Dozens of people, including actors, college coaches, and a university administrator, were charged on Tuesday in a federal case for their alleged involvement in an admissions-bribery scheme that touched several elite colleges. And the internet went wild.
According to an affidavit from the U.S. Department of Justice, a nonprofit company had applicants labeled as athletes, even if they were not quite athletes, to give them a leg up in the admissions process. The scheme even went as far as to create fake “profiles” for the applicants that were filled with spurious athletic credentials and staged or Photoshopped pictures of the students playing their purported sport.
We’re sorry, something went wrong.
We are unable to fully display the content of this page.
This is most likely due to a content blocker on your computer or network.
Please allow access to our site and then refresh this page.
You may then be asked to log in, create an account (if you don't already have one),
or subscribe.
If you continue to experience issues, please contact us at 202-466-1032 or help@chronicle.com.
Dozens of people, including actors, college coaches, and a university administrator, were charged on Tuesday in a federal case for their alleged involvement in an admissions-bribery scheme that touched several elite colleges. And the internet went wild.
According to an affidavit from the U.S. Department of Justice, a nonprofit company had applicants labeled as athletes, even if they were not quite athletes, to give them a leg up in the admissions process. The scheme even went as far as to create fake “profiles” for the applicants that were filled with spurious athletic credentials and staged or Photoshopped pictures of the students playing their purported sport.
Among the actors named in the affidavit were Felicity Huffman, who appeared in the TV series Desperate Housewives, and Lori Loughlin, who was in the 1990s sitcom Full House and the Netflix series Fuller House.
The breadth of the scheme was a lot to take in, and different corners of the internet are still processing the scandal.
Seven “highly selective private” universities and one “selective private” university were named in the affidavit. It’s not clear how investigators distinguished between the two types.
The company billed itself as a way for parents to ensure that their children would get a “guarantee” of admission to a specific university. That was a more-certain technique than if the students tried to get in on their own, and it was cheaper than securing admission by making a huge donation to the university, according to the complaint.
Some onlookers noted, tongue in cheek, that rich students have other options for assuring their admission to top institutions, like giving a new university building or making other gifts.
This is disgraceful. Everyone knows the proper way for the wealthy to get their underachieving kids into elite colleges is to endow a research center or pay for a new dorm. Old school!https://t.co/r6C32Cgc35
And what about those fake athletic profiles? One couple named in the affidavit, Elizabeth and Manuel Henriquez, crafted the false perception that their daughter was a top-tier “club tennis” player. The student ranked 207th in the under-12 girls division in Northern California when she was “at her best,” according to a footnote in the affidavit.
And of course the bribes did not come cheap. One parent named in the affidavit, John C. Wilson, was told that giving Stanford University’s sailing coach $160,000 for the sailing program was not “all it takes” to assure his daughter’s admission.
For many observers, the scandal highlighted that the wealthy parents charged in the case were just using their power in the broken system of elite-college admissions.
ADVERTISEMENT
brain 1: lol rich people are the worst brain 2: why didn’t they buy their way in the old-fashioned way brain 3: admissions preferences for lacrosse are affirmative action for the rich anyway galaxy brain: the fraudsters were merely acting rationally in a corrupt system
... and imagine how outraged those of us feel who struggle to support the lowest income students with no family support ... the elites suck up most of the charitable gifts for greedy purposes while the hardest work is done among schools who are as low income as our students!
People asking why these Hollywood actresses didn’t just bribe their way into the Ivies like normal rich people aren’t taking into account that the going market rate for legal graft is probably north of $10 million at this point whereas apparently they were paying like $15,000.
What really burns me, though, is Huffman and Macy’s abuse of the disability accommodations process. Using such accommodations as a backdoor to cheating your way into college poisons the well, and screws over honest kids—both with and without disabilities.
On my mind today: the significance of selectivity in higher ed. What this scandal shows is that admission to selective colleges is something the already rich/influential want for their kids because of its symbolic importance. It’s a way for them to signal more influence/power.
That isn’t to cast blame on parents who use (legal) means to advantage their child (the ones who use illegal means should indeed be in big trouble). It is to say that the entire system is skewed and is not about “merit,” which is how individuals justify truly egregious acts.
Fernanda is the engagement editor at The Chronicle. She is the voice behind Chronicle newsletters like the Weekly Briefing, Five Weeks to a Better Semester, and more. She also writes about what Chronicle readers are thinking. Send her an email at fernanda@chronicle.com.
