40 New Instances of Plagiarism Lodged Against Harvard's Diversity-Hire President Claudine Gay

A couple of dozen lifts here, a couple of dozen unattributed borrowings there, and pretty soon you're talking real... nothing.

Nothing. She's a Diversity Hire. She wasn't hired on merit so it's useless to attempt to use the rules of merit against her.

All she has to do to keep her job is continue being a Stronk Empowered WOC (who needs people to make special rules for her, because she's so Stronk and Empowered).

Harvard University on Tuesday received a complaint outlining over 40 allegations of plagiarism against its embattled president, Claudine Gay. The document paints a picture of a pattern of misconduct more extensive than has been previously reported and puts the Harvard Corporation, the university's governing body--which said it initiated an "independent review" of Gay's scholarship and issued a statement of support for her leadership--back in the spotlight.

The new allegations, which were submitted to Harvard's research integrity officer, Stacey Springs, include the examples reported by the Washington Free Beacon and other outlets, as well as dozens of additional cases in which Gay quoted or paraphrased authors without proper attribution, according to a copy of the complaint reviewed by the Free Beacon. They range from missing quotation marks around a few phrases or sentences to entire paragraphs lifted verbatim.

The full list of examples spans seven of Gay's publications--two more than previously reported--which comprise almost half of her scholarly output. Though the Harvard Corporation said earlier this month that it initiated an independent review of Gay's work in October and found "no violation of Harvard's standards for research misconduct," that probe focused on just three papers.

"[I]t is impossible that your office has already reviewed the entirety of these materials," the complaint reads, "as many ... have not been previously reported or submitted."

All allegations of faculty plagiarism must be reviewed by Harvard's research integrity officer, according to the school's official policies, and if deemed credible are referred for further investigation. A guilty finding can result in a range of consequences--including "suspension," "rank reduction," and "termination of employment."

In determining the appropriate sanction, the school claims to consider whether the misconduct "was an isolated event or part of a pattern."

Lurking in the background of the complaint is the question of whether Gay, Harvard's 30th president, will be held to the same standards as the university's own students, dozens of whom are disciplined for plagiarism each year.

Claudine Gay, Plagiarist.

Claudine Gay is a pseudointellectual who specialises in being a Diverse Black Female Academic. She first served as a Diverse Black Female Academic at Stanford University, before leaving to become a Diverse Black Female Academic at Harvard University. In 2018, Harvard decided it would be even more Diverse of them to make Gay the Diverse Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences, and in 2023 they thought they could achieve a new pinnacle of Diversity by making her their first Diverse Black Female President. Because Gay's importance derives entirely from being a Diverse Black Female Academic, she is an underqualified mediocrity, and she has never published anything interesting. In fact, relative to the average tenured Harvard professor, she has never published much of anything at all.

Like a lot of overpromoted mediocrities, Gay does not do her job very well....

Because academia is full of craven and cowardly people on the one hand, and malicious politically motivated people on the other hand, Gay has no shortage of defenders. I am not going to quote them because their statements are stupid and indefensible. Even some of the scholars Gay has plagiarised insist she is not guilty of plagiarism, though a growing number have come forward to state the obvious. What Gay has done in her dissertation and across at least five of her meagre career-total eleven papers is obviously plagiarism, and students at Harvard are very aware that they would be suspended for infractions like these. Gay's job is not to be a good president or a good scholar, however. Her job is to be a black female president and a black female scholar, and for this reason Harvard will try to keep her around.

...

I used to be a professor, I have published various books and articles, and for a while I even edited a journal. I know many students and the odd academic who have faced serious consequences for offences much lesser than Gay's.

Carol Swain: Claudine Gay stole my work, period.

I write as one of the scholars whose work Ms. Gay plagiarized. She failed to credit me for sections from my 1993 book, "Black Faces, Black Interests: The Representation of African Americans in Congress" and an article I published in 1997, "Women and Blacks in Congress: 1870-1996." The damage to me extends beyond the two instances of plagiarism identified by researchers Christopher Rufo and Christopher Brunet.

Ms. Gay's damage to me is aggravated because her early work was in the area where my research is considered seminal. Her scholarship on black congressional representation, electoral districting and descriptive representation builds on terrain where I plowed the ground.

When one follows in the footsteps of a more senior scholar, one is expected to acknowledge the latter's contribution to the field and how one's own research and ideas refute, affirm or expand knowledge in the area. Ms. Gay ignored the substantive importance of my research, which she should have acknowledged and engaged. A single citation or two wouldn't usually be considered intellectually honest.

When scholars aren't cited adequately or their work is ignored, it harms them because academic stature is determined by how often other researchers cite your work. Ms. Gay had no problem riding on the coattails of people whose work she used without proper attribution. Many of those whose work she pilfered aren't as incensed as I am. They are elites who have benefited from a system that protects its own.

Even aside from the documented instances of plagiarism, Ms. Gay's work wouldn't normally have earned tenure in the Ivy League. Tenure at a top-tier institution normally demands ground-breaking originality; her work displays none. In a world where the privilege of diversity is king, Ms. Gay was able to parlay mediocre research into tenure and administrative advancement at what was once considered a world-class university.

Harvard can't condemn Ms. Gay because she is the product of an elite system that holds minorities of high pedigree to a lower standard. This harms academia as a whole, and it demeans Americans, of all races, who had to work for everything they earned.

Even the left-wing Boston Globe points out that Harvard is equivocating and double-talking about whether Gay committed plagiarism or not.

They don't want to specify: If they say what she did wasn't plagiarism, then it's also not plagiarism for any other Harvard professor, researcher, or student.

If they admit it was, then they have to can her.

So they're obfuscating.

The rest of American higher education looks to Harvard for guidance on academic norms. With that leadership role in mind, the university should clear away the uncertainty over how it has applied its plagiarism policies to president Claudine Gay's past academic work and state clearly whether several of her papers ran afoul of the rules it expects students and professors to follow -- or not.

Gay's scholarly publications have come under a microscope in recent months, and media outlets have flagged numerous examples of what appear to be nearly verbatim copying from other sources. Last week the university's governing board released a confusing statement that appeared to confirm a few instances of plagiarism -- without using that word. It said a review by scholars had confirmed "instances of inadequate citation" in Gay's work, but also that she did not violate "standards for research misconduct." The statement also said she would be seeking corrections to add citations and quotation marks in two papers.

The statement seems contradictory. If Gay didn't violate any standards of research, why would she need to correct anything? Nor does the statement reflect what many Harvard affiliates thought the rules were. A webpage on Harvard's own website titled "What Constitutes Plagiarism?" says "it is considered plagiarism to draw any idea or any language from someone else without adequately crediting that source in your paper." Doesn't that mean that, almost by definition, "inadequate citation" constitutes plagiarism?

Christopher Rufo breaks new news: Harvard knew that Claudine Gay had a plagiarism problem one year ago, but apparently did not look into it until their quickie sweep-it-under-the-rug-in-one-week "investigation."

Christopher F. Rufo @realchrisrufo

Harvard's timeline doesn't make sense:

The New York Post confronted Harvard with evidence of Claudine Gay's plagiarism on October 24. The university then threatened legal action on October 27, but, according to its own public statement, did not get the "results" of their "review" of the allegations until December 9.

If the university didn't have the results until December, why did it feel confident enough to threaten legal action the month prior?

The fix was already in--and Harvard wanted to cover up the crime.

Claudine Gay is so lazy, so incapable of using her own words, she even plagiarizes... an acknowledgement.

posted by Disinformation Expert Ace at 02:47 PM

| Access Comments