The Milgram experiments--in which a "scientist" directs subjects to cause pain to people as part of a fake experiment--have recenty been replicated, and the results are apparently just about as bad as they were when the experiment was first run, in 1963.

One might have hoped that 30+ years of "question authority" sloganeering might have actully had some impact here...on the other hand, maybe the spirit of conformity inculcated by things like speech codes and university indoctrination sessions has had an effect in the opposite direction.

Even though they provide the URL for the admissions office at IUPUI, I don't think the university will be using this in their recruiting efforts. Mr. Sampson used the term "mind-boggling" to describe what had happened. Frankly I think that is too generous a characterization. Frightening doesn't even begin to describe the culture of a university that thinks any part of this process was appropriate, with the possible exception of the long overdue letter of apology.

This had me fuming with rage, though I can't honestly say I'm all that surprised by it.

And the litigious part of me says that a letter of apology is far too little, too late. One can't "unring the bell" of being tarred by such an outrageous accusation with mere words, but can only attempt to make whole the damaged reputation in the manner the common law has always provided for: by bringing the proper defendants, whether IUPUI and/or the individual administrators involved, before a civil jury to answer for their libel.

While I agree with the thrust of this film, one weakness is that (unless I totally missed it) it didn't indicate that any effort to present the "other side" was made. I would have appreciated it if at least it had said "our attempts to have the university or affirmative action office respond were turned down" -- assuming that such attempts were even made.

Not that any official rejoinder would have been particularly convincing, but at least an unconvincing official comment would speak for itself.

It's noteworthy that universities attempt to justify these policies in terms of limiting their liabilities...but--as Dave J suggested...the real effect may be to *expose* them to very high liabilities.

I wonder whether, in the case mentioned, the university administrators attempted to get an opinion from the university's General Counsel as to the wisdom of the course they were about to undertake. Unless university lawyers are entirely different from those attorneys I have worked with in business and private life, I'm pretty sure that the advice would have been "don't do it."