data, the application of previously known theories to a new problem, and so on. No-one has challenged the validity or originality of Gay or Oxman's research findings as far as I can see. Both did wrong, both should be required to correct their citations, but there are no grounds for rescinding the doctorate in either case. Both still have the right to lay claim to a significant achievement.

R83, Ackman has always been dramatic and publicity-seeking. He's someone who has to be right about everything. He's also a big investor in AI, so it's not surprising that he's pushing it as a tool to tackle plagiarism. And right now he's having a meltdown on X, crying about how unfair it all is and covertly threatening the families of the reporters investigating him and his wife.

He’s losing it @R97

[quote] Concerned, come on, comparing president of Harvard to a housewife. This looks desperate.

Calling Neri Oxman "a housewife" is what truly looks desperate.

She runs her own corporation and was until recently a tenured MIT professor. She's hardly wearing housedresses and vacuuming the drapes and watching her stories.

[quote][R83], Ackman has always been dramatic and publicity-seeking. He's someone who has to be right about everything. He's also a big investor in AI, so it's not surprising that he's pushing it as a tool to tackle plagiarism. And right now he's having a meltdown on X, crying about how unfair it all is and covertly threatening the families of the reporters investigating him and his wife.

But regardless of his character or motives you'll be absolutely fine with the Business Insider journalists and their families being investigated for potential professional misconduct, rights?

Because anyone who takes a perceived moral or principled stand on an issue should be scrutinised for hypocrisy, like Ackman was. Right? Including family members.

r100 = Little Miss Slippery Slope

Neri Oxman is not just a family member. She's a minor celebrity in her own right who may have dated Brad Pitt and received donations from Epstein. She's fair game.

A PhD isn't a private document like your medical records. A founding principle of the academy is that you make your work available to other researchers. If they read it because they want to build on your findings, great. If it's because they want to further a politically motivated plagiarism witch-hunt, then too bad, you already put it out there.

Hence the need to take care that anything going out in your name is squeaky clean.

OP is Gay

R56 has the best post.

[quote]So is it serious or not? Or is it only serious when your side does it? Or is it more serious if you do it and your husband takes a public stance against it?

It’s serious when you’re the president of Harvard.

Absolutely R107. I don't what do the posters who are equating these two cases want, Oximan' s husband to divorce her?

As for Claudine Gay, she will be the joke as professor, because any lazy student when caught copying other people's work could say: but you did the same Miss. If she had morsl integrity she would leave, but she has zero moral integrity, pulling the race card when caught red handed. Luckily that she teaches some woke shit, not some real studies.

OK, Bill Ackman has lost it. He posted a novel on X. It appears he really thinks he is going to bring down US Higher Education.... altogether. He's going to do it by using AI to check everyone's work for plagiarism.

[quote] Well, every faculty member knows that once their work is targeted by AI, they will be outed. No body of written work in academia can survive the power of AI searching for missing quotation marks, failures to paraphrase appropriately, and/or the failure to properly credit the work of others.

He's expecting the destruction of 'thousands' of reputations, mass withdrawal of donations and federal funding, and mass firings.

[quote] If every faculty member is held to the current plagiarism standards of their own institutions, and universities enforce their own rules, they would likely have to terminate the substantial majority of their faculty members.

How does someone this stupid become a billionaire? If it's 'impossible' to avoid plagiarising, then surely we need to change the definition of plagiarism? It is, of course, not impossible to avoid plagiarising.

Dreadful man.

R109, Ackman is not self-made. His father was very wealthy. He didn’t get to this position on his own. That may make it all worse, now that I think about it.

[quote] [R109], Ackman is not self-made. His father was very wealthy. He didn’t get to this position on his own. That may make it all worse, now that I think about it.

What the fuck are you on about?

Ackman, a Jew, was one of many to use his profile to highlight the toxic culture in academia, in particular the toxic culture for Jewish people after the Hamas mass slaughter of Jews on October 7th.

He’s now being attacked by ultra partisans who think his wife deserves the same scrutiny as the president of Harvard who resigned in disgrace.

He’s entitled to be angry and he’s entitled to target the relatives of those who have gone for his family.

He’s rich, he’a angry and he’s got nothing to lose.

It is a pretty special type of white supremacy which affords Claudine Gay no agency in her own downfall and instead focuses on a republican hypocrite and a billionaire Jew.

[quote] He’s entitled to be angry and he’s entitled to target the relatives of those who have gone for his family.

All we agree on is that he is, indeed, entitled.

You sound like a lickspittle for the extremely rich.

Ackman is a textbook meglomaniac. Money corrupts the mind and soul.

R112, perhaps you aren't an American. If you were, you would understand the point. Ackman is someone who has lived his whole life in a cocoon of privilege and wealth. He isn't a genius who did it all himself. He's the beneficiary of a social system designed to help the rich. He's become delusional and now thinks that he is entitled to harass and threaten people and dictate policy at Ivy League colleges. He's another poster boy for the hazards of extreme wealth inequality.

R112 Evidently you are not familiar with academic norms. Anyone who submits a thesis to earn a doctoral degree understands and consents for it to be scrutinised for plagiarism and understands also that if successful it will be made available to other researchers.

I can't believe someone here is actually arguing Ackman deserves to bully people because he's so rich.

[quote]I can't believe someone here is actually arguing Ackman deserves to bully people because he's so rich.

Well that's quite a reach. I haven't seen anyone say that.

Ackman took a stand against anti Jewish racism in academia and then on the plagiarism of Claudine Gay.

Ultra partisans didn't like that and went after his family. Ackman is now going after the people who came for him.

Claudine Gay isn't fit for public office. Neither is Clarence Thomas. Bill Ackman's family shouldn't be targeted because he spoke up, and neither should the families of the critics of Clarence Thomas, or Brett Kavanaugh or Coney Barrett.

[quote] Ackman is now going after the people who came for him. R118

Umm, actually, no, did you read the deranged tweet I posted above? He appears to be going after every university in the US rather than just the families of Business Insider reporters.

Also, let me try to explain this again... no-one did anything improper to his wife (or to Claudine Gay). Scrutinising a thesis or a published paper, whether it be for its findings, its methodology, potential plagiarism, or anything else is entirely permissible. Perhaps in both cases it was done for reasons other than a pure dedication to academic integrity, but them's the breaks.

Perhaps in both cases it was done for reasons other than a pure dedication to academic integrity…

Perhaps? 👀

R120 In the old world we often prefer polite understatement.

[quote] Well that's quite a reach. I haven't seen anyone say that.

But you yourself did. Don't pretend otherwise. Let me remind you of what you posted above:

[quote] He’s entitled to be angry and he’s entitled to target the relatives of those who have gone for his family.

[quote] He’s rich, he’a angry and he’s got nothing to lose.

Billionaire Overlord unleashes 1st army of Robots 🤖 against academia

Beware the savage jaw of 1984

LOL R122, you've taken 2 sentences and mixed the words up to claim I said something I didn't.

I said he is entitled to be angry because of how his wife has been treated.

He'd be entitled to do that regardless of his wealth, but targeting an angry billionaire does seem a rather foolish endeavor.

R121 the old world is old for a reason. Death be not proud and all that. We are in a not so brave new world.

As Concerned European has mentioned "scrutinising a thesis or a published paper, whether it be for its findings, its methodology, potential plagiarism, or anything else is entirely permissible", so there is no problem if Ackman has enough time and resources and money to launch a plagiarism review of the US universities.

And I don't think that it is a bad thing that the billionaires have this academic chick fight, cause we all know that corporations stand behind these elitist universities and I don't mind the corporate servants in academia being put to little roasting. These are people that created and popularized toxic identity politics which helped billionaires to hijack the left.

R127 Just to be clear, I'm not saying that he doesn't have the right to run everyone's doctoral thesis through a plagiarism checker if he likes. I am questioning his belief that he's going to force substantial numbers of faculty in the US out of their jobs - as well as his suggestion that the more high-profile scholars are the ones he is most likely to catch.

He wants their DEAD SILENCE and he feels he’s rich enough to buy it

Have you noticed Concerned, how I was afraid of being accused, so I quoted you, along with quotation marks

R129 well, not that they are not used to work for rich

R130 hahahaha but I'm afraid none of us are getting any academic credit for anything we write here.

Is Soros giving lot of money to the academia?

He controls western civilization! Haven’t you learned that by now?

—Crazed DL troller

R134 The Open Society Foundations are active in more than 120 countries around the world.

Without questioning Soros’ intentions and policies, any person who is not completely brainwashed would see that all this influence that the American billionaire has in different sides of the world is pure neocolonialism.

^^and there’s an actual troller, right on cue🫵🏻

Hard to talk to someone who has no brain R136

I can't pretend I'll miss Gay being president of Harvard. But I wish antisemitism on campus were handled better. There is the possibility of teachable moments here. Young people should be passionate about their beliefs. And youth is a good time to try out new political stances. Students at elite institutions should be guided toward expressing themselves cogently without attacking or oppressing fellow students. Interfering with other people's studies or meals should be punished, within reason, possibly by academic probation. Threats of violence or actual violence should be handled more urgently and more severely. And professors should not be allowed to bully students holding opposing political positions.

R138 this is because the academia, media and corporate world created reverse racism, meaning you carry collective guilt for the acts done by members of your race, nation, religion, in past and present, although you have nothing to do with it and nothing on common with the perpetrator except race, ethnicity etc. This is why white children carry the guilt of colonialism, slavery, Jews carry the guilt of Israeli crime etc. This is this crazy identity politics that seems like fascism to me. It looks as if they stole the ideology from Milošević. Perhaps they did.

[quote]It looks as if they stole the ideology from Milošević. Perhaps they did.

It's old Soviet Union propaganda and it looks like it's working.

R138 you’re too intelligent and temperate for the interwebs

[quote] [R138] this is because the academia, media and corporate world created reverse racism, meaning you carry collective guilt for the acts done by members of your race, nation, religion, in past and present, although you have nothing to do with it and nothing on common with the perpetrator except race, ethnicity etc. This is why white children carry the guilt of colonialism, slavery, Jews carry the guilt of Israeli crime etc. This is this crazy identity politics that seems like fascism to me. It looks as if they stole the ideology from Milošević. Perhaps they did.

There is no such thing as "reverse racism." The collective guilt of the majority culture is justified to the extent the groups privileged by past injustices (injustice is too tame a word) continue to perpetuate that injustice, and ignore or refute its present-day impacts.

It’s just racism, plain and simple

[quote] How does someone this stupid become a billionaire?

He’s a third generation rich bitch. He inherited his money

that's nice R144 Gay inherited her position thanks to DEI even though she was unqualified. So it all equals out.

R145, it equals out if Ackman either stops bullying people or gives up his money.

actually R146 it would be equal if Gay weren't still on the Harvard faculty after resigning as President in a position in which she is estimated to receive $900K a year. She disgraced Harvard and the University stands to lose millions in donations.

Ackman has no cause to continue his campaign of harassment. He should focus on his marriage and find ways to use his outrageous wealth to help people.

and Gay has no cause to remain in a paid position at Harvard

If Harvard students did what Gay did, they would be faced with possible expulsion and now their tuition is going to be paying her a salary.

I don't know how you stay at an institution where you have embarrassed yourself, been demoted from your job and humiliated your employer.

[quote] and Gay has no cause to remain in a paid position at Harvard

?????

What does that have to do with Ackman's campaign of harassment, ostensibly to uphold his wife's honor but really just about his ultra-rich ego.

[quote] I don't know how you stay at an institution where you have embarrassed yourself, been demoted from your job and humiliated your employer.

She has 900,000 reasons to stay...

R152 clutching at straws. The situations don't compare, and I don't equate what Ackman is doing with what Gay has done and the resulting fallout for Harvard.

Unrelated but please make sure to FF the piece of shit that is advocating for literal genocide in this thread.

She brought Harvard down and her continued paid position is absurd.

R149 R150 Students would in practice not be expelled for committing the same kinds of plagiarism as Gay did (which in most instances was: borrowing language, usually citing the source but not always, and not putting in quotation marks). The most severe penalties are reserved for the worst types of plagiarism: the theft of ideas central to sustaining the argument of your dissertation/paper/book.

The more minor type of plagiarism (unattributed borrowing of language/phrasing), when it occurs in my institution, usually results in a formal warning only, at least for the first offence, and potentially followed by marks deductions if the plagiarism reoccurs.

I don't think Gay could have concluded in a leadership role at Harvard, particularly one with responsibility for research ethics, but there are no real grounds to stripping her of her tenured position for the relatively minor offences she has committed. At most, a disciplinary process, formal warning, and a commitment required to correct all inadequate citing in her published work.

Here's a balanced take from Stephen Voss, from whom Gay plagiarised, published before she resigned. Summary: he regards what she did as plagiarism, but fairly minor, noting that it didn't do him any kind of harm (like stealing an original research idea would), and it didn't help her in any significant way.

How could they be expelled now R157 A plagiarist who was the President of Harvard is still on the faculty.

She plagiarized her acknowledgements. Who does that?

R159 The point is that for the same time of plagiarism they wouldn't have been expelled anyway, and certainly wouldn't be at my institution.

R160 This charge of plagiarising acknowledgements doesn't really make sense to me. Plagiarism matters because it's a way to gain academic credit with work that isn't yours, but the acknowledgements don't play any part in the assessment, and don't even need to be there at all. It would be like saying someone plagiarised their shopping list.

^^^ *the same type of

Because it shows a level of abject laziness that she can't even write acknowledgements in her own words? It's pathetic.

Is this the academic world’s me too?

Harvard 🙋‍♀️🙋‍♂️

R163 believe me when I say that no-one who gets a PhD is abjectly lazy.

but how did they get it R166 by cutting and pasting?

R167 nah mate we've been over this: a PhD is awarded for an original contribution to knowledge (original research findings based on new data, reinterpretations of existing data, applying a theory in a new way, etc). Those are the grounds on which Gay's thesis was judged, and nothing that has been produced so far to suggest that that work was plagiarised: rather, it was the sort of introductory or methodological paragraphs which are necessary to properly describe the problem, define terms, summarise existing knowledge, etc.

What she did was still wrong, but it's like a venial sin rather than a mortal one, if I may let out my inner Catholic for a moment.

The reports published in various outlets collect nearly 50 instances in which Gay allegedly misused academic sources. They appear in eight of her works: a 1993 essay in the magazine Origins, her dissertation from 1997, a 2001 working paper, and five articles she published while a professor at Stanford and Harvard (out of a total of 11 journal publications across her career).

Concerned, you somehow keep glossing over the fact that she’s a black woman and therefore can’t have earned a PhD on her own merits.

Concerned, she is becoming the poster child for what is wrong with DEI

[quote]I don't know how you stay at an institution where you have embarrassed yourself, been demoted from your job and humiliated your employer.

You claim your firing was motivated by racism and thus staying becomes an act of resistance. ✊✊✊

[quote]That's a stupid analogy. Being Harvard's president is not, and has never been, a critical function like performing brain surgery. This hullabaloo about a position that is basically a figurehead is strictly political, and racist.

So you wouldn't want a DEI surgeon to perform brain surgery on you. How racist of you.

PhD: piled high and deep

Seems like only white males get judged on their merit these days. Anyone else is DEI.

Asians too R175.

I mean DEI doesn't like Asians.

DEI doesn't like Jews either

Sarcasm dies at the DL

[quote] So you wouldn't want a DEI surgeon to perform brain surgery on you. How racist of you.

Believing there is such a thing as a "DEI surgeon" is racist.

[quote] Sarcasm dies at the DL

You must have plagiarized your thesis on sarcasm. Your comment(s) are obnoxious not sarcastic. Primarily because you believe that white men are judged on merit. White men are presumptively qualified even when they are imbeciles -- see, Donald Trump.

R180 why, because DEI are put only in schools, academia, courts, Congress, government, where they can endanger the society, but never on positions where they can directly endanger human life?

[quote]Believing there is such a thing as a "DEI surgeon" is racist.

I won't go into the full details but I once sat in an "equality" group listening to Welsh speakers complaining (in English) that there were no Welsh speaking surgeons available to perform life saving surgery and that they would rather have a Welsh speaking surgeon with limited experience than a vastly English speaking surgeon of any nationality that didn't speak Welsh.

They seemed confused by Welsh speaking surgeons didn't want to live and work in Wales, when also speaking English they could work pretty much anywhere in the world.

r183, do surgeons in Great Britain study in school, take board exams (or equivalent) and train as medical residents?

[quote] Harvard 🙋‍♀️🙋‍♂️

HA HA HA!!!!!

I have heard anti-semitic rhetoric suggesting that Jewish people have taken over Harvard because over 100 years ago it would not accept Jewish students. This episode has proven that Jewish people wield enormous influence over Harvard. Or is it just rich people?

Oxman and Ackman are two of the biggest famewhores in academia and finance. She used a brief "relationship" with a post-divorce Brad Pitt to snare him into marrying her. Prior to getting together with Pitt, he supposedly only wanted to date long-term.

Maybe they should be investigated R187 but in the meantime . . .

R187 hopefully someone will be 'probing' Oxman's relationship with Brad Pitt

[Quote] This episode has proven that Jewish people wield enormous influence over Harvard. Or is it just rich people?

Penny Pritzker is a billionaire entrepreneur civic leader and philanthropist who served as the US Secretary of Commerce from 2013 to 2017 she is also the senior fellow of the Harvard Corporate Corporation the governing board of Harvard University.

She's a member of the Pritzker family one of the wealthiest and most influential dynasties in America with interest in hotels health care and industrial conglomerates.

She is a key fundraiser and supporter of the Democratic Party having helped Barack Obama and Joe Biden with their presidential campaigns

[quote] Penny Pritzker is a billionaire

Did Tracy Turnblad get rich as welll?

[quote] Gay inherited her position thanks to DEI even though she was unqualified

Who did she inherit her position from? Which family member? Which heir bequeathed it to her.?

(^.^) from her roots: Kunta Kenya

R77 not any longer but Harvard is still news

Harvard University has been sued by Jewish students who accused it of allowing its campus to become a bastion of rampant antisemitism.

In a complaint filed on Wednesday night, six students accused Harvard of selectively enforcing its anti-discrimination policies to avoid protecting Jewish students from harassment, ignoring their pleas for protection, and hiring professors who support anti-Jewish violence and spread antisemitic propaganda.