A couple of weeks ago, I blogged about how Biju Mathew was in the Bay Area speaking on topics of taxi wallahs, an event coordinated by the people at Friends of South Asia (FOSA). He was invited to speak at Stanford, but then The Stanford Daily wrote a story on April 8th (Friday) which accused Biju of having communist and terrorist sympathies– suggestions received from an anonymous source.
One source, a man who has protested against previous FOSA events, but wished to remain anonymous, expressed concern over what he perceives as Islamist and Communist sympathies within the organization. Mathew himself has also drawn criticism for his radical political beliefs… At one time his Web page featured a link to the Unabomber’s Manifesto, although the link is no longer active… The same protester said that he is troubled by Mathew’s “support for the Unabomber and his association with the Communist Party of India (Marxist).”[link]
Because of the article, Biju was kicked off of speaking on campus. All this makes me reminisce of that time here at UCLA that Vinay Lal made Dirty Thirty list, and the McCarthyism-like tactics that were used. This article was officially retracted over the weekend, and on Monday The Stanford Daily stated the following apology…
We apologize for last Friday’s article on the upcoming event organized by Friends of South Asia (FOSA) (“Leftist speaker sparks debate,” Apr. 7). FOSA does not have any ties to Communist or terrorist groups. We should not have made such allegations on the basis of a single anonymous source. We also apologize to Prof. Biju Mathew for associating him in any way with the Unabomber and other extremist elements.[link]
Tsk, tsk. Bad journalism at its finest. Even I, as a mere blogger, could have told you not to base your story on one anonymous source. This letter to the editor sums it up, pretty much.