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 why did those opposed to him mention that he was a supporter of Israel?

Academia generally has a liberal left mindset and anyone who doesn't subscribe to 'progressive' views is immediately under suspicion. Kathleen Stock is a good example of this as she was anti TWAW so she was hounded out of her post by other academics and students alike. Academia has form in the harassment of people who don't subscribe to the accepted set of beliefs.

So why did those opposed to him mention that he was a supporter of Israel?

I think for some on the left, being a Zionist is far worse than being a racist.

I don't know what form his pro-Israel stance took, it's certainly strange to cite mere support for Israel as a complaint - I was trying to say that the other grounds seem enough.

The letter from Ghent re. his temporary suspension has been released/leaked. It doesn't mention Israel so maybe that was a red herring.

Their main thrust is that he is guilty of professional misconduct on a few grounds - mainly 1. He was hired to undertake research in one area whereas he is publicly saying he is focussed on another area, and 2. his comments on race and disability are in violation of the University's Ethical Code which 'prohibits spreading ideas of racial superiority or inciting racial segregation'.

Here are images of the first part of the letter (Mumsnet restrict the number of images that can be uploaded

The rest of the letter says academic freedom/freedom of expression is not unlimited in Belgium, for example if it violates anti-discrimination law; that his remarks about Arday (eg being 'mentally disabled') is a potential breach of Belgian law in terms of 'offences against a person's honour or reputation' and that his comments about wanting to purge academics who he thinks are his ideological enemies has caused distress to his colleagues. It also mentions the scale of complaints from students and colleagues.

The whole letter is on Bluesky here https://bsky.app/profile/roterote.bsky.social/post/3mtonundvbs22

it's certainly strange to cite mere support for Israel as a complaint

It’s now absolutely commonplace to demonise people who support Israel, particularly at universities. All those pro-Palestine protests at universities were rabidly anti-Zionist.

Yes, in the world of academia being a supporter of Israel is unacceptable. Only certain views are permitted and anyone who falls outside of those views is guilty of wrong-think (see also Kathleen Stock).

What discipline do you work in? This is not a view I recognise, though many academics are know are vocal critics of Israel and Zionism, many others are supporters. And many more are capable of seeing the issues without taking sides. Maybe social science is more holistic than some other disciplines.

Thanks for sharing the letter. As it seemed, Cofnas has brought this on himself by his obviously ill advised commentary over the last few weeks, and throughout his appointment. I’m sure if any of us went on podcasts taking about how we’d been employed to carry out pet project when in fact we were employed to do quite different job we’d find ourselves in breach of contract. And if that pet project brought us into conflict with the values of our employer, they’d be well entitled to take action. In the past I’ve worked with colleagues who had some questionable beliefs and out of work past times, but they at least had the sense not to make it public. Cofnas seems like a bit of an idiot that he didn’t foresee this, or a clever strategist banking on these repeated sackings making him a fundable darling of certain political groups. A sort of highbrow Tommy Robinson.

Support of Israel wasn't cited in the decision to suspend Cofnas, it's a red herring that of course people want to seize on rather than address the actual reasons given by the University.

Kathleen Stock might be the default academic martyr for many posters on Mumsnet but her ignorant comment that autism, ADHD, dyslexia and dyspraxia are ‘intellectual disabilities’ that should disqualify people from academic careers is bigoted as well as being factually wrong. Are such prejudiced comments just 'views'?

Saying that the university didn’t cite it in their letter doesn’t mean that people didn’t complain about it making them feel uncomfortable though.

I think that asserting that academia is a solid mix of political opinions just isn’t true.

He's not a typical employee I guess given how he has sought so much publicity and how emboldened he is after the Arday situation. It feels like he's basking in it - and as you suggested he's probably hoping for a lucrative career funded by the Human Diversity Foundation/Pioneer Fund/Aporia (for example). Wonder how Trump's espousal of his cause will play out.

@OneArtfulUmberSquid There’s reasonable debate about this and Stock is entitled to her views. She’s really talking about giving a huge amount of rope to people who are not good enough. Yes, she’s labelled them, but look at the issues when unsuitable people are not supervised and promoted above their capability. It’s a disaster for everyone. There’s also a huge argument now about the vast number of labels attached to people and whether this has gone too far. Fewer labels, less possible discrimination and less over compensation or special consideration that’s barely justified.

I can’t remember where the reference to him being ‘Israel supporting came from’ now. But people can complain about all kinds of things, doesn’t mean they’re taken seriously.

I also don’t think anyone is asserting a solid mix, but there are different experiences. Immune is that universities are broadly culturally left (though not always economically so, looking at you VCs…) But I had a fair few Jewish colleagues, not all of whom supported Israel even a good few years ago, and now I’m only in contact through work projects or with friends, so harder to say. I just wouldn’t make blanket statements like ‘X is unacceptable in academia’ because - apart from anything else - the rarified air of Jesus College is not UClan, or UEL, or Edge Hill or similar where people are much more focused on their own worlds. Again, in my experience!

Sure - I didn't see any original complaint reproduced in full mentioning Israel, just reported here. It doesn't seem substantive in terms of the actual grounds for suspending him.
I doubt any one profession or sector of employment/activity has a precise mix of political views but there's certainly many pro-Israel academics as well as many conservative ones, but it's pretty uneven according to disciplines, institutions and internationally.

Entitled to her view that dyslexia ought to disqualify someone from an academic career? Sure. And we’re entitled for criticise her as embarrassingly ignorant. Einstein and Edison both famously dyslexic and late talkers. Prof Maggie Aderin Pocock has talked about only being diagnosed in her 40s.

Stock is another one a bit delirious from the oxygen of publicity imo.

I’ve seen Cofnas increasingly referred to as a Zionist racist on social media.

I’m surprised that you seem unaware of the explosion in anti-Israel sentiment, and the problem with anti-semitism in universities (and on the left generally) particularly since Oct 2023.

She's really talking about
You might be kindly reading between the lines but she wrote what she wrote with nothing like the nuance you're suggesting.

Stock is entitled to her views
She is not entitled to use a public platform (a newspaper column) to falsely describe certain neurological profiles as 'intellectually disabled'. It's not a view, it's a factual error.

It's a pretty strange take to assert that neurodiverse people can't have careers in what she calls 'scholarly pursuit' - half of the academics in some University departments wouldn't be there if that was the case.

I think your 'vast number of labels' comment is about something different. I'm not in the UK - maybe you are and it's different there - but if you think diagnosing disability has 'gone too far' maybe you haven't had to suffer from the lengthy waits for assessment, lack of services, lack of support, bigoted commentary and more that people endure.

Oh no doubt, I was thinking only about reasons for the investigation/suspension. Tbh I generally avoid social media bar here because it’s too depressing.

I’m not unaware of it, I just see it in a bigger context. There’s a lot of antisemitism everywhere, there always has been but I see more people alert to it now as a way to critique certain left wing groups. As if the right are not also guilty of it. Student politics waxes and wanes, much of it fairly shallow. There was a lot of support for Arafat when I was first at university. I’m Jewish by heritage though it’s not a big part of my identity (at least not as much as it is for antisemites), so I guess maybe I gravitate towards people with more educated/balanced viewpoints and filter out the noise.

@OneArtfulUmberSquid There are very many well qualified people who are saying resources are spread too thinly because of the rush to attach labels to
people. They create the issues. There are degrees of disability and I think a discussion on this is worthwhile and you are entitled to your opinion on Stock and her words but it’s a position that can be debated, and should be. Others might well disagree with your assertions too about disability.

Others might well disagree with your assertions too about disability.
What is there to disagree with? Dyslexia, dyspraxia, autism, ADHD and speech delay are not classified as intellectual disabilities. It's a fact, not a view nor an assertion.

If you think 'many well qualified people' think there's a 'rush to attach labels', many other well qualified people think there is a lack of diagnosis, so it seems a dead-end argument for this thread. Stock is clearly not well qualified as she gets basic facts wrong (her prejudicial views aside).

I'm sure most people are aware of anti-Israel sentiment given public protests and arrests, and the problem of collating anti-Zionism with anti-semitism.

There's definitely been a rise in anti-semitic attacks associated with the conflict in Israel/Palestine/the Middle East since 2023

but it's worth noting that:

In terms of universities, the UK organisation dedicated to logging anti-semitism actually reported a decrease in the number of antisemitic incidents reported in higher education in 2025, with 78 cases of anti-Jewish hate recorded which they notes was a significant drop of 41% from 2024. cst.org.uk/data/file/3/1/CST%20Incidents%20Report%202025.1772031180.pdf

There is also a growth in racialised right wing anti-semitism informed by ideologies such as the Great Replacement Theory. Even the Telegraph - not a bastion of left-wing thinking - has covered this:
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/08/17/how-great-replacement-theory-infiltrated-british-politics/

It matters not one jot about classifications, it is about suitability and ability to do a job and there are degrees of every “disability”. Most of us know when someone is not good enough. We just keep thinking with help, everyone is identical. They are not. I celebrate differences but just saying x is not the right sort of disability is splitting hairs. We know what Stock means!

I would assume that Stock is sufficiently intelligent and erudite to say what she means, so I take what she wrote at face value. She has grouped together a range of what she considers ‘labels’, called them intellectual disabilities and indicated that her view is that people who have them are unsuited to an academic career.

She doesn’t distinguish by degrees.

Do you agree that dyslexic people are unsuited to academia?

Classifications do matter of course - ID affects the acquisition of knowledge and skills.

I don't know anyone who thinks that with help everyone is identical.

I've had some stellar dyslexic MA and PhD students who use particular software (eg voice to text) and for whom I might use a particular approach in PowerPoints (eg certain colour contrasts and typefaces). It doesn't make them identical, but does enable them to engage in 'scholarly pursuits' to a very high level.

Do you agree that dyslexic people are unsuited to academia?
No, I don't. Nor do I consider her list to be 'labels'.

I might have more experience than her on the ground in universities with this because I've undergone training in universal design for learning for teaching/supervising postgrads including taught courses and research degrees to improve my skills in teaching people with different neurological / learning profiles.

As well as teaching and supervising some (taught) MA students I supervised a PhD student with dyslexia to completion (no corrections). They had a number of workarounds they developed themselves as well as using some assistive software (voice to text) and we figured out what would work best for them - for example, recorded (audio) feedback.

@Switchnow Some are and some definitely are not. But there are other things that determine how suitable someone is for a job. Most I know would be unsuitable because they prefer practical jobs and have the high skill levels to match. Others would run a mile from academia - like many sane people. What I don’t think is right is that people who are plainly not good enough getting jobs over people who are in order to tick boxes or meet quotas. It’s wrong.