Everyone in academia should be paying attention to this and thinking about how they/we can fight back against these bad faith attacks. As a scholar in an adjacent field targeted by some of these same bad actors, the "if you don't fight back, they'll go away" strategy is just not an option.
Why use made up quotes when you can just quote them and then quote people everyone knows were notorious bigots, saying the same damn things. When Kennedy says that racist ideas progress or are innovated, part of it is they just flip the words around a little. It really is plagiarism.
One way to fight back is to point out that Rufo, et al are plagiarizing from the bigots of the past. Be scholars. Point to the many examples and put them word for word, side by side, in a brutally truthful fashion.
The schools should be doing it too. Something along the lines of "we've reviewed the documents and found the accusations of plagiarism to be without merit." But they're cowards
I wonder if there are lesson learned from physics/astro-physics dealing with less than supported theories al la @astrokatie.com ‘s recent posts on Dark matter?
Correct, and the underlying attack on higher education will come for all fields in time. Any academic who thinks they are safe is asking to learn about Niemöller's observation the hard way.
The word McCarthyism comes to mind. Time for #academics to band together to fight back. They need to show the biased nature and political motivations behind this deeply anti #academic anti-modern #University movement. #Academia
I’m sadly not surprised. I’ve asked lots of disinfo researchers (and read lots of books) for guidance on how to respond when you’re part of a group targeted by disinfo. And have come up empty every time.
We had an issue at the University of Oregon when I was there and decided to keep quiet and let it blow over rather than defending ourselves.
As a result, the bad-faith attacks became accepted as the truth, and two years later we were still receiving hate mail and having donors ghost us.
Yeah, and although many would blanch at mixing politics with academia, I believe a more proactive approach may be needed; why give the bad-faith actors the luxury of picking targets they deem most vulnerable?
He’s trying to make “intersectionality” a dirty word that means “black women” (implied unqualified), the same he called all mention of racism “CRT”, and any trans person a “groomer”, his tactic is so obvious and it works because he trusts legacy media to repeat his words as “rising concerns) or w/e