"First, I know Anthropology best and that is the discipline that has taken the most publicly radical stance."

In a horse race with Sociology in this category, Anthro might win by a nose. Even after Chancellor DiStefano from U of C set forth the findings of a 5 member panel levied against Churchill, the Public Sociology blogs had any number of credentialed Academics rallying to his defense. Unbelievable.

In DeStefano's statement is mentioned that despite Churchill misrepresenting himself as a Native American, it was not an actionable offense. This could suggest that the hyper-charged politicized environment of Western Academia has yet to reach its zenith, when lying on employment applications in order to attain a salary is not actionable due to other more pressing considerations, like First Amendment rights.

From the Committee's report comes this gem: " However, questions raised in regard to the allegation of misrepresentation of ethnicity to gain credibility and an audience for scholarship were also reviewed, and the Committee felt that such misrepresentation might constitute research misconduct and failure to meet the standards". This sounds like something evil corporations and the evil government would do to 3rd worlders, doesn't it? One could suggest conversely the smaller and poorer an ethnic group is, the less professional standards are applied in interacting with them. Anyway, this Post will probably be sent to the My Bloody Soapbox section of this forum......