College entrance cheating scandal

a1tinkfans

Spreading Some Pixie Dust Today!
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
You wonder what happens to a person like Olivia Jade now? She seems addicted to attention. But now she can't film herself in bed, she can't sell her makeup, she isn't posting on her Instagram. She will most likely never return to college.

Will the public be forgiving? Will she be back bigger than ever? Or is this the end of the road?
I seem to recall a HS graduate ( at least I think graduated HS) whose Vivid Sex Tape launched her into the Stratosphere! $$$ rolling in , the likes of which most will never Achieve thru Academic work.

... she ll survive. Perhaps this Harsh lesson will start a New Tradition for the Next generation of her family. She proudly video chatted about how her dad lied to his parents and took their money for college and instead did what he wanted, fashion. She joked about it.
The apple didn’t fall far from the Tree. Lie, cheat, no self respect ... and finally, caught.
Hard lesson to learn. I hope it wakes up that Entire Family.
 

cabanafrau

Registered
Joined
May 10, 2006
I would hope the FBI has bigger fish to fry. These were mostly private universities. They can let in anyone they wish.
Considering the nexus between degrees from many of these private universities and the upper echelons of power and wealth for at least a century in this country, this should indeed be on the radar of the FBI.

ETA: That idea also smacks of the elite and wealthy not needing to face justice.
 
Last edited:

cabanafrau

Registered
Joined
May 10, 2006
You wonder what happens to a person like Olivia Jade now? She seems addicted to attention. But now she can't film herself in bed, she can't sell her makeup, she isn't posting on her Instagram. She will most likely never return to college.

Will the public be forgiving? Will she be back bigger than ever? Or is this the end of the road?
How ever will she be the next youngest self made billionaire now?
 
  • cabanafrau

    Registered
    Joined
    May 10, 2006
    I haven't read all the posts on here, but just wanted to add my 2 cents. I've never liked Lori Loughlin. She always came across as fake to me in interviews and in her shows/movies. Have to say I wasn't surprised about her. I was, however, surprised by Felicity Huffman. That one came out of left field.
    End of the day, we feel we have a deeper familiarity with celebrities than we actually do, especially those who have been in the public eye for a long time. Even (repeated) fan encounters with a particular celebrity don't necessarily give us as much insight into character and personality as we might absolutely be convinced we have.

    Nicole Kidman is a celebrity whose personality I know I speculated for years was rather cold and aloof. I think some of it was shaded by many of her roles back in the day and the fact that she did good work at portraying those characters. Over time I've seen her in a few interview situations and come to realize that I was also probably put off because it seems she's incredibly shy, which made her seem more aloof. I've now caught her in several appearances on the Graham Norton talk show, the second time was a joint appearance with her husband. It was like the sun had broken out of the clouds with her, she was notably more relaxed and at ease -- seemed almost like a different person. I saw her appear one more time on the show and she was relaxed, appeared confident what the experience would be like and obviously felt reasonably comfortable.

    Unless we know someone personally we don't really know what their offstage personality is. Apparently some celebrities struggle when they're in a situation where they're not playing a character and are actually very introverted in their personal character.
     

    gwynne

    Happily planning our next adventure
    Joined
    Jan 1, 2012
    I would hope the FBI has bigger fish to fry. These were mostly private universities. They can let in anyone they wish.
    Both public and private universities were involved. Criminal acts like bribery, fraud and racketeering fall well within the FBI's investigative jurisdiction.
    I don't believe individuals or organizations involved in criminality should be given a pass.
     

    _19disnA

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Aug 8, 2018
    Haven't read all 15 prior pages of remarks, but in the media reports I have read, there seems to be 2 different issues. Parents who knowingly hire someone to take the ACT/SAT test for their child and/or have someone on the inside changing wrong answers to correct ones or bribe someone in the athletic department should certainly be ashamed and held responsible for their acts. None of them could possibly believe what they were doing was legal/ethical.

    The other issue is the dubious practice of wealthy families 'donating' large sums of money to a college and there is a wink/nod type behavior that allows their child to more easily get accepted as a result of that donation. Maybe this whole situation will cause greater scrutiny of many supposed "non-profit" organizations who are really running them as a business and using it as a clever way to avoid paying taxes. I think many people have the faulty notion that a non-profit organization means the employees are all volunteers, which is generally not the case. Top people in those organizations are often paid as much or more then their counterparts working in 'for profit' companies.
     
    Last edited:

    asta

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jun 13, 2001
    I've always wondered why Vanderbilt insists on competing in a major athletic conference. They should consider a lower level conference or Division 2 or even drop football altogether.
    One big reason for staying in the SEC - last year the member schools received around $43 million. I think they would be crazy to give up that payout. They are also very competitive in other sports.

    A better question is to ask about the academic exceptions that are allowed to be used by coaches at other schools that purport to have high academic standards.
     
  • cabanafrau

    Registered
    Joined
    May 10, 2006
    One big reason for staying in the SEC - last year the member schools received around $43 million. I think they would be crazy to give up that payout. They are also very competitive in other sports.

    A better question is to ask about the academic exceptions that are allowed to be used by coaches at other schools that purport to have high academic standards.
    It sounds as if you're suggesting colleges and universities shouldn't focus on their primary business and instead should seek to prioritize education as their primary focus. Sounds radical.
     

    gwynne

    Happily planning our next adventure
    Joined
    Jan 1, 2012
    One big reason for staying in the SEC - last year the member schools received around $43 million. I think they would be crazy to give up that payout. They are also very competitive in other sports.

    A better question is to ask about the academic exceptions that are allowed to be used by coaches at other schools that purport to have high academic standards.
    Yep. I believe Vanderbilt is currently ranked #1 in D1 baseball.
     
  • EMom

    <font color=red>Comes from a long line of all fork
    Joined
    Jul 2, 2007
    You wonder what happens to a person like Olivia Jade now? She seems addicted to attention. But now she can't film herself in bed, she can't sell her makeup, she isn't posting on her Instagram. She will most likely never return to college.

    Will the public be forgiving? Will she be back bigger than ever? Or is this the end of the road?
    Maybe she could consult Kim Kardashian on how to get her career moving.
     

    kidshop

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Nov 8, 2003
    And I saw that both daughters won't return to school because they are worried they'll be bullied.
    by bullied, do they mean people will hold them accountable for fraud?

    Haven't read all 15 prior pages of remarks, but in the media reports I have read, there seems to be 2 different issues. Parents who knowingly hire someone to take the ACT/SAT test for their child and/or have someone on the inside changing wrong answers to correct ones or bribe someone in the athletic department should certainly be ashamed and held responsible for their acts. None of them could possibly believe what they were doing was legal/ethical.

    The other issue is the dubious practice of wealthy families 'donating' large sums of money to a college and there is a wink/nod type behavior that allows their child to more easily get accepted as a result of that donation. Maybe this whole situation will cause greater scrutiny of many supposed "non-profit" organizations who are really running them as a business and using it as a clever way to avoid paying taxes. I think many people have the faulty notion that a non-profit organization means the employees are all volunteers, which is generally not the case. Top people in those organizations are often paid as much or more then their counterparts working in 'for profit' companies.
    Well those donating large sums of money or buildings are few, I think, but the schools use their money to help fund scholarships and free rides. That money actually goes to the school and students. That way is legal and not guaranteed admission. (wink wink). It is something to think about, how looking very closely at donations may affect having money available for low income students to attend.
     

    NotUrsula

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Apr 19, 2002
    I would hope the FBI has bigger fish to fry. These were mostly private universities. They can let in anyone they wish.
    Yes they can but then the school does not get accredited for accepted standards. Accreditation has a big impact especially if you need to take any kind of boards or sit for licensure of any kind, for example.
    Why would anyone want to go to a school that is not accredited?
    Yes, accreditation DOES have a huge impact, but selective admissions criteria are not factored into accreditation standards. A school can have completely open admissions and still pass accreditation review with flying colors.

    Accreditation is about the quality of the education that students will receive, NOT about how picky the school is about who will be allowed to receive it. It counts such things as curriculum rigor, class size, laboratory equipment, size, age, and relevance of the library collections, qualifications and number of teaching staff, 5-yr graduation rates, and the grading curve. Accrediting agencies are in fact very impressed with schools that can consistently manage to turn very mediocre applicants into well-educated, gainfully-employed graduates, because that is what being a good undergraduate school is really about.

    If this scandal were about paying for grades, rather than admission, then the assertion that it affects accreditation would be correct. As it stands, the bribery of coaches WILL affect the schools' NCAA standing, but that is the only issue that can negatively affect the schools themselves, other than in terms of the negative press of being connected to scandal, even if it wasn't their fault.
     
    Last edited:

    mnrose

    Queen of all she surveys
    Joined
    Jun 18, 2009
    And I saw that both daughters won't return to school because they are worried they'll be bullied.

    Oh poor little things. NOT.

    They shouldn't be ALLOWED to return. They got their by cheating, and I'm guessing dimes to donuts that they were not otherwise qualified to attend. Too bad. So sad.
     

    tarheelmjfan

    Proud Redhead
    Joined
    May 10, 2001
    Even though they are private schools, they do receive federal dollars in various forms - research grants, other grants, student aid, etc.
    I realize that, but they don't receive the amount of oversight that public schools do in many cases. I don't agree with it, but it's often the case.
     

    longboard55

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Oct 9, 2014
    Still not seeing the crime for the movie stars here. They paid a consultant. They did not tell the consultant how to do his job. Its a college, they collect money from everyone, every building has a name, every bench, every drinking fountain. It would not be unusual at all to give a school money and expect a favor in return, it is done 1000 times a day
     

    CarolAnn856

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Jun 11, 2016
    Still not seeing the crime for the movie stars here. They paid a consultant. They did not tell the consultant how to do his job. Its a college, they collect money from everyone, every building has a name, every bench, every drinking fountain. It would not be unusual at all to give a school money and expect a favor in return, it is done 1000 times a day
    Okay, now I know you're just stirring the pot, since it's painfully obvious that paying someone to fake your kid's credentials is not at all the same thing as dropping big bucks for a building.
     

    smiths02

    DIS Veteran
    Joined
    Feb 13, 2009
    Still not seeing the crime for the movie stars here. They paid a consultant. They did not tell the consultant how to do his job. Its a college, they collect money from everyone, every building has a name, every bench, every drinking fountain. It would not be unusual at all to give a school money and expect a favor in return, it is done 1000 times a day
    If you pay someone to commit a crime for you, then you have committed a crime.
     

    Connect

    Disney News and Updates

    Daily Updates and News




    Top