More Potential Academic Fraud: Sociology Edition

Related Post Roulette

14 Responses

  1. Avatar Richard Hershberger
    Ignored
    says:

    Please, please don’t tell me if there are any similar questions about Sudhir Venkatesh!Report

  2. Avatar Chris
    Ignored
    says:

    Goffman was accused of making it up from the start. I saw her pop up in the news last week or the week before, and was surprised, because I thought most people had decided it probably was fake. Then, I didn’t pay that much attention then.

    She’s also really tone deaf on racial issues in a way that suggests less exposure than she claims, but what are ya gonna do.Report

  3. Avatar aaron david
    Ignored
    says:

    “It is impossible to tell how much these fabrications and obsfucations come from a desire to help or a desire for fame and glory.”

    I would say the two are bound together like egos and politicians.Report

  4. Avatar LeeEsq
    Ignored
    says:

    There are two golden rules for academics. The first one is don’t commit plagiarism. The second one is don’t make sh*t up.

    If a prosecutor decides to charge Goffman with conspiracy to commit murder, her only real defense is that part of the book is completed fabricated or maybe even the entire book is fake.Report

    • Avatar Chris in reply to LeeEsq
      Ignored
      says:

      There are two golden rules for academics. The first one is don’t commit plagiarism. The second one is don’t make sh*t up.

      That second rule’s gonna be a problem for the creative writing faculty, I think.Report

      • Avatar Saul Degraw in reply to Chris
        Ignored
        says:

        Interestingly I heard that it is fairly common for people to try and disguise their autobiographical memoirs as fiction in creative writing classes especially at the MFA level. This is a big taboo and no no. Fiction class is for fiction but memoirs are big right now (God knows why) and nothing can stop the writing crowd from getting critiques for their memoirs.Report

    • Avatar Griff in reply to LeeEsq
      Ignored
      says:

      Actually, her main defense would be that you can’t be convicted of a crime based solely on your own statements without SOME other evidence that a crime ever occurred. The only way to convict her would be to find a witness who could testify that something like what she describes in the book actually happened.Report

      • Avatar LeeEsq in reply to Griff
        Ignored
        says:

        A statement in a book you wrote about driving a car while looking to murder a particular person would constitute an admission to a crime. Admissions are treated as exceptions to the rules against hearsay.Report

        • Avatar Griff in reply to LeeEsq
          Ignored
          says:

          Her statement would be admissible but it wouldn’t be sufficient to convict her in the absence of some corroborative evidence that a crime actually occurred. This is the common law rule and as far as I know it applies in PA.Report

  5. Avatar zic
    Ignored
    says:

    In the interest of being properly skeptical of her skeptic, almost all of the refutals he gives are based on questioning local law enforcement. Not saying it’s either correct or incorrect; but it sorta creeped me out.Report

    • Avatar Saul Degraw in reply to zic
      Ignored
      says:

      He also talked to public defenders.Report

      • Avatar zic in reply to Saul Degraw
        Ignored
        says:

        I know.

        I also know I had a lot of people on the street talking to me about cops and the system.

        I understand confidentially from a journalist perspective; I often had to look for ways to tell peoples’ stories that protected their confidence. I also needed people, with names, to tell stories. There were a lot of incidences that I didn’t write about, but illuminated patterns of behavior to observe.

        How does that work in this academic study; how do you do this kind of research, write honestly, and protect those sources at the same time?

        She became part of the story, I mistrust that.

        But I still got that icky, this isn’t right, feeling about his reliance on the legal system, including public defenders. Just because he got some to say these things couldn’t happen doesn’t mean they don’t happen. A lot of people get shit for representation. I think it’s a persistent violation of their constitutional rights.

        I am not saying defending her, I am skeptical of his critique for these reasons.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *