To compare and contrast coverage and outcome of the Jason Arday scandal with that of Cambridge plagiarist William O'Reilly

[OneArtfulUmberSquid]

Partly due to being an academic, the slow news season and the sensationalism, like many people I've been following the Jason Arday story and have been appalled by the scale of the fabulation and the abysmal lack of due diligence by Cambridge when they appointed him - I've also been appalled by how he was presented by the University when he was hired in terms of the emphasis on his back story and what he represented rather than his scholarship.

It's interesting to compare/contrast with the case of William O'Reilly - who was caught plagiarising his own undergrad students' essays and was then found to have plagiarised other scholars' work a number of times before...see https://www.varsity.co.uk/news/27433

He also threatened to sue student journalists for exposing him - not as bad as Arday calling the police, but still pretty risible
https://www.varsity.co.uk/news/26105

A further issue relates to his witness for the accused in a rape case despite being involved in the investigation.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2020/feb/22/cambridge-university-sexual-misconduct-cases
https://www.varsity.co.uk/news/18747

I'd be interested to know what anyone else thinks of the two cases in terms of academic misconduct and outcomes, particularly anyone who works in Cambridge. O'Reilly claimed that the scrutinising of his work was due to homophobia.

More here but behind a paywall
https://www.ft.com/content/ae7f16ae-95ab-4aae-a676-0748e3e61b6d?shareType=nongift&syn-25a6b1a6=1

So firstly, is there an element of racism? Yes, almost certainly, but I think there’s more to it.

I think one key factor is the fabrication of the personal story which is of much more interest to the man in the street than some academic copying someone elses’s homework. I think if it was just the academic plagerism in Jason’s case it would have died down.Most of the internet discussion has focussed on the other stuff ( the runs, the pigs head, the knife man etc). That’s what people are most incredulous about- ie that no one questioned this stuff. If you think how popular all those “scammer”
documentaries are on Netflix then this is along the same lines.

There’s also the fact that he was better known at the time than the other guy, whose name I’ve already forgotten and who is just another middle aged/ old don, fairly indistinguishable from all the others. Jason is more interesting precisely because of his atypical background/ striking appearance etc. I’m not saying either was “well known” but I’d say if you showed a picture of each to a sample of reasonably well read people, a far few would be able to identify Jason ) if not by name) where literally none would be able to identify William.

AllJoyAndNoFun
thanks, yes I guess that's it, although I don't think Professor mainstream is much less 'guilty' of academic fraud - Arday did have qualifications, publications and research projects (although his PhD was obviously a bit plagiarised), and his back story was so compelling...hope Cambridge put their house in order over all this, it will be exploited to the hilt.

Yes agree it’s the ‘fame’ element and the personal life embellishments that are of more interest in the Arday story

but also, to me, it highlights the racism at universities where they are unable to look at black candidates and identify the truly talented ones because they are too busy trying to get a good story. Iyswim

It's really very unfortunate that his story will inevitably continue to be exploited by the anti-woke, anti-DEI brigade.

But as PP has said, I really don't think it's unreasonable that this has captured media and public attention - I think even if there were no race element to it, there would be a lot of media interest. I'd heard of Arday before all this blew up in the context of "man who couldn't speak until aged 11 or read until he was 18 becomes Cambridge University's youngest professor" - that's such an incredible story (that is possibly incredible in the more literal sense).

I think of it as similar to the Salt Path story - people are interested in uncovering fabrications. If it had just been a straightforward plagiarism story it'd burned out much more quickly, it's all the detail (he ran how many marathons? was there ever a pig's head? a brain tumour?) which is keeping it running.

Or just the 'good story'/PR tail wagging the dog. I know many people are unsympathetic to Arday, but I think Cambridge were really irresponsible to him (as well as to students, the institution and so on) in making the appointment, and then going into publicity over-drive about it. I remember the announcement, and as I've an autistic child I was both heartened but a little cynical about some parts of his story - as well as taken aback by the way Cambridge seemed to be really exploiting his back story.

That said, other institutions also rewarded him - eg, Glasgow appointed him to a professorship at an almost uniquely young age and ARU gave him an honorary doctorate and presented that wrapped up in the narrative about his mutism etc - https://www.aru.ac.uk/graduation-and-alumni/honorary-award-holders2/jason-arday#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20Jason%20was%20appointed,And%20in

there have been many 'scandals' of plagiarism in academia - most never make it beyond a few specialised blogs and journals. But that is because most academics don't have the public profile and story of Jason Arday. If Brian Cox or Hannah Fry was plagiarising their research, we'd all know about it too.

The slow summer time for news stories + any story that brings Cambridge down a notch makes a difference too.

If I were one of O’ Reilly’s students who had had an essay plagiarised by him, I would be fuming. But the people I feel really sorry for are those who got a lower grade for their degree than they had been expecting because of Jason Arday’s lack of teaching and supervision, because that affects their career.
“Some of his former students are considering appealing their grades, accusing him of "inadequate" supervision which lead to lower marks than they were expecting. If their requests are denied, their appeals could result in legal action against the university. Some students are also asking for a refund for the classes they took with Arday, stating that they were “deceived about the nature of their education”. This kind of refund would be unprecedented for the institution.“. (LBC news)
I think anyone doing a degree at a university as prestigious as Cambridge can reasonably hope for a supervisor who is on top of his subject and proper supervision.

Arday seems to have been a complete fantasist with every element of his life - not just academia. 🤷‍♀️

"So firstly, is there an element of racism? Yes, almost certainly, but I think there’s more to it"

Obviously in certain corners on the internet / media there is a narrative that if you are a minority you will now be treated favourably e..g Henry Nowak case etc.

The fact that Ardey's frankly preposterous backstory / athletic / fundraising feats was overlooked and due diligence apparently skipped by numerous institutions gives this narrative fuel for the fire...

sesquipedalian Interesting to see how it plays out in terms of appeals over grades and so on.
The University can say that he technically met the criteria to be appointed I guess - the fabrications are around all the other stuff. But poor teaching is poor teaching and given the publicity they may well be treated favourably - bad PR otherwise.
I'd be more than fuming if I was one of O'Reilly's students - doesn't sound like they were treated too well by Cambridge once it came to light.

I'm sure they'll say he met the criteria - which suggests they were nowhere near as rigorous as they always are for such posts (which usually demand a great deal of published research, for example).

Right - whereas the dodgy fabricated stuff, suffused with the triumph of personal determination and magical turning points may have been the deciding factors.
Maybe it's along the lines of what Priyamvada Gopal describes as the 'oprahfication' of antiracism here zeteo.uk/p/the-jason-arday-affair-and-the-oprahfication (I don't have a sub so haven't read the whole article)

I think comparing those cases is the wrong exercise as the Arday case is not about an individual so much as an institution which was so desparate to "atone" for its lack of diversity at senior academic levels, post BLM and Rhodes Must Fall (I know that was Oxford, but still) that it was willing to overlook some pretty obvious ways in which this was not a credible senior appointment. Some of the racist press has gone after Arday, yes, but even individuals as activist as Priyamvada Gopal have questioned what on earth Cambridge was doing with this appointment.

Having been on numerous academic appointment panels, there are always underqualified people who apply for every position that's advertised, but the panel's job is to filter them out at the shortlisting stage. The usual careful scrutiny of publications and expectation of achievement commensurate to the appointment grade seems to have been lacking here.

Right. Do you think the O'Reilly (and other cases) show a lack of rigour around academic misdemeanours? LJMU standing over Arday's doctoral award seems really dodgy, he should at least have been required to resubmit even if it was a few years later.

O'Reilly's case was indeed bad but Arday is on another level. "A bit plagiarised" ???? 188 separate passages were identical or near identical to another student’s work. In his PhD.

And when his PhD was scrutinised he kicked back hard - actually getting the police involved to try and stop the scrutiny. He is not some innocent who accidently ended up here.

From The Times:

Dr David Harris, an academic at Plymouth Marjon University, who had been reviewing Mr Arday’s work as part of a wider research project, and Prof Martyn Hammersley, a sociologist at the Open University whom Dr Harris had asked to review, wrote to Prof Cremin in 2023 with evidence of Mr Arday’s plagiarism, according to emails seen by The Times.

Prof Cremin responded by saying she had met Mr Arday to discuss the article in question, which was published in 2018. After their meeting, he agreed to take the article down from an online journal platform and re-upload it.

They had raised their concerns with Prof Cremin after Dr Harris wrote to Mr Arday directly asking him to clear up “certain oddities and confusions” and explain similarities between a 2018 paper published by Mr Arday and a study by Prof Anjum Memon, a renowned epidemiologist, and his team and Jason Arday had responded: “I have no problem with constructive criticism, but the tone of your emails are unkind and hostile. You are a monument to the fact we live in a society where grammar is valued above equity. If only all academics were as diligent in their fight for equality as you have been in attending to my spelling.”

He asked Dr Harris not to write to him again, saying: “Anything further from you will be considered bullying and harassment.”

When Dr Harris did so, Mr Arday reported him to police for harassment. Devon and Cornwall Police declined to pursue the case.

I think it is the scale, and the level of ridiculousness, of the deception that has given this story such legs and I think that would be the case regardless of Jason Arday’s race.

Sorry - I just read more about the PhD plagiarism and agree it was appalling - LMJU should not have stood over it, and should have required a rewrite and resubmission. That harassment story is awful.

I think O'Reilly's plagiarism (including of his own students) was also appalling, as was his threats to sue the student journalists, and he should have received a far stronger reprimand.

In general, standards relating to credibility, academic fraud, appointment practices and PR seem to be in the gutter.

He did not have a role in Glasgow Uni -more bullshit

Cambridge was rated in the top 5 world rankings in 2025 - what does this nonsense say about British universities -that they don’t care about plagiarised Phds- that fake professors are the norm - or the thousands who got Cambridge qualifications - maybe they are all helped through like this conman was helped into a senior tutors role? Disgraceful and mocks the British system

What is both striking is that both O'Reilly and Arday claim that they are being unfairly targeted and that if the work of other academics was scrutinised in the same way, then that would similarly be found wanting.

So they both say that everyone in academia is churning out crap and to pick on them is unfair. One wonders how true that is.

So firstly, is there an element of racism? Yes, almost certainly, but I think there’s more to it

As much as I agree that there is a racist element to this.
It should be recognised that there is a group of Arday's supporters that have tried to hide what he has done by using racism to hide what he has done.

Well there’s a large element of reverse racism going on where those poor, disadvantaged black people need a bit of help to get important roles and mustn’t be scrutinised too closely because well, you know

Of course, "churning out crap" isn't the same as churning out plagiarized crap!

From what I could see, it was plagiarised and crap....

I think given that a massive racist was the first (I think) to publicly attack Arday (in a substack), it seems understandable that the 'support Jason Arday' defence was built around 'the attack is motivated by racism', because at that point it was. The attack was also correct, but the assumption was that it was incorrect, not only because of the racism, but because Arday had been cleared of plagiarism.

That’s the problem though isn’t it? Everyone is scared to put their hand up and say ‘hang on, that doesn’t sound right’ in case they’re accused of racism

and the people that really hurts are the black people who deserved the job and opportunities