Oberlin hoax lesson: Smelling a rat is good, smelling like a rat is bad
I smelled a rat in the Oberlin racism narrative, and so did some other people in the conservative blogosphere, including but not limited to Michelle Malkin and Chuck Ross of The Daily Caller (who obtained the police report that confirmed our suspicions that this was a hoax).
So while Jack Marshall at Ethics Alarms directs this praise towards me, it applies equally to the other skeptics who smelled a rat at Oberlin (emphasis in original):
◾William Jacobson, who is a Cornell law school professor, notes in his report that he “smelled a rat” with the Oberlin story, and investigated. Why was this story only investigated by a blogging law professor? Where were the journalists? Why weren’t they—the Times, the Post, CNN, CBS, FOX, NBC—checking the facts? That it took this long for the truth to come out is an indictment of how lazy, inept and biased our journalistic establishment has become.
◾Prof. Jacobson is an Ethics Hero. This was important work, and he set out to find the truth while smug reporters slept, and gleeful pundits on the left used a false account to implicate Republicans and conservatives.
The disinterest of the mainstream media in uncovering and addressing the hoax makes it come out of this smelling like a rat, as does the Oberlin administration’s failure to disclose the hoax to unsuspecting students.
The biggest rats of all, of course, were the pro-Obama liberal “anti-racist” students who perpetrated the racism hoax in the first place; it’s no excuse that the adults in the room (the media and administration) played along.
I was interviewed on these and related subjects yesterday morning by Arthur King on the Inside Maine radio show on 560 WGAN AM in, you guessed it, Maine.
[starting at 11:00] “Oberlin could have concluded two things: One, this was a hoax and a prank, even though a stupid prank, and two, that he was not actually motivated by racism or anti-Semitism, or any like that. And that would have just changed the whole way this thing went down, and Oberlin needs to explain why they didn’t give that explanation.”
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Between making Bayard Rustin’s troubling 1965 vision “From Protest to politics” the theme of the White House pushed American Commonwealth Partnership with higher ed and the determination to make ethnic or racial identity a key component of what is to drive the revolution in ed http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/second-part-empowering-millenials-to-create-change-youth-organizing-low-income-students-of-color/ , the incentives are to ignite the long sought transformation, whatever the facts.
Oberlin is also front and center of the entire sustainability push via new types of minds for the 21st century through Professor David Orr’s oft-cited work. I just came across an exchange from the early 80s that called all these Insurmountable Challenges that become the excuse for fundamental change “the world-crisis solution with 100 names.”
And if no one is sufficiently listening you make up egregious facts until they do.
Since the administration was aware of the hoax, could this have been a revenue generating event for Oberlin, which prides itself on promoting “diversity”, and capturing the interest and funds of similarly minded people?
“……smelling like a rat is bad”
And we are blessed with SCADS of those. If I type, ‘we need an exterminator’, think the NSA will watc..screw ’em. They probably are ANYWAY..
Why hasn’t Mike DeWine opened an investigation?
Look, new dog!
That’s what the LSM is interested in. Ethics? It’s a sad day when you can’t trust a fixed fight anymore.
[…] Oberlin hoax lesson: Smelling a rat is good, smelling like a rat is bad I smelled a rat in the Oberlin racism narrative, and so did some other people in the conservative blogosphere, including but not limited to Michelle Malkin and Chuck Ross of The Daily Caller (who obtained the police report that confirmed our suspicions that this was a hoax). […]
Where was Chrisie Matthews while this was happening? Isn’t
he supposed to be a true sycophant?
At least we know it wouldn’t have made a difference in the way it was handled, if the hoaxers had been anti-Obama, “racist” rethuglicans.
Oberlin’s tacit approval & soft sell undoubtedly helps them financially. No wonder capitalism is so so bad
you did an excellent job here. its appreciated.
don’t know why but this whole thing has really bugged me, more so than normal.
Take a victory lap Prof! You “Watergated” (with blogging allies) the rats!
You ID’d the student perps as rats.
You’ve put the Oberlin admin on notice that they are rat enablers.
And outed the left bloggers as rat collaborators.
This is new news! Not blogosphere commentary (although valuable) … but investigation / significant truth-telling.
Is there a Pulitzer for blogging? If not, someone should underwrite.
I was on the fence about blog influence outside the welcome news & commentary among the like-minded. But this is New Blog Ground. Gracias.
What percentage of reported “hate crimes” or “hate incidents” actually turn out to be that? I suspect that it’s far less than 50%. Whenever such a crime or incident is reported in the news, my default assumption is that it’s either a hoax, or an ordinary crime that has nothing to do with hatred of anybody.
(One subcategory of that is bored teenagers who vandalize religious buildings or cemeteries, because they’re easy targets at night, and because it gives them a transgressive thrill, and paint what appear to be bigoted slogans or symbols, not because they’re really bigots, but because they know it’ll get a rise out of the victims. E.g. the same teenagers, who don’t really hate anyone but are generally antisocial and mischievous, will paint a swastika on a synagogue, “Hail Satan!” on a church, or “KKK” on a black church, because they know it will push the right buttons in each case.)
No mention of the Professor BUT Fox News does have it on their “front” web page.