Jason Arday found dead today.

Cofnas is also known for his anti-Semitic literature.

Imo an all round very bad egg.

Yes . we do need the truth and a very thorough, rational investigation. I am not suggesting anything should be hidden, let alone not discussed but the man is barely two days dead, emotions are running high and this is neither the time nor the place for point scoring.

Thank you Luckygirl.
Race and DEI were mentioned in many posts.

Investigation is good.
'Pile on' is not.

I think the original instigator was Arday himself. If he hadn't fabricated such fantastic stuff that he had apparently done and which was easily disprovable there would have been no story to challenge. I didn't know anything about it until Jeremy Vine on radio 2 read out a list of things he'd presented as fact. Vine was struggling to believe it all as I was I as I heard it.
As someone up thread said he'd had the nerve to come out with all this stuff but not the nerve to see it through.
I'm surprised that Simon Baron Cohen who'd apparently seen him just hours before he died wasn't able to assess the suicide risk and give appropriate help or get him to somewhere he could access it.
Academic plagiarism, calls of racism and blaming journalists are not new. The story of this young man is.

Luckygirl3

"The media killed Arday. The scrutiny that followed his appointment was immediate and intense. Allegations of plagiarism surfaced through Nathan Cofnas, a self-described “race realist” who has argued that Black people would disappear from high-profile positions at top universities including Harvard under meritocracy. The claims expanded into national coverage. The British press treated Arday as a symbol of alleged DEI excess and framed him as a diversity poster boy. The reporting was disproportionate compared to similar cases involving white academics, whose transgressions rarely attract national attention nor are universalized to other white academics. For example, when a Cambridge historian was found to have plagiarised student essays, the coverage was minimal. "

This is the view of PTZeleza, a black academic. This is my point .... that Arday's alleged transgressions (that undoubtedly need scrutiny by the university) turned into a vendetta because of his race/colour and because he was seen as an example of positive discrimination "gone wrong". He was required to bear the weight not only of what he might actually have done wrong himself but also of the potential flaws in a policy much larger than himself. Too much for any one individual in this media led culture.

Well said.
👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽

Absolutely spot on.

"The media killed Arday. The scrutiny that followed his appointment was immediate and intense. Allegations of plagiarism surfaced through Nathan Cofnas, a self-described “race realist” who has argued that Black people would disappear from high-profile positions at top universities including Harvard under meritocracy. The claims expanded into national coverage. The British press treated Arday as a symbol of alleged DEI excess and framed him as a diversity poster boy. The reporting was disproportionate compared to similar cases involving white academics, whose transgressions rarely attract national attention nor are universalized to other white academics. For example, when a Cambridge historian was found to have plagiarised student essays, the coverage was minimal. "

This is the view of PTZeleza, a black academic. This is my point .... that Arday's alleged transgressions (that undoubtedly need scrutiny by the university) turned into a vendetta because of his race/colour and because he was seen as an example of positive discrimination "gone wrong". He was required to bear the weight not only of what he might actually have done wrong himself but also of the potential flaws in a policy much larger than himself. Too much for any one individual in this media led culture.

Galaxy

Oh so when the guardian reports information it is fine but when press you dont like does it it is bad. Sorry but again we cant operate like that. That is tribal stuff and partly why we are where we are.
If the press are responsible for this then the guardian goes down as well. I dont think they are responsible and I am currently watching some extraordinarily brave journalists defending their corner. Thank god for them.

That is absolutely not what I am saying. You are allowing your bias to misunderstand.

If the press’ behaviour is responsible then of course it must be called out.

But I am saying that the instigator who in my view is almost certainly Cofnas should have much greater scrutiny in the veracity if his claims. Something that the press have not imv done.

I would always try to find the facts first.

Then if the assertion is true it is irrelevant who made it.

If the assertion is false then who made it may be relevant to future assertions, but not to that one because it has been proved to be false.

To question the motivation of the person who makes the assertion and to form judgement on the validity of their assertion based on your opinion of them, makes it difficult, if not impossible to view the assertion without prejudice.

Perhaps the approach of person first was what influenced the Universities involved.

One of the journalists who ardy instructed solicitors and police against was from the Times higher education publication.

Oh so when the guardian reports information it is fine but when press you dont like does it it is bad. Sorry but again we cant operate like that. That is tribal stuff and partly why we are where we are.
If the press are responsible for this then the guardian goes down as well. I dont think they are responsible and I am currently watching some extraordinarily brave journalists defending their corner. Thank god for them.

But my point is we don’t know the truth.

If I’m reading something that is an assertion about someone else, I always question that persons motivation, before trying to get at the real facts.

In my view Cofnas who made his assertion in July needs to be carefully considered, given his academic background. The Guardians ‘in depth’ analyses was published in August, by which time the right wing press were running like mad with the opportunity to condemn a black academic.

Cofnas’ reputation as a which supremicist is well known in the academic world, and his insistence that all black academics should be sacked known by all.

His own words condemn his motivation.

It is obvious and he has succeeded.

Unpleasant motives can't change truth into lies or lies into truth. Facts remain facts no matter the method of revealing them.

I to be honest dont really think the motives matter if what they have uncovered is true. I dont care what the Guardians motives were ( I think their motives were investigative journalism). Are we worrying what the motives of journalists were when they dug into mandelsson.
I cannot believe I have ended up defending the guardian.

The point is that there is no definitive answer to the whole sorry issue, but we can definitely work out the motivation behind much of the reporting.

I think public interest was more sparked by his obviously fantastical claims of other achievements (not the plagiarism) that were unquestionably accepted by various media and his book publisher. Too many were obviously disprovable, the universities where he claimed to be a visiting professor, the installing of water points in South America and West Africa, the huge sums of money raised for charities, his running The last 9 marathons in a 30 marathons in 30 days challenge with a fractured leg, and many more. How any interviewer could hear all this and much more and not think "really? sounds a bit over the top" I do not know. I blame all those outlets that swallowed his stories without question, who fed his ego. When it became obvious that it was all going to crumble Jason Arday has likely committed suicide, which is a tragedy for him and his family.
It's worth remembering that an average of 20 people commit suicide every day in the UK, each and every one a tragedy. Much more needs to be done about suicide prevention.

Galaxy

It wasn't just him those was it, as I said the guardian did their own investigation, the things they uncovered were not much to do with the plagarism allegations. Is the guardian now right wing because that is where I saw some of the most serious questions.

I am not clear what you are saying?

That Nathan Cofnas’ role in this should be disregarded, and his motives not investigated

Or that the Guardian’s role in its investigation is on a parr with the motives of Cofnas

eazybee

A man has died, apparently in tragic circumstances, because he was in serious trouble. I feel great pity for the waste of a life and for his family.

Sufficient unto the day; this is not the time for casting unpleasant aspersions.

That’s why we need the truth. To cast out aspersions, speculation, opinion, partisanship.

The truth of everyone’s responsibilty in this because it is not just a personal tragedy of one man and has enormous implications for many people both now and in the future.

Many people directly involved will find the truth hard to bear and will face public scrutiny for their actions and decisions. Should those be kept hidden because of the distress they might cause?

It wasn't just him those was it, as I said the guardian did their own investigation, the things they uncovered were not much to do with the plagarism allegations. Is the guardian now right wing because that is where I saw some of the most serious questions.

Galaxy

I think there are two views that cant be reconciled, those who think the lies and sustaining the lies were the problem, and those who think exposing the lies was the problem. I dont think those two views are every going to be reconciled.

There is a third view -

Those who question the original motive by a sacked academic which gained immediate traction in the right wing media as a result of racism. No one has question the veracity if his claims.

No one has yet absolutely proven the case

A man has died, apparently in tragic circumstances, because he was in serious trouble. I feel great pity for the waste of a life and for his family.

Sufficient unto the day; this is not the time for casting unpleasant aspersions.

It's very sad.
At the root of all this are the stupid people at Cambridge who appointed a fraudster. He created a web of lies, none of which were checked.
DEI policy rather than rigorous checking of his background, academic credentials and claims set this young man up for a fall and when it came, it was mighty.
Shame and lengthy ridicule heaped on all concerned, including the perpetrator.
Not surprising really.

Arday was cool enough to con, but didn't have the strength to brazen out the consequences.

As Scott wrote
'What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.'

A cautionary tale, but with a very sad ending.

I think there are two views that cant be reconciled, those who think the lies and sustaining the lies were the problem, and those who think exposing the lies was the problem. I dont think those two views are every going to be reconciled.

He seemed to be a Walter Mitty type of person,deep rooted issues,wanting to fit in but exaggerating everything,then it all goes wrong and the pressure on him must have been dreadful.

The humiliation and very public vilification were horrendous and unrelenting. A colleague who spoke to him yesterday morning said that Jason could not even leave his house anymore.
Was insupportable and unforgivable.