Some Thoughts on Campus Hoaxes
Don't know if anyone's been following the story of the Wisconsin-Madison student who was the subject of much news attention for having, apparently, been abducted last Saturday. Well, it turns out that it looks to be a hoax. There are inconsistencies in her story, she apparently was caught on camera buying the materials she said her abducter used, and someone used her computer to search for wooded areas and check the weather while she was supposedly abducted. I find this story interesting coming on the heels of the story out of Pomona College about the faculty member who faked a racist attack. And some quick searching on the web will find you a variety of similar stories, often at small schools but not always.
It's interesting to think about what might motivate stuff like this. There's the obvious explanation that some folks are just crazy, but when we see these things clustering in a way they appear to be, and when they seem to cluster around race/gender/ethnicity, then there might be larger forces at play. I saw a forensic psychiatrist on CNN talking about the Wisconsin woman and suggesting that it was designed to generate the sympathy and emotional reaction of the community. Perhaps. It may also be a way of pleasing people who share your concern about the issues the hoax calls attention to. For example, if you are taking a course on racism and hanging out with other students and faculty who have a deep political commitment to fighting racism, staging a racist attack could be seen as a way to please those folks by providing evidence for their beliefs. This would appear to be particularly powerful on a small campus like Pomona where a student or faculty member would have intense relationships with peers/faculty and where being the victim of a racist incident would be perceived as one way to establish the legitmacy of the cause and to gain esteem in their eyes.
It also seems plausible that these are intentional political acts designed to call the community's attention to some urgent issue, e.g. racism on campus, gender-based violence on campus, etc.. This piece from the Claremont Colleges student newspaper (brief registration may be required) comes close to defending doing just that:
With its greater context in mind, what implications should students draw from such an event? First, it would be incorrect to make assumptions about Professor Dunn's mindset or her goals if she did in fact vandalize her own car. Instead, students should keep in mind that faking a hate crime is not necessarily the work of an irrational person. In addition, if students and the administration interpret this hoax correctly, as an extreme expression of legitimate grievances, this disturbing scandal does not have to negatively affect on-campus dialogue on race nor hinder the progress of activist organizations like SLAM.
(Note the idea that there is a "correct" interepretation of this event. Evidently student journalists at Claremont have learned from their faculty that the belief that reality isn't objective and multiple interpretations are possible doesn't apply if the cause is noble.) This paragraph comes after one analogizing the professor's hoax to W's claim about the Iraqis buying uranium from Niger, concluding: "Although manipulating popular opinion through deceit is unethical and unjustifiable, it is not a new phenomenon." So if it's good enough for the president....?
In any case, this just feels to me like a disturbing trend that ultimately will backfire on those involved. If more hoaxes are uncovered, the often legitimate causes to which the hoaxers are calling attention will suffer from the problem of "crying wolf." Ultimately, the fight against racism etc. is best fought with the light of truth shining brightly. There's enough real racism, gender violence, etc. around that there's no need to threaten to undermine the legitimacy of those concerns by making them up where they aren't. If that's what these events are about, it's a shame on multiple levels.