The unfortunate death of Cambridge Professor Jason Arday proves that the vetting process for prestigious jobs needs to be improved and the diversity and inclusion agenda that has infected academia has real-world consequences if proper due diligence is compromised in any way as a result of 'virtue signalling'.
Retraction Watch was one of the first to break this story:
In this case the vetting by a prestigious university was clearly deficient based on a highly suspect PhD thesis as analyzed by The Critic:
https://thecritic.co.uk/impoverished-sociology/
Not only did it fail to spot plagiarism in an applicant's PhD thesis, which turnitin would have caught, it also played along with what appear to have been the dreams of a fantasist.
https://batheticfallacy.substack.com/p/jason-ardays-phd-turnitin-report
The Guardian did an analysis of many of Arday's claims here:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/aug/06/rise-and-fall-of-jason-arday
But plagiarism and fantacism are not a consequence of race.
Plenty of white people have undoubtedly plagiarised in their PhD theses and had fantasies and Jeffrey Archer is a famous example of a famous white person (in the UK) being imprisoned for lying, thereby perjuring himself, despite his fragrant wife.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/1424501.stm
That Arday's PhD thesis was not analyzed meticulously before he was offered any academic job (as it has been subsequently) is clearly unbelievable, but there also appears to have been no mental health or risk assessment done of someone who would be interacting with 'snowflake' students who may have their own vulnerabilities.
Nor was everyone convinced of his ability as a teacher as Unherd reports:
https://unherd.com/newsroom/jason-arday-taught-me-heres-what-i-learnt/
But what's new with dubious teaching ability?
FNN vividly remembers a 'seminar' at a well-known London university college taught by a 'learned' white Professor who brought along his own vodka bottle for occasional sustenance.
The whole debate about Arday soon became tainted with concerns about bias in the 'right-wing' press and its fixation with DEI:
https://www.theguardian.com/news/2026/aug/12/jason-arday-life-conversation-dei
This Guardian article proceeds to debunk a number 'straw-man' myths that only have any reality in terms of The Guardian's own 'bubble'.
The 'rightwing' press - in the form of The Critic - meanwhile had comebacks of its own:
https://thecritic.co.uk/ardays-army/
https://thecritic.co.uk/scrutiny-and-sympathy/
The New York Times also had something to say about the vetting process at Cambridge:
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/15/world/europe/jason-arday-cambridge-hiring-questions.html
But whether you care or not about PhD plagiarism and the impact of DEI on hiring processes, the fact is that there is far too much mutual backslapping going on in these job application processes, as is shown by the flawed Mandelson appointment and ignoring of claims of 'fibs' by Rachel Reeves on her CV. Who cares if a Chancellor fibs?
And what does it say generally about our culture when people lie on CVs to get jobs, are awarded peace prizes for making war, and write bestselling 'inspirational' autobiographies based on what turned out to be false premises.
Everyone just takes the money and runs with it.
Or what about the sports competitions called 'World' something when, selectively, certain 'world' countries are banned from competing?
We have genuinely lost it and perhaps the best thing for us is to be taken over by AI.