John is dead on about the problem with the U.S. News Rankings. They offer outputs, failing to

measure the results of a college education. How many students land good jobs shortly after receiving their diplomas? How many go on to earn graduate degrees? How many simply know more?

He does not, however, address the motives of the various presidents who are revolting against these rankings.

Robert Samuelson does, and in no uncertain terms:

The proper response to [imperfect] evidence that you dislike or dispute is to supplement it or discredit it with better evidence. The wrong response is to suppress it. And yet, that’s the agenda of these college presidents.

By not cooperating with some or all of the U.S. News survey, they hope to sabotage the rankings. They say they’ll provide superior information. But they want to control what parents and students see. This is soft censorship.

What their students will learn, if they’re paying attention, is a life lesson in cynicism: how eminent authorities cloak their self-interest in high-sounding, deceptive rhetoric.