Shots In The Dark

U-Colorado professor Ward Churchill may not get fired for his controversial remarks about 9/11...but he might get the boot for being a plagiarist, according to an article in InsiderHigherEd.com.

It also turns out that Churchill may not be of Native American descent, as he has claimed.

Key quote: "The report also examined an unusual allegation that has been raised: That Churchill is not an American Indian.... Churchill has always identified himself to the university as an American Indian, and the university received complaints from Indian leaders 10 years ago that Churchill was being untruthful. At the time, the university concluded that self-identification was an appropriate way for Churchill to declare himself an Indian, so the matter was dropped."

This question of self-identification has become an issue at Harvard as well. If a student applies to the school and identifies him or herself as a minority—presumably creating some small advantage in the application process–does Harvard have any obligation to verify the claim?

I am reminded of an old friend of mine, a TV reporter with just about the WASPiest face and name you could imagine. She wanted to get out of her small market station, but despite being a terrific reporter, couldn't get hired anywhere. So she changed her preppy surname to a Hispanic one, and got a job offer within days—no matter that she couldn't have looked less Hispanic. Thus breeding cynicsm all 'round.

Two thoughts:

1) Winston Churchill shouldn't get fired for saying something political and stupid...but these other allegations are definitely firing offenses, if true.

2) The debate over "self-identification" is going to heat up....