I’m looking forward to reading Stanley Kurtz’s thoughts on the latest report out of Columbia. Meanwhile, it’s worth noting this post on the relatively new website CampusJ, which relates that the university gave first dibs on the committee report to the New York Times, along with the Columbia Spectator, in exchange for the papers’ promise that they would not solicit any comment from the students who made the complaints. (See also this article in the New York Sun.) According to CampusJ, the Times article was released before students were even permitted to read the committee report. (Ariel Beery, one of the most involved of the students, confirmed this in an e-mail: “The Times published on-line as we were waiting in a hallway for Provost Brinkley to let us into his office–and even that was hard-won, with us waiting for him in the cold for three hours until the administration would meet with us.”) Putting aside for now the report’s content, this detail alone should raise serious doubts about Columbia’s commitment to seeing the controversy fairly resolved.
Update: In fairness to the Spectator, it should be said that their initial articles on the committee report did contain student quotes. According to the paper’s editor (you may need to scroll down), they were given the same ground rules as the Times but somehow managed to evade the “no students” condition.