So the Arday furore was founded on racism, was it? Nonsense

Two of the senior academics who had helped pilot this project, Professor John Paul Leach, the consultant neurologist who was head of undergraduate medicine at Glasgow and Dr Neil Croll, the university’s head of widening participation, were delighted at its success. Professor Leach said he’d have been happy if even half of the 20 GAP students had attained the required level to embark on a medical degree. “They were all still expected to meet the very stringent academic standards required to study medicine at Glasgow.” Dr Croll rejected the view that widening access programmes penalise hard-working children from more affluent backgrounds. “There are many historical and deeply-rooted barriers blocking the way to university for bright pupils from disadvantaged communities. It’s a tragic waste of talent that hurts the country.”

Read more

• Jason Arday case shows the persecution of minorities has reached bloodthirsty levels
• I never got a PhD — after the Jason Arday row, I should have tried
• 'Far right' is now a meaningless smear thanks to the 'fake left'
• We should all be concerned about the Catholic Church’s vow of silence
• Nicola Sturgeon confronted over Salmond, Murrell and trans in Eastwood

Underpinning the entire project was a duty of psychological and emotional care towards the young participants. The university had gone to great lengths to ensure that they were all properly equipped to handle the academic and emotional challenges that come with studying for a medical degree. This was done cautiously and sensitively through building relationships with local schools. There were mentoring schemes to ensure each student had the best possible chance to maintain their studies and obtain their degrees. Crucially, Glasgow University only went public with the success of their programme (and cautiously so) when they felt confident that it was sufficiently robust to serve future generations of young people. They avoided the temptation for flag-waving, sloganeering and media blitzes. Glasgow University’s care for these young people stands in contrast to the way that Cambridge University exploited Jason Arday, the young academic who died in tragic circumstances last week.

It’s become clear that Cambridge bent their own rules to an absurd extent to appoint Mr Arday to its highest academic station. It stands accused of having done so to massage its own sense of esteem and to increase its own academic cache.

This insulted thousands of young academics across the UK who had toiled honestly for their degrees and had their research robustly peer-reviewed. Worse than this though, was that Cambridge was undermining the prospects of under-graduates by making them guinea pigs in this exercise in self-glorification by placing their academic dreams in the hands of a man who was ill-qualified to be in such an elevated position. To describe the justified anger arising from this as somehow "racist" is dishonest and irresponsible.

Of all the columns and commentary I’ve read questioning how we arrived at this situation there has been no racism. Indeed the overwhelming bulk of it has been reasonably expressed concern about the apparatus that had permitted such an absurd situation to develop.

Some have suggested that other academics found guilty of plagiarising had been spared the scrutiny of Mr Arday’s work. Cambridge University and its marketing department though, had craved media exposure for its progressive appointment of Mr Arday. It must have occurred to some on their academic appointments board that his garlanded CV and some of his more unlikely-sounding achievements would attract future scrutiny, even as they were pushing him in front of the cameras and microphones. Did none of them consider for a moment that this might disintegrate in contact with the real world? Or was their commitment to inclusion and diversity so shallow that they simply didn’t consider the future wellbeing of their young star? Did it not occur to them that an intervention may be required to prevent the delusion careering out of control? Or was it simply a case of "so long as we’re alright, that’s all that matters"?

‘Glasgow University’s approach to widening participation stands in contrast to the way that Cambridge University exploited Jason Arday’ (Image: Colin Mearns)

A depressingly predictable narrative has emerged following Jason Arday's death. This claims that he was only subject to such intense media scrutiny because he was black. Perhaps they’ve not been aware of what’s been happening in Scotland in recent years. Ask the poet, Jenny Lindsay, who lost her home and her career for her sex-realist views what a personal and professional hounding looks like. Likewise, Fiona Macdonald the trade union activist. The Labour MP, Joani Reid endured an appalling and vindictive campaign of extreme misogyny and sex-shaming in the wake of her husband’s arrest on suspicion of spying for China. These three women did nothing wrong. How many of those now indulging in race-baiting after Mr Arday's death expressed any sympathy for them? How many actively participated in humiliating them?

Some of those now hurling accusations of racism gleefully celebrated the murder of Ann Widdecombe in the vilest terms imaginable. As they’d done with the murder of the American political activist, Charlie Kirk. Earlier this year, they hounded a man suffering from Tourette's because he had an unfortunate episode at a cinema awards night.

The scrutiny of Mr Arday’s increasingly questionable CV and Cambridge University’s elevation of him was legitimate public-interest journalism that proceeded across both right-wing and left-wing publications. The university had enlisted the media’s participation in conferring academic sainthood on him and most were happy to indulge them.

There’s a cost to flinging around false accusations of racism. It reinforces the motives of real racists and diminishes the gravity of real racism.

Some of those who gleefully participated in brutal houndings of honest individuals whom they disagreed with on gender or faith, portray themselves as fiercely anti-racist. I wonder though, how deep their anti-racism runs.

Kevin McKenna is Scotland’s Columnist of the Year