Due diligence is something else. You should learn the terminology.
What did Cech turn down? You can only turn down something that is offered and you have no idea whether he was offered it or not.Perhaps he wasn't. Withdrawing one's name from consideration is not turning something down.
 

Kudos to Goldenberg's gut.
 

Anonymous 9:24,

You are being twice pedantic. I know the professional meaning of due diligence, thank you. It's obvious that I used the term more casually.

And it's quite clear that the job was being offered to Cech on condition that certain conditions be worked out, which they weren't—because he declined to accept them.

In both cases, you miss the larger point: These search processes have been marred by amateurish mistakes.
 

Due diligence also means knowing when candidates are implausible for reasons of sheer administrative incompetence, inattentiveness, questionable ethics, etc. Harvard repeatedly fails to figure that out. Dark horses that emerge at the last minute are especially problematic in this regard. God help FAS.
 

Here! Here! Cheers to Goldenberg!
 

Richard,

The Crimson has not necessarily reported news, rather it has reported the same two anonymous "individuals close to University administrators" Adam Goldenberg relied on. The only difference is that they are now joined by "an individual informed of the decision by an FAS administrator", -- careful but near-meaningless language in terms of additional credibility. This presumably persuaded the Crimson the report is now a fact and therefore news.

And so it may be, as I wrote in reaction to the Gadfly reporting. Either way, this merry threesome clearly wants news or "news" out that will work to the detriment of the institution -- for whatever reasons. Given that, I would place no credence on anything else they suggest. Moreover, the names they suggest are likely to be looked on with suspicion given the sources, and this would be a disservice to such valued colleagues, a number of whom might be good deans.

I'm sure DF will make a good appointment, and if she's not ready to do so, for whatever reason, I would imagine she might try and persuade David Pilbeam to continue for a year. He knows FAS culture, has been around University Hall, is already as interim dean instituting committees vital for the success of Gen Ed, and would be very helpful with the transition Mass Hall will be going through.
 

Prof. Thomas:

You're wrong.

The Crimson has been sitting on this story for a week because they were looking for enough independent confirmation to be sure of the story's accuracy. They apparently convinced enough people to talk to them to run the story. I know the Faculty team reporters very well, and they would not be so cavalier as to run this story as the top article in today's paper were they not certain of their facts.

Gadfly got its confirmation a week before The Crimson did. Before we broke the story, it wasn't on The Crimson's radar screen. Now it is, hence today's story, after a full week of investigation and confirmation on The Crimson's part.

There is no conspiracy. Ask your colleagues in University Hall. You might be surprised at how competent student journalists can be when it comes to penetrating the iron-clad secrecy of the Harvard administration.
 

I'm just going by what each of you reported, Adam. Your wording:
"According to two sources close to the administration"

The Crimson's:
"individuals close to University administrators" + "an individual informed of the decision by an FAS administrator"
You have two, they have this additional one.

I claim no conspiracy on your part or the Crimson's, though the latter were duped on the "bad blood" matter a few weeks ago, which simply shows how treacherous the terrain is. On the contrary I have frequently praised the reportorial side of the Crimson, and if the JB news is true, something I have consistently allowed, then you are to be congratulated for connecting to or being contacted by two truth-telling leakers; the Crimson, for adding an extra one (or more, as you claim).

You can see from my previous post that my interests and concerns have to do with disinformation and manipulation of opinion that might be attached to the (true, as it may well be) leak about JB's decision.

Best, RFT
 

How much "competence" does it take to be on the other end of well planned and placed leaks from people in Mass and UHall seeking to shape outcomes? Give me a break. Kudos to the Crimson for getting on this and using these sources to break news. But the failure to examine the motives of the sources - both in the FAS Dean and Presidential search stories - has also allowed the Crimson to be USED and USED repeatedly. Since the sources are highly placed the Crimson considers them unimpeachable. And they may indeed be accurate, in a fashion. But they also have BIG axes to grind and protecting their anonymity--necessary I realize--obscures this for the readers.
 

Folks, aren't you forgetting that if Drew Faust suspects there are leaks from Mass Hall, she's in a position to do something about it?
 

1:22, there was meant to be a dash of irony in my congratulations, for the reasons you give -- though Crimson reporters have done a very good job in recent years. Quite so, RB 1:32. speriamo!
 

Faust may be "in a position" to do something, but does she really have the power and moxie to do anything?
 

Anyone else think Faust should be praised for taking her time? for not giving into faculty pressure and gossip. She took her time for a first selection; she will probably do so again. Doesn't bother me that she's moving at glacial speed. There are six weeks left after all. No rule that she can't wait until the last second OR ask Pilbeam to linger. (There might be a lot of that). Let's not start undercutting Faust's authority/power before she "officially" assumes the role. She's not even ascended the throne, so to speak. There has been so much rancor about this, perhaps she will wait until campus is "quiet" after commencement. It does take a fair amount of control not to just go to a second choice. Besides, we don't _really_ know why Bloxham declined.
 

I agree. By the way, some years ago Derek Bok tried to get Jeremy Knowles to be his dean, and Knowles said 'no'. No reflection on Bok back then, so why should there be any on Drew Faust IF JB said 'no'?
 

Is Faust really in a position to do something about the Mass Hall leaks? Like what? They preceded her. They come from members of the current (and past and no doubt future) administration.
 

University Hall leaks too.
 

One the Crimson's two current favorites for FAS is a guy who repeatedly loses his cool in explosive rages. He will make people want LHS back....
 

Anon. 8:27:

If so, it's not Kosslyn. He's exemplary, even under difficult circumstances, and would make an exceptional FAS dean. It would be a huge loss for the psych department, though...